Worcester daily spy. [volume] (Worcester [Mass.]) 1850-1888, 1872-02-29

and in every subsequent year America has been
cOntending-and don't deny her right to con-
tend-that we have failed in our international
duty. In every one Of these years, in every va
rety Of form of representation and public act, we
have been contendiug on the contrary that we
have not failed In our International duty. And
so on through perfect GladstOnan whirlwnd of
words, words, words. until we come TO the eat
ing of the verbal whlrlwind OF Tuesday, which
has. become 'spin' in the skin of the right
honorable gentleman. He did not allude to The
intention Of the parties" He simply adhered
to the meaning of the words. We do not i'm.
pute blame to the American government. They
have a right TO their own Interpretation of the
treaty. IL they choose to say il is clear and I'M
Ambiguous against us, he appeals TO logic and
grammar and common sense to establish what
he calls the unambiguous Interpretation Of the
treaty. He denies that, rs some contend, the
whole strength of the British case depends on
their maintaining that the treaty is ambiguous.
The upshot of the whirlwnd is that Mr.. Glad
stone did not say to-day what he meant yester-
day, and lid not mean Yesterday what he SAYS
to-day. In a lucid interval of the first whirl-
wind he managed to be understood, athougn
probably he did not succeed in understanding
himself as saying that "te meaning, the only
meaning, the only rational meaning, the only
direct meaning, the only grammatical meaning,
whether tested by sense, by policy, or by any
Other standard was" his meaning. In an ap-
prcheusve interval of the second whirlwind he
dulIlis tudl LtC CllIltu oldlGS government are
quite Justified in seeing In the treaty directly
the opposite meaning to the grammatical" and
rational" and Sensible" and "poitic," and
only meaning. No wonder it is declared on
every hand that this whirlwind method Of treat
inE this tlckish question is not likely to induce
our cover mcnt TO withdraw the indirect claim
they have prepared. 1.-THE difficulty Of getting
high spirited nation 10 recast their case after
they have translated it into the chief languages
Of Edrdpt and Scattered over tile continent is
sufficiently enormous, but the difficulty is in
creased, if we begin denouucing their pleading
as irTeconcilable with sense, reason, or honesty
I'VE are all agreed that ours is tie better con-
structOn of the treaty, but there is no one Who
does see what plausible argument may be adj
dressed on the other side" Lord Derby struT-
ged hard to say that the treaty was ambiguous,
but could not. All he could say was that 'it
Bears 6af Construction quite as well as it bears
the opposite or American construction" Add
this 10 the testimony of Lord Cairns, and Lord
RUSSELL and several others, and the testimony Of
the ableSt of the press lied Ivy the Fmesl and
you hayea strong showing for the American side
on this side of the controversy
Tue TIMES contends that cit is idle, worse than
idle because irritating to the otter side, TO say,
after all this testimony, that the treaty IS clear
and uuambigiiots, having one, and only one,
rational and granhiatical meaning" The Times,
by the way, as yOu will see by The very calm,
and, of course, able articles have sent you,
takes a very sensible view of the matter. lis
reprimand Tor pin p undoubtedly had its effect
in bringing the PRIME minister into more pru-
dent and almost into less ambiguous state OF
MUD, But the Times is too sensible for the
premier'S revised state o. mind. 1t tur ANYBODY
else) understands him. his last stab is little bet
ter than the first, and he still goes for making
lis stand on the urambigutv Of the words which
have but one meaning attached to them by the
British government, parliament, people, and
press, to.wii: All indirect claims ruled cut. The
Tunes position, and THAT of the leading press
and statesmen, is: ave demonstrate what we
intended in accediug to the treaty, and We sub
mil that if the Americans intended something
different, and persist IN adhering to their differ
ent reading of it, the treaty falls TO the ground.
P wager hat that flour people would speak
theif minds frankly they would say that the
very able and astue geiitenien WHO made ont
our case have gone too far and have placed us
in The, position Of the dog which let 90 of the
bntle he had in his mouth to grab at its shadow
in the watcf. Whatever may lie the interpret8-
uon of the treaty, there is no dGdbt that the
claim for damages for Mr.. Gadstone's sympa-
thieS and Lord Russell's opinions, and the pure
cusscdness Of the English aboitionists is ri
gantic piece of abSurdty, half ttiaudlin and half
mercenary, and if there is another half it is po-
itical: In that opinion all Europe, Asia and
AlricaJ and | must believe 99-100 of America
concur. At all events there is not d dissenting
voice in this country, and for the first time IL
half century Great Britain is absolutely unani-
nous on a foreign question.