The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1866-02-26

be sensible of no wrong, and are not disposed
to make eny reparation. This, however, Is
altogether characteristic OF British diplomacy,
whose policy it has ever been never to aelznow-
ledge an injury done, and never, IL It can be
avoided, to repair It.
1t must be confessed, on the other hand,
that the Washington Administration has thus
far observed great good temper and patient
forbearance In reference to the affairs now In
dispute, and that If the friendly relations Of
the two countries shall hereafter be disturbed
by persistent refusal of an honorable adjust
ment of the difficulty, Great Britain, and not
the United States, win be to blame for the
result. Lord CLARENDON. with cool impu-
dence worthy of "John Bull" actually pro-
posed to Mr.. ADAMS to wipe out the whole
record of British breaches of neutrality during
the past four years, in so far as they relate to
this country, and start henceforth on a better
understanding as to international rights and
duties -
Lord CLARENDON states that he suggested to
Mr.. ADAMS that IL would now be useful and
practical 10 forget the past, and turn the lesson
OF experience to account for the future; that
England and the United States had each become
law, and that it would greatly rebound TO the
honor Of the two principal maritime nations of
the world to attempt the improvements in that
code which had been proved to be necessary.
1t was possible that the wounds inflicted by the
war we're still too recent, ard that the ill-will
towards England was still too rife, to render
such an undertaking practical at the present
moment; but 1t was one which ought to be born
in mind, ard that was earnestly desired by her
Maies,y's Government, as means of promoting
peace and abating the horrors OF war: and q
work, therefore, which would be worthy of the
civilization OF our age, and which would entt'le
the Governments which achieved it to the gratl-
tude OF mankind"
This proposition was very promptly and
very properly declined by Mr.. ADAMS, and
SO the matter in debate remains open. 1t
would surely have been very convenient ar
rangement to have got finally rid of claims
against British subjects to the amount of many
millions Of pounds sterling, due our citizens
for depredations on their commerce during
the Rebellion, by taking sponge and erasing
the whole score from the slate. But that
would neither have satisfied the honor of this
nation, nor the just requirements of its peo-
pie, whose property has been burned and
otherwise destroyed on the high seas.
Besides, what would be the use of entering
into special convention with Great Britain
changing, in certain particulars, the present
law of nations? Mr. MARCY declined to do
that when invited to do it by the Congress at
Paris, which undertook to settle the diff
ferences between Russia and the Western
Powers. He saw very plainly that partial
modification Of the great common law of all
nations, for the government only of few who
might assent to the amendments, would be
difficult OF adoption, and of very unreliable
duration or authority. Moreover, what would
be the sense of making new rules and regu-
lations to govern neutrality in time Of
war, when those that are established and con-
flrmed by long usage and universal acquies-
cence, are not obeyed? Since Great Britain
pays such poor respect to her obligations
under the present code of nations, how can her
ministers expect this Government to believe,
that if the code were altered at her SUCCESS
ton, she would vouchsafe any greater defer
ence to, and obey it any more faithfully,
than she does the one now in force? The
fact is, that Great Britain is given, in dipIo-
macy, to brow-beating, and, if that fails, to
pettifoggng. That policy has succeeded
pretty well in Europe. But it will not, in the
end, prosper in any controversy with the
United States.