The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1866-05-04
BOmbardment of Valparaiso.

Bombardment of Valparaiso.
From the World ..,..
We suppose there can be no doubt that the
whole civilized world will regard the lombard.
ment OF Valparaiso by the Spanish feet as an
atrocous outrage Had 1t not been for the
sneaking and irresolute conduct of the British
Admiral that appalling crime against humanity
might have been prevented. The British resi-
dents, whose lives and property were in leo.
pardy, called upon him, as they had a right to
do for protection; and he excused himself from
interference by saying that his squadron was
insufficient to cope with that of the Spanards.
Ihls was weak excuse; since the instifhciency
OF his feet was no reason why he should moi
nave united with the American Commodore ia
an energetic protest; and it is possible that q
united protest might have been effective with.
outa resort to force. Pleading the insufficiepcy
OF his force was, at least, admission that there
were good moral grounds for nterlerence; for
II there were moi, that should have been as.
signed to the British residents as his excuse for
inaction. ...
But il the moral reasons were good, thew
ought 70 have been backed by physical force
Commodore Rodgers has let slip a great oppor.
tunlty TO assume the heroic responslbiiity
Whlch, besides rendering distinguished service
TO- humanity, would have been valuable CON
trlonGlon TO the fame OF his country. He
would, no doubt, have transcribed his nstruc-
tions, the general tenor OF which very properly
required him to observe a strict neutrality; but
Instructions cannot toresee every emergency
nor would IL have been courteous in our Gov
ernment TO have assumed in advance of the
facts, that Spain would, in her mode of prosecut-
ing hosnltes, outrage humanity and civilization
what was Commodore Rodgers, with powerful
heet, In Chllian waters tOr9 Does our Gov
ernment build and arm war-shps and send
them to cruise on distant coasts, merely as an
IDLE pageant? Is 1t all for vain show, as if
MS fleet were no better than a collection of
painted shps upon painted ocean," We
repeat what WAS Commodore Rodgers and his
heet at Valparaiso for? Why does our navy
cruise IN all seas, bearing not mimic guns but
lron-throated ordnance; not Chinese fire-crack.
ers, but Veritable gunpowderl The country
lncurs this expense for the protection of Amerf.
can citizens and the upholding Of American
interests, "whithersoever scattered abroad.n
Now, II the bombardment of Valparaiso in
whlch there were American property, defense
less American citizens, and helpless American
women and children, was not q case tor backing
protests with shotted guns by what possibility
can such case ever arise? Why
be at the great expense of sending naval force
10 distant waters at ALL If the IRON throats are to
be dumb dogs that cannot barkn in an emer.
eency like this? True, our Minister protested
and tried to get Others to join l the protest; but
ne could equally have made an Intellectual pro.
test, If there mad been no American squadron in
those waters. What as The use OF sending to those
distant shores powerful American fleet TO look
after and protect American citizens, if in the
very CRISIS OF their peril, our ships lie lazy BY
as inert SPECTATORS OF cruel and inhuman HON.
bardment? We ask still again, what were thew
there for? For aught anybody can see, they
might, for all purposes of protection, as well
nave been at home, laid up in the stocks as to
oe IN the harbor OF Valparaiso passive spectators
We do not complain of the neutrality of our
Government in the war between Spain and
Ch1ll. II is not a question of neutrality at all,
Dut a 9uesuon OF protecuon to American citi-
Zens. III / eutral OBLIGATIONS forbade Comuodora
Rodgers TO make threat, or to fire gun, on |
what principle did our Minister there make so
earnest protest? II the Spanish Admiral was
ABOUT 10 perpetrate lustihable act of war; the |
protest itself was violation of neutrality. But |
1t the bombardment was not ustfable act of |
war, but piece OF inhuman barbarity imperil- |
ing the lives and property OF our citizens. why |
should opposition have been limited to an empty |
and unavailing protest? II the bombardment |
was right there should have been no protest; if |
It was wrong, protest should have been followed |
oy enerfetlc measures OF prevention.
In such case, Commodore Rodgers would,
OF course, have assumed a responsibility in ex. |
cess OF his instructions, and must have brayed |
Whatever personal consequences might result TO |
himself. But IN defense of right, in defense of |
the helpless against barbarous outrage, in de. |
tense OF MS own countrymen, his personal ex. |
posure would have rendered hls conduct ali the |
more heroic. What better use can be made of
lie than nobly to peril it in the protection of
the helplessy The fact that he had no instruc
tions should have rendered him the bolder. His |
Government was, in that case, free to dsayow
his act, and cashier and punish him: and as the
consequences OF his misstep, ii 1t should he |
deemed a mlsstep, would fall not on his country |
but solely on himself, it would have been an ACT
OF pure herosm which great soul would natu-
rally pant for an opportunity to perform IL
would have been like the sublime intrepidity Of
great geninses in literature, who, as the poet
says, sometimes 'glOriOusly offend, and rise to
faults true critics dare not d;"-like this, but
nObler; as action Is nObler than words uf.