The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1871-06-30

scope of the treaty, it is impossible not to
feel annoyance and modification. Unques-
tionably these elaine ought to have been in
cluded and arbitrated on under the machinery
of the treaty, and if any effort we're wanting
towards success in getting this included, the
failure was not creditable to our Commission
ers On the other hand, we know very we'll
the political" moves at work to keep the ad-
mission of these claims out of the treaty.
We know that the Irish party in the United
States would have raised great hue and cry
against any government that admitted them,
and we may look upon the United States
Government in this matter very much as we
do upon an Irish employer who has received
notice from the Ribbonmen to say that if he
takes certain person into his employment,
he will be a dead man in a few months
time. Granted that this was so, and that
our Commissioners could not cure it, or
hope to cure it, would there have
been any sense in breaking off the negotia-
tioDs on this point alone? Is there any real
wisdom in refusing half loaf because you
cannot get whole? in failing to recognize
the advantage which loaf has over no bread?
If there are to be outstanding subjects of dis
pute, why not make them as few as possible?
On the points agreed upon we have conceded
something but America has also conceded
something. We are to have a genuine arbi-
tration on the San Juan question. We are to
hear no more of the absurd grievance of our
premature recognition of the belligerent
rights of the South. We are to have no bill
for general damages-inj juries to trade and
So forth-sent in to us, though we may be
liable for the particular devastations of the
Alabama. On the fisheries question we are to
have our concessions valued, and the Domin-
ion is to receive the balance in their favor in
cash. Why should we fail to profit by these
concessions, aud to cement real friendship
between the two countries simply because
the American Governmenthas not the courage
to face the hostility of the Irish vote? Is it
nothing to us to regain the feeling of security
as respects our relations with America?
Is it nothing to feel that if the cloud should
again gather and break over Europe, there is
no danger in our rear to withdraw our atten-
tion from the danger in front? The House of
Lords knew well that this, far from being of
no Importance, is a matter of the first signi6-
canoe, and that if our Government had really
broken off negotiations on the Fenian ques-
tion, the very speakers who now condemn
Lord Granville for pliarcy and weakness
would have been the first to condemn HIM
still more severely for petulance and total
inability to estimate the true proportions of
affairs. Lord Russell may believe those who
tell him that this treaty has struck fearful
blow at the power and prestige of England,
if he will; but the House of Lords was quite
keen enough to discern that this is but the petu-
liant assertion of a few bitter critics, while
the great mass of sensible men on both sides
of the Atlantic are we'll aware that both Eng
land and America have gained vastly in free
dom of action and in might by the re-esta-
blishment of friendship and the adoption of
policy of cooperation.