The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1872-06-18

In the present case-shOuld only be RESPONSE
BILE, in the event of not showing "due dill
gence" as a neutral and friendly Power, for
direct losses. Is this not fair? To use COM
mon colloquial expression, ''what is sauce for
the goose is sauce for the gander." But Eng
land is not satisfied. She has fallen into her
own trap The chief object she had in view in
making the treaty was exemption from the
very evils we suffered at her hands. She
was well aware, too, that these new,
stringent rules regarding neutrals, would
prove extremely embarrassing to the
United States on account of our
vast seaboard, the restlessness and speculative
activity of our people and the sympathy they
feel for the liberal side of any conflict among
of war between herself and any other Power
the American people would be apt to remember
her unfriendliness in the time of their severest
trial for national existence. Looking far
ahead, as England always does, her great
purpose in making the treaty, as has been
said, was to save herself in the future. That
was the meaning of the new and exacting
rules regarding neutrals which were to her
the basis and life of that instrument. She had
put us under bonds. We see, therefore, the
cause of her present embarrassment
There has been and will be great deal Of
talk about side issues, legal technicalities and
forms of proceeding at Geneva, but the real
issue is as we have stated it. Our govern
ment probably has seen the mistake it made
in accepting the new neutral rules and the
consequences likely to follow, and may not be
sorry that England has given the opportunity
to modify them, or set them aside In fact, we
may consider them dead, for England can
hardly admit arbitration for consequential
damages after the attitude she has taken,
and our government is resolved not to
abandon that claim unless England consents
to modification of the neutral rules SO as to
exclude such a claim against America hereafter
should she violate the laws of neutrality. We
regard it as fortunate that our government has
got back, through the overreaching conduct of
England, to the ground the HERALD has taken
all along on this question of future neutrality
obligations. Let the past be determined by
the past, and let us avoid entangling alliances.
Our life and prospects as nation are peculiar
and in time we shall be more likely to make
laws for others than have incon-
venient ones imposed upon us. Ifthe Wash
ngton Treaty should stand with the modified
rule Of neutrals proposed in the supplemental
article Incorporated, all very well, but if it
should fail our government ought to be care
sul to avoid the mistake it made in any treaty
With England or other European nations here
Ifter. AS to the present difficulty, however it
nay terminate, there is little fear Of peace
between England and the United States being
disturbed. The President has expressed the
opinion that there is no cause for apprehension.
The vast commercial relations between the two
ountries and the good sense Of the people will
'revent war. Time will heal existing differ
noes, and the next diplomats and statesmen
Who undertake to adjust unsettled matters will
AVE more light for their guidance and will be
bile to avoid the errors Of their predecessors.