The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1869-05-01
OUR ENGLISH RELATIONSHIP. MOTLEY'S
MISSION.
From, the ". Y. Times.


From the NJ Y. Times
And now we are told that Minister Motley is
going to England without instructions on the
Alabama case. What, then is he going for
Simply to reside in London and to figure in
Court circles as an ornamental representative of
the Great Republic The country has been
under the impression that he was going either to
settle our differences or to prosecute our COM
plants against the British Government for its
conduct during our Rebellion. But it seems he
is not to do either. The Government proposes
to give him no instructions whatever on the sub
ject; and, rs matter of course, he can scarcely
open negotiations on a subject of this kind
without instructions, AS If he himself were an
independent power.
OF course we attach no Importance to the
report that he is instructed to make Mr. Sum
ner's speech the basis of his negotiations. Mr..
Sumner is certainly not yet an independent
power, so far as foreign nations are concerned,
whatever he may be as regards our own. And
if General Grant had desired to have him in
struct our Ministers abroad, either on their
duties in general or in reference to specific ques
tions he would probably have made him Secre-
tary of State, which, so far as we are informed
he has not done.
The probability is that the Alabama is to be
let alone. There is n current belief that we have
nothing to gain by having it settled, and that
! England has everything to fear from having it
left unsettled. But the complaint of injury
comes from us, it is the most natural thing in
the world to suppose that we should either press
III OF ABANDON II; one OF OlllCr, III would Seen we
mVst do. If we do not press 1t, if we do not de-
mand redress or reparation, but leave the whole
matter alone, the natural inference will be that
we have abandoned it. England is not likely to
urge us to bring it forward. She afford to
: let the matter die out, if we can. ReverdY John
son went over under instructions from our Gov
ernment, to settle all disputes and close past ac-
counts with England. And he bluudered so
dreadfully in doing it that any renewal of the
effort. indeed that the verv idea of q settlement
at all has hppOmp unnpDulnr The foVpritp
tion just now is that without discussing the
question at all, we can await favorable oppOr-
tunity. and then pay England in her own COIN
by applying her own principles of neutrality
and serving her as she served us during our Re
bellion. SO we hear proposals that we
should recognize the Cubans rs belligerents,
allow the Fenans to fit out privateers in our
ports, ld thus subject English commerce to the
fate which, through England's action, has over
taken ours.
1t might be well to remember, however, that
this is really accepting the action OF England in
n single case as having established a new rule
of international law: for if we act upon such a
rule we must do so, not because it suits con-
venience or gratifes our resentments, but be-
cause it is according to our view of the case, a
| fixed and settled rule of international law. But
| we have always denied tive complain of Eng
| land for having introduced it, and are actually
| claiming damages of her for having acted upon
| it to our injury. We must utterly stultify our
| selves to begin with, and abandon the theories
| W
| can satisfy our national sensibilitics in the way
| proposed. Besides, we must take no action
| which we cannot Justify in the eyes of other
| nations, on solid grounds of international law
| and we fancy it would be somewhat difficult tC
| do this, if We were to make England's conduct in
| the Alabama case, against which we have pro.
tested so strongly, the rule of our action under
similar circumstances. Moreover, England. as Il
| matter of course, would never assent to such 4
| view of the case. If in case of the Fenians, OF
! any other case in which she is interested, We
| were to act thus towards her, she would unques
| tionably resent ii even at the hazard of n war
and we should, therefore, gain nothing by sucl
an undignifed and unmany evasion as the one
proposed
The injuries we suffered from England, in the
view taken of them by Mr. Sumner and thu
country generally, can be redressed only by the
fullest apology and reparation, or by war. 1t il
folly to fancy that England can be induced tC
acknowledge any violation of justice and right
or can be bullied into making reparation for
wrong she denies having ever done She ha
consented to refer the matter to the decision of
mixed commission, and this is as far as she vii
consent to 90. Any other reparation we ma.
seek can be had only at the cost of a war; anC
the sooner we take that view of the matter, ant
act accordingly, the sooner will the affair b
settled