The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1868-12-18


temperamentw would do much towards removing
every trace of ill-will between the two ooun-
tries, and settling all questions at issue,
especially the questions arising out of the
depredations Of the British vessel Alabama.
We presumed he would meet many English
men who did not sympathize with us during
the war. He would most probably be brought
into relations with Lsrd Russell, who made
such swift haste to give rebellion belligerent
rights and to humiliate US after the accidental
capture Of Mason and Sldell. We felt sure
he would have conferences with Mr.. Glad
stone, whose imagination once scared into
rhetorical recognition OF the Southern Con
federacy and the exaltatiOn of Mr.. Davis to
the ruleTship of a sovereign people. We did
not require him to make any distinctions in
his treatment of the English people based
upon their feelings towards the North and
South. There were two classes Of Eug
lishmen-those like Mr.. Gladstone, whose
fancy, or perhaps whose preiudce,
had swept them into an ind5creet
fondness for the Southern people, especially
for types OF men like "Stonewall' Jackson.
With them we had merely an intellectual dit
ference Of opinion, which events have deter
mined. There were those who not only SYM
pathized with the South but even went so far
as to trangress the laws of England to give the
South aid. They did not even have the poor
merit which belongs TO Jefferson Davis, OF be-
lieving that they were au oppressed people
struggling for freedom. But for money, for
hatred-because they saw in the downfall Of
the American Republic another argument
against progress and liberty-they made them
selves the allies of an armed Rebellion aud
the enemies of the United States
Mr. Laird was q conspicuous example. Ia
defiance of the orders of the Queen he built
vessels to destroy the commerce of America.
Many good ship went down uuder their
np1 o1f at,t1,
leader of the English anti American senti-
ment, and accepted the craftsmanship Of a so
ciety avowedly established to aid the Rebel
lion. Mr. Roebuck, in his violent, coarse way,
was the lusty champion of Rebellion in the
House of Commons. His enmity took him all
the way to Paris to coax the French Emperor
to interfere in behalf of the South. Here were
three EDglishmen who were as much in the
Rebel interest as though they had taken up
arms under General Lee. Mr. Johnson's mis-
sion might bring him into relations with them.
No one expected that he would exhibit the
least discourtesy. What the duty of his Office
required was'proper, and nothing more. But
the duty of his Office certainly did not re-
quire him to meet them in friendship, to
make them speeches of adulaton; to single
out Lord Wharncliffs as a man dear to
America, to publicly welcome Mr.. Roebuck
as his friend, even while he assailed
America with a disgusting criticism,
and to proudly salute Mr.. Laird before com
pany OF English gentlemen. All this Revsr iy
johnson did, and when the cable flashed to US
the story of his deeds every Americans blushed
with shame. 1t is no excuse to quote the ex-
ample of General Grant There Is vast diff
ference between the attentions shown to Gene
raj Lopgstreet by the President elect and those
showered upon Mr. Laird. General Longstreet
is a soldier who fought in a mistaken cause,
who was beaten, and who accepted defeat like
soldier and gentleman. He used his influ-
ence to restore peace. He had rislled his life
| for what he believed to be his duty. Mr..
Laird risked his money for what his Queen
told him was a crime, and in contest in
which he had neither part nor lot. He sent
out ships to destroy the commerce of n alton
with which he was at peace. He was mere
pirate covering under the English flag. Nay,
If he had even been pirate, he might at least
| have courageously accepted the risks which
the Alabama encountered off the coast OF
France, and enforced the respect which is ever
due to courage.
We would do no harm to these gentlemen.
| All we expected from our minister was that
he should cross over to the other side, and
permit them to 60 their way. We regard him
as man unmindful of the dignity and self
respect of an American Minister. He is no
| ambassador of ours. He is mere salaried
adventurer, who has forfeited his position,
and is in no sense the representative of the
United States. And when Mr.. Johnson
ascribes this sentiment to "a secret dislike fol-
the preservation of peaceful relations between
the two countries" she makes his position
forlorn and pitiful. We honor the great Eng
lish nation. So far as our poor influence has
gone, we have labored for harmony and peace
and unity. The England of Bright and Cob
den is a glorious nationality, and its flag has
long been the emblem of civilization and jns
tice.
We have criticized her policy, and especially
the policy which has oppressed Ireland; but il
this we have only joined with her mos
trusted statesmen. The England of Laird ant
Wharnoliffe and Roebuck deserves no respect
no consideration, no friendship. For Mr.
Johnson to seek out and cover it with hi
eulogies and adulation, and publicly en-
brace it, is as much an insult to America as i
would be in the eyes of Englishmen for S
Edward Thornton to do honor to Mr.. JohI
Savage or Mr.. George Francis Train.
Mr.. Johnson evidently feels this. Hi
humility is touching, There are some sin
hat cannot be forgiven, aud these he ha
committed. His usefulness as Minister is a
an end. When ambassadors find it necessary
10 go down upon their knees they had bette
cCme home.
II. Gs at Ottawa.