The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1872-02-20
DISRAELI And GLADSTONE.
The Washington Treaty Discussed in
the British Parliament.
1f. Disraeli's Review Of the Past and Present
Tseaties-The Government Questioned-Dh
rest and Indirect Losses-What Mr.
Gladstone Has to Say in Reply
A Most Important Debate.


che House OF Commons yesterday after vle delivery
o. the Queens speech
speech of MIR. DisrncII.
- We must remember that when the
senate rejected the treaty walcn had been negO-
chose indirect and constructive claBls frst assumed
an authentic and formal shape When Her
the claims to arbitration It could only mean
the claims arising out OF the direct acts
The Senate o. the United States rejected the treaty
on those grounds then for the first time those in
Cnaracler. Then we were told Tor the first time
That we were expected TO give compensation, not
merely Tor the direct acts or the prlvaieer but
. variety OF circumstances, such the losses
caused by the transference OF the carrying trade
from the American to the British nag. from the IN.
Creasing rates OF insurance, from pr0longatlon
OF the war. and the immense expenditure OF the
was negotiated by Lord Clarendon acting under
Lord Paimerslon. The government then took
specifically might have been criticised, but which
sio not critcise. which1 approved OF at the time
sas. the dipiomatic Venue should be changed. and
tAat the treaty should be negotiated at Washington
not at Westminster highly approved Of that deter
UlnatlOn. But that step must not be miscOnceived.
But the House must not for moment
enppose that because the negotiations were carried
WASHINGTON INSTEAD OF WESTMINSTER
she direct control OF Her Majerty's government
whoever might form that government, whether the
night honorable gentleman or others who may be
mis- opponents-was IN any sense or for moment
cav mat not sentence-nay not the punctuation
q period, was ever allowed without being
noss M mad the
Eniity OF conducting the negotiations:
sons that certain consequences have occurred from
the nadvertence. or the inaccuracy or the neglect
or the careessneSs OF any Individual VINO might be
~ washington, we are really entering into a scene
wsich has no foundation. l''aea-, hear, from Mr..
THE GOVERNMENT is RESPONSIBLE
l"Hear, hear from MIR. Gladstonel-and 1t
government OF England, from Its response
biltty lor the negonaton OF treaty OF that
KIND aear," from Mr. Gladstone.l RE treaty.
So'sG suercistOn or her AaJesty's government, and
no doubt the Secretary for Foreign Affairs and the
government gave to the negotiations their most
anxious and most scrupulous attention.
arrived in TINS country. when 1t arrived /
Tor one saw many things In It OF winch
post Jacto dealing with the law OF nations. /
Thought that perllous and could not persuade my
self that It necessary. There were other things
In the treaty which objection might be made but
not OF SO great Importance conferred with my COL
tary OF STATE IN the late government and the noble
lord who was Lord High Chancellor OF the late gov
ernment-men most capable OF comprehending such
affairs and OF forming sound judgment upon them;
ana though they dlsapprOved equally with myself
Of those concessions. and even more than did, and
were clearly OF opinion That IL ,cds impossible,
according TO our constitution, for the houses or
treaty They felt that the treaty was IN fact COM
pleled from the language OF the credentials OF the
OegOtiatOrs- which
PLEDGED HER MAJEsTY's ROYAL WORD
tnat she would sanction everything which they
merely morally, but legally, without the form OF
ratification. There are circumstances In which ne
ana distant countries, in which it NAV he
OF the utmost importance that the power of
the w Sa
negotiated the two Houses OF Parliament were
estopped IN every way from interfering They
he more unwlse, hen such a treaty negotiated,
when there was prospect OF cordial and endur-
ing understanding being established between
THE UNITED KINGDOM AND TUE UNITED STATES
what could be more lmprovident, what more I'M
patriotic, than that the time OF Parliament should
De taken up with captious criticisms which could
only tend to exacerDate feelings the other side OF
which we hoped had been accomplished. But al.
though In consequence OF these feelings no action
Ss or hs house Of IT,
Still II was fated that discussion should place
upon that subject. one OF the most eminent states.
men OF the day-a man who long led this House.
and whose name. though was MS opponent In
politics, ! shall never mention, and certainly not
In the House OF Commons, but with that profound
respect and admiration which he deserves-I mean
Lord RussefeIt It mis- duty to call tine attention OF
THIS TREATY.
Lord Russell, emlnenty constitutional states.
ratification, and he was not clear that the House
of Parliament Ia which ne sat might not express
It's OPINION upon the subject OF the treaty, and by Its
vote form some obstacle to It's being carried
Into execution, though ! think the course
In that position, and That he really brought forward
the subject TO indicate his own views and TO point
out Inc mpolicy OF Inc provisions which he de-.
be or the greatest Importance upon the question
which is now agitating the country, because the
argument OF Lord Russell was that we had made
UNWORTHY AND UNWISk CONCESSIONS
70 the United states Of America and be pointed to
ternat0na law to winch I have referred. lie
tnousht as | thought, hat they were penlous,
necessary Bu. what O"V was ase answer Msrs u Of
heT Saesys g %yen Te IN the House OF
government for the unoise CONCESSIONS Elev had
made In he Treaty OF Washington, :wnat was the
answer ,nea OF sas government True we have made
those concessions. We believe they were wise and
polite, but you quite forget
THE GREATER CONCESSIONS THAT WE'RE MADE
oy the government OF the United States. Yon
quite forget that they ratced all those in
formerly pressed upon u.s." and which by
way OF taunt and UNJUST taunr, Lord Granville told
treaty, which the Senate OF America mad not rati.
NED, on the alleged ground that under that treaty
such claims could not be preferred. "Now,' SAID
GREAT AND BENEFICIAL TREATY TO BOTH MA
but 1t is most advantageous to England and re-.
citing and referring 10 the elaborate enumeration OF
the lndlrect anu constructive claims by the Amer-
can secretary OF state, Mr.. Fish, Lord Granville
said, 'lnstead Of this. we have secured a limited
area OF defined claims aud we have given TO the
wn0e proceedings q limited anC defined character.
Under this treaty Ue can only be calied tpon
TO gSUe c0Tspensdtion FOR proued acts or a..
styGcmon srIfch hare been directly occasio,ed
Or the pr1udteers.r THAT think IL enough TO
prove what was the view OF the English govern
ment with regard 10 the treaty; but I must be
allowed TO pursue the subject little further The
opinion OF the Secretary oil State and man 30 dis
nngusbed as Lord Granville, ought, certainly. on
q aubfect sufficient: but this IL n
which Ifcsr viii not easily disappear from the dis
cussions OF Parliament and too vide and accurate
knowledge sf the opinions or pubic men upon 1t
cannot be CIRCULATED It 30 happens that
THE CHIEF HEGOTIATOR,
Her Majesty's Chief Commissioner at Wash ington,
was present at this debate; for he was a member
OF that House Lord Ripon spoke upon the sub
jecs and reiterated IN most distinct terms
and accepted by Her Majesty's government,