The farther that I got away from Boston the less strong did I find the feeling of anger against England.  There, as I have said before, there was a bitter animosity against the mother country in that she had shown no open sympathy with the North.  In Maine and New Hampshire I did not find this to be the case to any violent degree.  Men spoke of the war as openly as they did at Boston, and, in speaking to me, generally connected England with the subject.  But they did so simply to ask questions as to England’s policy.  What will she do for cotton when her operatives are really pressed?  Will she break the blockade?  Will she insist on a right to trade with Charleston and new Orleans?  I always answered that she would insist on no such right, if that right were denied to others and the denial enforced.  England, I took upon myself to say, would not break a veritable blockade, let her be driven to what shifts she might in providing for her operatives.  “Ah! that’s what we fear,” a very stanch patriot said to me, if words may be taken as a proof of stauchness.  “If England allies herself with the Southerners, all our trouble is for nothing.”  It was impossible not to feel that all that was said was complimentary to England.  It is her sympathy that the Northern men desire, to her co-operation that they would willingly trust, on her honesty that they would choose to depend.  It is the same feeling whether it shows itself in anger or in curiosity.  An American, whether he be embarked in politics, in literature, or in commerce, desires English admiration, English appreciation of his energy, and English encouragement.  The anger of Boston is but a sign of its affectionate friendliness.  What feeling is so hot as that of a friend when his dearest friend refuses to share his quarrel or to sympathize in his wrongs!  To my thinking, the men of Boston are wrong and unreasonable in their anger; but were I a man of Boston, I should be as wrong and as unreasonable as any of them.  All that, however, will come right.  I will not believe it possible that there should in very truth be a quarrel between England and the Northern States.

In the guidance of those who are not quite au fait at the details of American government, I will here in a few words describe the outlines of State government as it is arranged in New Hampshire.  The States, in this respect, are not all alike, the modes of election of their officers, and periods of service, being different.  Even the franchise is different in different States.  Universal suffrage is not the rule throughout the United States, though it is, I believe, very generally thought in England that such is the fact.  I need hardly say that the laws in the different States may be as various as the different legislatures may choose to make them.