New-York tribune., 1869-06-02

reading on the 14th inst.
DUBLIN, June lit is rumored that Earl Spencer
Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, is about to resign
AMERICAN RELATIoNs-MR. FORSTER ON MR..
sUMNER-sIR FRANCIS HEAD-THE LONDON
CONSULATE.
TFRoM OUR OWN CORRESPONDENT
LONDON May 22.-There is probably no man in
England whose friendship for the United States has
been more steady and sincere than Mr.. w. L. For
sters His name ought to be as widely known in
America as any one Of half dozen that dear to
us for great and disinterestcd services. OF that
small band Of Engishmen he happens to be the first
who has spoken since Mr.. Sumner. All that no says
ON American affairs deserves to be read and consld-
cred in America, and this speech may be taken as
the nearest approach to fair at any rate friendly
view of the American question possible IN
England at this moment. The tone of it deserves
all praise The argument of it will not
reach any American mind. What Mr.. Forster says is
another proof how entirely Mr.. Summers speech is
misapprehended even by those who have every wish
to read and judge it fairly l should say Of Mr..
Forster as of other friends, that he will be of n
different mind little while hence. But you may
accept his speech as the limit beyond which the
most reasonable and friendly of Englishmen cannot
or will not 90, at present. The current carries
everybody down stream; one man will reach the
shore at one point; at another; but thus far,
most men seem 10 be trying which shall get into tho
deepest water Mr. Forster perhaps, has an excep-
tIonal of the advantage Of having his feet on
the solid ground.
His statement about the Neutrality Proclamation
is not new but at this moment deserves 90 be con-
sidered anew. So long ago the great Alabama
debate in the House, March of last year, and dare
say before that Mr.. Forster said in substance what
he says now. He, friend TO the North, urged the
issue of the Proclamation a means of preventing
the sailing of privateeTs from English ports under
Rebel letters-of-marque Hence, says Mr.. Forster
it could not have been unfriendly act, and
Mr. Summers complaints are unfoundcd. Now
of Mr. Forsteris good faith there can be no
question whatever but his argument will not bear
moments examination. The Proclamation may have
had incidentally its advantages 10 our side, and
friend Of ours in his eagerness 10 secure those may
have overlooked the greater losses and evils II was
destined to inflict on us. But the fact that Mr.
Forster's motive in advising 1t was good, docs not
prove does not even tend TO prove that the motive
of the Government, Of which he was not member
was also good still less that the act itself was not
an injury and such violation Of law and Of inter
national comfy made England responsible iOr the
calamites that sprung from It,
have stated pretty strongly in former letters my
opinion that all approach to a settlement is for the
present impossible and that negotiations had better
be postponed Ny view is not in the least changed,
but il is no more than fai 10 tell you that there is at
least one American here who thinks otherwise. His
acquaintance with public men in England is large,
and his conversations with them have been frequent
and confidential. He believes that even now the
way is open to a peaceful and prompt settlement. He
is convinced that England will go step OF two be-
yond the johnson treaty, spite Of eyerybodys vehe-
ment protestation that she will not On the Alabama
Ia sI,..kt tI,.ro o,s,n L.
no difficulty; that England viii readily consent to
acknowledge her liability for whatever direct dam
ages can be proved to have resulted from the escape
of that vessel; the amount to be determined by a
Mixed Commission, which should receive proof Of
claims like any other tribunal. l think he even be-
eves, OF hopes, that England in the fury of her
present exasperatiOn would consent TO refer to arb
tration the questions arising out Of the Neutrality
Proclamation, which two successive governments
negotiating not In circumstances Of evaporation but
of general good feeling have expressly refused to do
Beyond that his most sanguine hopes do not carry
him. and whether that is basis on which the Ameri
can Government and People are eager TO resume nc
gOtiations is question better answered your side
than on this.
have sincere respect for the judgment and good
sense Of the friend whose opinions state. There
are few Americans who know much of England,
and especially Of the men who govern England. But
the value of his opinion is not evidence of the
readiness Of certain leading Ministers TO accept what
America is unit in demanding. There is not one of
them who could hold Office an hour if he allowed il
to be supposed lie would ever consider such terms
What this testimony proves is what / have never
denied the real anxiety in the Cabinet TO avoid
giving Onense, to abstain from aggravating
policy, to put themselves in the right before the
world. and finally TO reach settlement by persuad-
ing America first of their sincere desire TO 20 all
possible lengths and secondly that it is not possible
to 20 much further in the way of concession than
they had already gone.
Sir Francis Head, who was Governor of Upper
Canada in 1887 has been printing a mass of corre-
spondence in respect to the MKenze affair in that
year, with view TO show that the course at that
time adopted by the Governor of NewYork consti-
tutes precedent by which the United States Gov
ernment are now prohibited from claiming apology
or redress for the Neutrality Proclamation in 1861.
To state the case is to prove its absurdity. Sir
Francis Head ought to know, and probably does
know that the Governor Of New-York is n
functonary unknown to international law He
seems to suppose that the English pnblic will not
know il, and l presume they do not. Still,
very little attention has been attracted by
this dreary erpos6 with its four columns Of musty
documents Possibly somebody will take the trouble,
by and by. to explain that tho Governor of New
York for all international purposes is functionaTy
,N he 4 ,rl NnfW WaK