New-York tribune., 1872-04-01

be was not on speaking terms, to put into the
unfortunate document his own wild and
sanguinary ideas. This seems so absurd that
we must give the words of The Times: "The
efforts to settle our difficulties with England
arc most honorable to a President who Is
"knOwn TO entertain no affection for that
Power If they shall come to naught, 1t VIII
"bc through the Influences which MIR. Sumner,
"the leader Of the opposition, has brought to
"bear. The indirect claims did not originate
with Gen. Grant or Secretary Fish," the
Erening Mail cannot follow in 80 ridiculous u
path az this, but finds itself unable either to
Justify the Case or to blame Mr.. Fish for 1t.
Gen. Grant is, of course, out of the question.
He il responsible for everything that turns
ont well, and for nothing that turns out badly.
But victim must be found, and Mr.. Bancroft
Davis is the vicariOus sacrifice. He ia out
of Office and ont of the country, AMI no amount
of ignominy falling to him will ondanger the
ticket. So this loyal Grant paper talks OF
"NIr. Bancroft Davis's il-advised claim for
consequential damages There is about as
much candOr and about as much congrnity III
this cxpcdent rs i'll that famous inspiration or
the Knight of La Mancha, when he claimed,
after attacking a sacred procession, that 1T was
not he but his lance which committed the
sacrilege. There is no use in falsehOOd at the
confessional. Neither Mr.. Sumner nor MIR.
Davis is the Administration, and we cannot
load its sins upon their backs. If the Alabama
Treaty fails, it will be the fault either of the
British Government or Of ours. There is no
possibility of finding any third party to charge
it upon. The new effort of the Grant papers
to sustain tho English side and excupatc the
President and Secretary Of State is pure
waste of time.
The Springfeh Republican, q few days ago,
set forth three possible ways in which the
supposed deadlock might be broken. 1st-
That England should go the Arbitration and
await the resut-paying if The award suited
her, and refusing if it did not; 3D. That our
Government should withdraw the claims for
indirect damages, md let the Arbitration pro-
ceed OH the English understanding; Sd. That
both sides should drop the Arbitration, and let
Gen. Schencb and Lord Granville arrange for
the payment of a round sum, and the recipro-
cal writing of receipts in full. And this last
off-hand and easy way of dong business
strikes some of the Administration papers as
the best road ont of the slough of DcspOnd
where the question is sticking. The first of
these suggestions is the only admissible one
from our point of view. But independently
of the fact that it would be dcrogation of
the dignity of England to 90 to Geneva on
any such terms, we have tho positive declara-
tons of her Ministers that she will
do nothing of the kind We cannot
withdraw or modify our Case without change
in the State Department. A Secretary of
State who has so strong sense of personal
dignity that he would prefer to insult the son
of a friendly sovereign and the guest of the
nation, rather than recognize an Objectionable
envoy for single evening, could certainly
not be expected to remain in Office after the
principal public act of his Ministry had been
repudiatcd. We take it for granted that Mr..
Fish il not to leave the State Department, and
consequently that our Case is not to be mOdi-
fed As to the third suggestion, that Gen.
Schcnck and Lord Granville shall talk it over
and agree on settlement, that is the ldlest
and most thoughtless fancy of all. MIR. Glad
stone and Lord Granville have both said that
England would never pay a cent except after
tho decision of a competent tribunal, for that
would be a clear confession OF conscious
wrong.
Is there, theD no outlet from this false pO-
sition, which would be ludicrous if it were
not so tragc7 We do not yet abandon the
hope that the English Government, disregard
ing the first hasty and imprudent utterances
Of their own ministers, may yet see their way
clear to abiding by the decision Of the high
tribunal at Geneva, which there is no reason
to fear will be unjust or cxtravagant. MIR.
John Bright, in letter to distinguished
American citizen, suggests that our Govern
ment should assure the Government Of Great
Britain that we do not intend to press the
claims for indirect damages, but that they
shall remain in the document as portion OF
the history of the Case. While this ar
rangement would relieve the British Ministry,
it would have its awkward side for our Gov
ernment. Still another recent suggestion Is
that the two nations shall stpulate maxi
mum beyond which the award of the Board
of Arbitration shall not go. But it would
seem discourteOus in this way to hamper the
freedom of an international court. In the
meanwhile, the two frecst, most enlightened
nations in the world both agreed upon essen
tial points, and equally anxious for peaceful
settlement are kept apart, and their final rec
onciliation endangered by questions of little
moro than etiquette and form.
SHN1TOP WOOD