The New York herald., 1872-09-15


it left the real matter at issue-the bad faith Of
England and the consequent i'll blood
between the two great English-speaking
nations of the world-untouched When
the Treaty of Washington was signed and
ratified, interpreting its language by the light
of common sense, we hailed it as a
complete and satisfactory disposition of all the
differences between England and America, in
cluding the liability of the former to our
nation as we'll as to our individual citizens for
alleged unfriendly neutrality during our
national peril It was only when Secretary
Fish had yielded the position we had secured
and had sacrificed the honor of our govern
ment, at the imperious demand Of the English
Cabinet, that we denounced the pretended set
Element as unsatisfactory and called for the
destruction of the distorted and violated treaty.
The result proves that our position was well
taken. The money award, whatever it might
have been, is not worthy of consideration as
compared with the graver interests involved in
perfect friendly feeling between the two
countries yet the insignificant sum of sixteen
or seventeen million dollars, which may APP
pear to many considerable sum, will probably
be more than swallowed up in the counter
awards made to British subjects by the Claims
Commission, and after the payment Of
all the expenses incurred by our government
will certainly leave us loser in the mere
matter of dollars and cents, as well as in honor,
consistency and reputation. This England
knows well enough; and while Lord Chief
Justice Cockburn coolly "dissents" from
holding his government responsible for any
thing at ALL and while the English papers will
put on show of indignation against even this
paltry award, for political effect England in
truth laughs in her sleeve at her triumph over
The shrewd Yankees, financially as well as
There is only one point upon which any
credit could possibly be claimed for the Treaty
Of Washington and this Geneva farce, and
even this is precluded by the unfortunate facts
the negotiations. 1t has been said
that the creation of the tribunal has been the
triumph of peaceful arbitration over the
old appeal to war in the adjust
ment of international disputes. But such
a settlement, to be worth anything, must be
made in good faith and effective in removing
the cause of disagreement. It must reach the
seat of the disease and not merely heal over
the surface. Has the treaty of Washington ac-
such work? Is it not notorious
that it leaves the bitterness and i'll feeling
heretofore existing against England only ag-
gravated by a sense that we have been worsted
in diplomacy and overreached in hard-driven
bargain2 A friendly arbitration between great
nations means something noble, self-denying
and generous in action-a simultaneous OPEN
ing of the heart and yielding of conflicting
views to the impulse of an honest desire for
and peace. In place of any such
sentiments there have been in the Treaty of
Washington rather, in the Interpretation
of the treaty forced upon our time-serving
diplomats by England-sharp practice, advan-
tage taking, diplomatic fencing and feinting,
all the shifts of legal and political cunning, to
win advantage over an adversary A settlement
that leaves bitter feeling 9f humiliation
and injustice ranking in the breast Of one of
the parties is worse than no settlement at all.
Then, again, no person can pretend that there
was any danger of war with England growing
out of the Alabama difficulties, and hence we
cannot console ourselves with the belief that
the Geneva farce has been triumph of peace.
The whole affair is an unfortunate one for the
credit, honor and advantage of the United
States; and yet there is nothing left but to &C.
cept the insufficient award and platitudes Of
the Geneva Tribunal and to be thankful that
we are rid of the Court and its business.