The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1869-05-13
AmERrCANPREACaING VS.. PRACTICE.

The Times of Monday contained telegram
from its Philadelphia corrcspondent-more IN
telligible and probably more exact than MT.
Reuters on the same subject-announcing that
the House of Representatives has passed q
resolution declaring its sympathy with the CUBAN
insurgents, and promising its support 10 INC
President whenever he shall think II rlght 10 re-
cognize their independence. ii the negouauonls
between the United States should be renewedi
this step will neCessttate some ingenious sPSStSg.
pleading on the part of Mr.. Motley. IL ls dln-
cult to conceal the teeslng WILL ,ism of Com,
mons had passed an analogous resolution IN 1901.
The adoption by q majority OF neary Ihree
to one of an address 10 Ihe OIoWn
expressinp sympathy with the southern
States and promising her Majesty support IN
the event of her thinking 1t right TO recognize
their independence, would have been accepted
almost as n declaration OF war. Spain is not
likely to look on the act of the House of Repre-
sentatives in this light, because she has enough
on her hands without that quarrel with the
United States which is all thatis needed to make
the loss of Cuba inevitable. But the character
of the resolution is not altered by the degree OF
impunity which attends it. If it is right for the
House of Representatives to move the President
to recognize the independence OF Cuba, IL would
have been right for the House OF Commons to
move the Crown to recognize the independence
of the South. We are justified, therefore, in
asking some of our American critics TO explain
how il is that the same body which has Just
taken the former step itself nomshcs bitter in
dignation against Great Britain for taking, nat
the latter step, but something infinitely short Of
it. So much has been said in the United States
on the unprecedented conduct of this country i'm
recognizing the Southern States as belligerent
and this not merely by members of Con-
gress, and others who claim a prcscriptiye
right to talk patriotic nonsense, but by
journalists and politicians Of real eminCncc-that
this is not too much to claim at their hands
VIII either the conductors of the Nation or the
correspondents of the Daily NeiDS or Spectator
condescend to give us what we crave? If it had
been Canada instead of Cuba that is now in in
surrection all would have been plain. Even then
to treat recognition of independence as equiyN-
lent to a recognition of bcligCreuCy would be
stretching matters rather far, though soreness of
temper is usually apt to see points of resemblance
which escape ordinary eyes. But towards Spain
the House of Representatives has no ill-ieeng
If we are not mistaken, it has already declared
its sympathy with the Spanish reyolutiOn-sO
that some slight sacrifice to consistency was not
more than might have been looked for. Since
this sacrifice has not been made; Englishmen
will have a right to regard American politicians
as simply out of court with regard to the
proclamation of neutrality and the ll-will of
which Great Britain has in consequence been
the object, unless they can draw some distnc-
tiOn between the insurgents in Cuba and the in
surgents i'm the South. We cannot be expected
to submit to their disinterested efforts to take
out the mote that is in Our eye unless they
will at least recognize the existence of the very
large beam which has just made its appearance
in their own eye. We wish to ask them a very
simple question:-Why, if it is right for Amer
ban insurgents, was it wrong for Englishmen to
feel and express sympathy with the Southern
Insurgents? Perhaps the easiest way of dealing
with the difficulty is to abandon as indefensible
the position taken up by the House of Represen-
tatiVes. This, may be gathered from an an
ticpatory reference to the subject in the Spectd-
tor, will be the line adopted by the most reason
able of those English Liberals who have con-
sistenuy sympathized with the Republican party
in Congress. They will say, with perfect truth,
that one mans i'll doing is not excused by an
other mans subsequent Ill doing; that the fact
of our being wrong in 1861 is in no way altered
by the Americans being wrong in 1868. But If
this is to be the answer, it will be well for those
who give it to guard in some way against the
very sweeping application of which it is sus-
ceptibe. 1t certainly seems as if some Eng
lish Liberals had become unduly chary of
their sympathy with Instructions since
the outbreak of the civil war in America. There
can be no objection to their revising their theory
of rebellion if they thought it stood in need of
such treatment-a point on which we should
perhaps be inclined to agree with them-but
they must be on the watch against the extreme
absolutism to which their new creed threatens
to commit them. The doctrines which have
been preached in the Spectator and the Daily
Ne1CS with reference to the insuucctiOn OF the
South are equivalent, as it seems to us, to the
assertion that armed resistance to authority can
never be lawful. We do not for a moment sup
pose that this opinion is really held by the Jour
nails in question, but we confess that we are
utterly unable to reconcile their views of the
American with any other theory. If Anne
ricans may not sympathiZe with the CubanS, if
Englishmen might not sympathize with the
Southern States, when it is lawful for either
Americans or Englishmcn to sympathiZe with
insurgents anywhere? Is rebellion always
sinful, and if not, what is the test by which
its innocence is to be recognized? Those
Americans who prefer to draw distinction be-
tween the cases. and to justify the proposed
recognition of Cuba as an independent State
while cOndemning the recognition OF the South
even as a belligerent power, will probably not
trouble themselves to reconcile the two iudg-
ments, unless as in the instance of Mr. Motley,
they may be compelled to attempt it in the
course of official business. Certainly no man
can be Judged very hardly for shirking such Il
task. SOsfar as the facts arc known, the posi-
tion of the Cuban insurreCtion is far less favor
able than the position of the South was at any
time during the first two years of the civil war.
On the theory so persistently advanced by Mr..
Seward, even the existence of civil war in
Cuba is not yet established. Why should il
be regarded as anything more than "a
domestic disturbance which, although it has
severe pecuharites, is in fact only such a sedi-
tious insuTrecton as is incidental TO national
progress in every State z" This is how Mr.
Seward thought fit to describe the secession OF
> the South, and it is hard TO see why other Coy
ernments should not be allowed the benefit of a
similar mode of dressing up facts. Spain is in
great need of national progress just now, and
if seditious msurrection is everywhere Incl.
dental" to this blessing professed lovers oflberty
ought to be above taking advantage of the
"severe peculiarities' by which il may be for The
moment attended
Mental Awakening i'm China.
The NeiC Highlander has an interesting article
entitled "The Renaissance in China from whicl
we have gathered some facts on the great men