New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1872-05-31
rHE TROUBLE ABOUT The TREATY.

ton Press about the successful close of the
negotiations with England, it seems as if the
Treaty were yet to fail unless our Govern
fnent still further humiiates and discredits it.
self before the country and the world AL
ready the matter has arrived at point where
any additional step must be awkward ana I'M
gracious. To accede to the new demands oil
England will seem to exhibit total lack of re-
spect for our own opinions, and to refuse
to yield what is said to b., from our point of
view, tIihing matter. after we have already
yielded so much, would seem like an act OF
caprice and bad temper. 1t is possible that
we may be compelled to wait week or two
more for final decision. The written copy
of the Senate's amendments to Lord Gram
vile's project of treaty will not arrive IN
England until the end of next week. and it is
rather unlikely that the List word will be
spoken by telegraph. There is, therefore,
time enough for us to make up our minds
with some deliberatiOn as to what has been
done, and what remains to do
The fault of our Administration in this mat
ter appears to have been pure incapacity, and
nothing worse. 1t is true that in this quality
they were very evenly matched by Her AaJes-
tvs High Commissioners. 1t VIII hardly be
believed by the future readers OF history that
dozen gentlemen of prominence sat about
the same table for three months, and during
all that time never mentioned the most i'm
portant question connected with the Treaty
tbey were making Both sides seemed to ex-
hibit O childish cunning in keeping silent on
this vital NATTER so that each could claim
that nothing had been said against its peculiar
Interpretation of the Treaty. When the pre-
liminary work was done, the two coun-
tries, taking it too promptly for granted
that it was well done, went off into trans
ports of good will which seem pathetic enough
to-day The English Commissioners got their
titles and ours any quantity of good words,
and the dinners and toasts and able editorials
gave us foretaste of the times when flags
shall be finally furled in the federation OF the
world. But when the Cases were laid before
the Arbitrators this Arcadian period ended
Each side found out what the others silence
meant. The neglect to exclude the indirect
claims gave our Government the opportunity
to put them into The Case; but the fact that
they were not expressly included in the
Treaty enabled the British Government
to say to the English critics that they
were not within the purview of the instru-
ment. They were presented in a needlessly
offensive aud alarming manner, in way which
made it matter of life and death for the
Gladstone Ministry to reject them. And here
is point which the English press and Eng
lsh Speakers had entirely neglected. They
have continually asserted that the Treaty dis
cussion on this side was a political matter.
how oH tha oil Of Eop
Grant as hnging upon this affair. But in fact,
the whole question has had but little political
significance in this country. 1t hasconcerned the
Cabinet Of Mr.. Gladstone infinitely more than
it can concern that of Gen. Grant 1t is with
us q matter of national self-respect and national
interests but in England the very existence Of
the Gladstone Ministry has been involved in
its treatment of this case. In proof of this it
is seen that the London journals divide upon
this issue precisely according to their partisan
leanings, while in New-York the three leading
newspapers-THE TRIBUNE, Herald, and World
agreeing upon no political questions, unani-
mously sustained the Government as long as
it seemed mindful of its own dignity, and con-
demned it only when it weakly yielded to UNI
justifable English dictation.
There is no question that the English Gov
eminent was very anxious for settlement on
the basis of Lord Granville's Supplemental
Treaty. The lquestion then arises, why have
they refused to accept the amendments of the
Senate, which are said to be immaterial2 1t is
reported that we agree not to press our claims
for indirect damages, and that i'll cOnsidera-
ton of this England shall agree not to bring
any claims for indirect damages against us in
future. Yet it seems that England refuses to
accept this slight modification of her own
terms. This is not done from mere wantOnness;
and if the ultimatum of Gen. Grant has really
been sent, stating that we have nothing further
to offer, it will be singularly significant
thing if the British Government prefer the
loss of their cherished Treaty rather than the
acceptance of our amendments. 1t will show
simply that in their opinion we cannot be
trusted. Lord Russell intmated as much in
his speech in the House of Lords. Lord
Derby did not stop at limitations, but said
plainly that in dealing with us nothing must
be left to understandings. The unanimous
tone of the London press is one of panic lest
in the Supplemental Treaty there should be
left some loophole of expression through
which we shall come out at some future day
and spoil them. They have become so nervous
over this question of indirect claims, that
they will not even trust the Geneva Board
with our abandoned claims. They insist,
first, upon the absolute withdrawal of
these demands; and second, they insist upon
drawing up for themselves any stipulations for
the future into which both powers are to
enter When two nations have arrived at
such point of mutual distrust, any friendly
arrangement becomes exceedingly difficult.