New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1869-03-09

When this dispatch soon after appeared In the
Dooumens Diplonatiques, Mr. BigelOw obJe00eu
M version of his conversation as cor
responding neither with the language he hau
roaa nor the impression he had intended 10
convey and then ensued the diplomatic col
respondence between Mr.. Bgelow ana NJ.
Drouyn de Lhuys, upSl the official record OIL
which, in Mr.. Stewards volumes, we based our
ren,ark. Mr.. BigelOw's own language Is:
e" asked whether, in your Excellencys opinion,
oMaximilian would be able to sustain himself
without the aid of France, if his authority
owere recognized by the United States" we
ara puzzed to understand why Mr.. Blge-
low. in his card written 10 correct our alleged
mistake. and 10 give the historic view OF so
interesting a question, ignores completely ms
own correspondence on the subject with d.
Drown do Lhuys, instituted to place himself
in his true position, and which, IN addltioh "
its being placed upon the files at the DeparO-
ment in Washington, he proposed to nave pup
lished in the France and the Conshfdt'ohne.
Of Paris. Ifit was delcaey that forbade q reier
ence to his own dispatches, It was as unhects-
sary as the modesty which induced hlm Oh lllS
first interview with NJ. Drouyn de Lhuys 70
confess that he was not unconscious Oh MS
"yOuth and inexperience as diplomats"
| and 70 accept tho Recommendation WIN Which
u,o, ostute minister favored him, to cultivate
n,o foc,,ltv and disposition of looking at
dinlomotie ouestion from the point OF view
occuuied by those with whom lac was negotiltlhg'
Nothing could have been more proper thah
| for Mr.. Bigelow to have quoted, In TINS con-
nectiofi, those well-known letters, when we
now do linn the Justice to reproduce, as
| exhibiting the exact position which he
occupied ON the occasion in question ana as
i showing, by The. differing yet still coincIdent
versior of his conversation when making the
s,,,,,,cstior 10 which we alluded, as given by
NJ piooIo,v ON. the one side, NJ. Drouyn dc
II,nvs ON the other, that it was quite another
sation from that with which be has iaY-
ored ms in his card. Is .-..
Ir.- One point which appears in both ana upon
| which Mr. Bigelow seems TO lay great Stress
'is that the logic Of the situation required the
"French troops 10 leave before the American !,
| "GOyernment could recognize MaXIniihan'
| Had he looked at the question from the
American point of view, he might lave ieit
more sensibiy than he seems to have done,
| that "tlc advent Of Macmillan to the pre-
.'tentled throne of Mexico was part OF the
rebellion and that tic logic Of the situa-
ton required, in the blunt language of Grant,
lthat :" his departure should be part OF Its
Is"history." 1t is not pleasant thought, nor
Twill it arouse the pride of our children, when
J they read upon the page of history that the
| first order for the return Of the French troops
from Mexico was based upon the suggestion
of the American Minister that America might
recognize when they were gone the empmo
which, with equal wickednoss and meapEess,
during our temporary disability, had been
forced upon the Meucans by foreign Dayonets.
Nor will il add TO the charm OF this story TO
remember that after such q suggestion had
been made on The one side, and promptly ac.ed
upon on the other, tho unhappy and credulous
Macmillan remained behind when bis allies had
departed, not TO rule and be recognized, bat to
be scoficd at. abandoned, aud shot. '
MIR Bigelow closes discard with the remark
that DC had neglected an excellent opportunity
"of enlarging 10 the French Minister upon tho
"terrors Of the American Easlc.' But is
there no medium between ehlarging on the
terror of our eagle and exhibiting him
as the meckest OF birds cIoucliiug before Ghe
Gallo cock, volunteering to DO plurkcd aud
asking to be humbledf -
The proposition which Mr. BleeOw Of his
own accord made to NJ Dronyn de Lhuys bad
two years before been made by the French
Minister to Mr. Dayton, with tho remark that
=" the dangers Of tho Government Of tho Arch
"duke wonld come principally from the United
States, and that the early acknowledgment
"of that Government by the United States
"wOuld tend to shorten, or perhaps to end all
"tle Troublesome complications of France in
"that country" Although we were then strug-
Cling with the Rebellion aud there were
grounds on which unprncipled timidity might
have dictated srbservience to our foreiEn foes,
aud not "a when Mr. Bigelow made his sug-
gestion at the hight of orr position as a fist
class power, Mr.. Dayton with due regard to
the dignity 90 ne country, replied with dry
significance that he should scarcely suppose
that France, under tho circumstances, would
expect the United States 10 make haste 20
acknowledge a new monarchy in Mexico.
But our object at present is not to remark
further upon this prominent act of Mr.. Bige-
lows brief career in diplomacy, but simply to
answer his ill-advised charges against the ae-
curacy of THE TRIBUNE, and to show that our
statement of his conduct, so far from being
zone Of those mistakes into which the daily
" Press Is liable to fall in judging the conduct
of its diplomatic officers" was based with
conscientious exactitude upon his own official
letters and Mr. Stewards approval Of his course.
The whole of our recent policy toward France
and Mexico is wrapped in mystery, and TIE
Nation of last week, in alluding to Mr. Blge-
lows card, recalls attention to n charge re-
peatedly made and never denied, that through
A.. .ai.o,l 81 NJ gaword tho Erauch Mi.