Cleveland morning leader. [volume] (Cleveland [Ohio]) 1854-1865, 1864-11-30
DAILY LEADER.
GOODWIN SMITH on ENGLAND AND
AMERICA,
The Conduct Of EnEIand-The LOndOl
- Times ''-CarlyIe.

- Times ''-CaElyle.
The Atlantic Monthly for December
contains an article by Professor Gold
wiz Smith, from which we make few ex-
tracts;
ENGLAND AND AMERICA.
q You msy think that English freedom
falls far shcrt of yours. You allow that
itsgoes beyond any yet sttuined by the
great European nations, and that to these
nations it has been and still IS light of
hone. see it treated with contempt here.
It is not treated with contempt by Garibsl-
di. 1t is not treated with contempt by the
exiles from French despotism, who are
pro1d to learn the English tongue and
who find in our land, as they thing, the
great asylum of the free. Let England
and America quarrel. Let your weight be
cast into the scale against US, when we
struggle with the great conspiracy Of alb
solute powers around US, and the hope of
freedom In Europe would be almost
quenched. Hsmpden and Washington in
arms against each other What could
the powers Of evil desir5 more2 When
Americans talk lightly Of war with Eng
land one drsires to ask them whsl they be-
live the effects of such war would be on
their own country. How many more
American wives do they wish TO make
widows? How many more American
children do they wish TO make orphans
Do they deem it wise TO put a still greater
strain on the already groaning timbers of
the constitution, with the price of labor
rising and the harvests of Illinois exclud-
ed from their market, would help you tc
cope with the financial difficulties which
fill with anxiety exery rejecting mind p
Do they think that four more years of
wAr-government would render easy the
tremendous work of reconstruction But
the interests of the great commU-
nity of nations are above the
private interests of America or Of Eng
land. If war were to break out between
US, what would become of Italy, abandon
ed without helpto her Austrian enemy and
her sinister protector What would be-
come of the last hopes of liberty in
Franee2 Whae would become of the
world?
THE CONDUCT OF ENGLAND.
aAnd now as to the conduct of England
towards you in this civil war. 1t is want
of sympathy, if of anything, on our part,
not of want of interest, that you have q
right to complain. Never within my
memory, have the hearts of Englishmen
been so deeply moved by any foreign
struggle as by this civil wsr-not even, if
1 recollect Alright, by the great European
earthquake of l94S. I doubt whether
they were more moved by the Indian mu-
tiny OF by our war with Russia. It seemed
that history had brought round again the
great crisis Of the Thirty Years War,
when all England tnrobbed with the NOR
tsl struggle wsged between the powers of
liberty and slavery On their German bat
tie field; for expectation can scarcely be
more intense when GGstsvus and lilly
were approaching each other at Leipsic
than it was when Meade and Lee were ap-
preaching each other at Gettysburg. Sew
cred from US by the Atlantic, while other
nations are at our deer, you are still near
er to US than all the world beside.
"The feeling Of our sristocracy, as of all
sristocrscies, is against you. 1t does not
follow, nor do believe, that as a body
they would desire or urge their govern
ment to do you q wrong, whatever spirit
may be shown by few of the less honOrs-
bic or more violent members of there Crder.
With all their clsss-sentiments, they are
EDglishmen, trained to walk in the paths
of English policy and Justice. But that
their feelings should be against you is not
strange. You are not fighting for the res
toration of the Union, not for the emanei-
patton of the negro, but for democracy
against sristocrscy, and this fact is thor
oughly understood by both parties through
out the Old World. As the champions of
democracy, you may claim, and you receive
the sympathy of the democratic party in
England and in Europe; that of the sris-
tocratic party you cannot claim. You
must bear it calmly, if the sristocracies
mourn over your victories and triumph
over your defeats. Do the friends Of de-
mocracy conceal their joy when despot-
ism or an oligarcby bites the dust?
"The members of our aristocrscy bear
you no personal hatred. An American
going among them even now meets with
nothing but personsl courtesy and kind
ness. Under ordinary circumstances they
are not Indifferent to your good will nor
unconscious of the tie of blood. But to
ask trem entirely TO forget their order
would be too much. In the success of a
commonwea th founded on social and poll
tical equality all aristocracies must read
their doom. Not by arms, but by example,
you are standing meBsce to the existence
of political privilege. And the thread OF
that existence is trRil,
THE LONDON t'TI6Es"
tfThe Times was in former days great
popular organ. It led vehemently and
even violently the struggle for Parlia-
msntary reform. In that way it made its
fortune, and having made its fortune, it
takes part with the rich. Its proprietor
in those days was a man with many faults,
but he was man of the people. Aristo-
cratic society disliked and excluded him
he lived at var with it to the end. AT
fronted by the Wings, he becsine in
certain sense Tory; but he united his
Toryism with Chartism, and was sent 10
Parliament for Nottingham by Tories and
Chsrtists combined. The opposition Of
his journal to our New Poor Law evineed,
though in g perEerse way, bis feeling for
the people But his heir, the present pro-
prletor, was born in the purple He is
wealthy landed gentleman, ana sits in
Parliament for constituency Of landlords.
He is thought TO have been marked out for
q pasrage. 1t is accusing him of no crime
to suppose that, so far as he controls the
Times, it takes the bias of his class, and
that its voice, if it speaks his sentiments,
is not that OF the English people, but of
rich, conservative squire.
1.-THE editor is distinct from the proprie-
tor, but his connections are perhaps still
more sristocrstiG. A good deal has been
said among US of late about his position
Befor his time our journalism was not only
anonymous, but impersonAl. The jour
nalist wore the mask not only to those
whom he criticized, but TO all & world.
The present editcr Of the Times wsars the
y,ael- fO tho ohfacte of his oriti4iano INT