New-York tribune., 1872-05-11
THE TRIBUNE AND THE TREATY.

the beginning of the international negotiations
TO the present time, without recognizing the
loyalty and consistency of our attitude in the
matter The fact that certian newspapers
pretend to misunderstood it, is merely proof
of lack Of intelligence or lack of candor. To
accuse THE TRIBUNE of attempting to fan the
flames of hostility between the United States
and England TOR partisan purposes Is too dull
a calumny to require serious refutation.
THE TRIBUNE is not partisan supporter OF
Gen. Grant, and yet, in every stage but one
of this business, we have given to his Admin
istration a cordial and unwavering support.
THE TRIBUNE is not partisan opponent OF
Gen. Grant, and has therefore refrained from
what would have been just criticism, at a mo-
ment when such criticism would have weak
ened and compromised the position of the
United States before the Geneva Tribunal.
No paper gave more hearty approval to the
Treaty when it was first framed. The IRIB-
UNE published it first to the country, and IN
spite of the malicious Imprisonment and per-
secutiOn of our agents, sustained it by daily
and earnest advocacy in its progress through
the Senate We considered the Treaty, on the
whole, good one, not giving any special ad-
vantages to either side, but filled with those
mutual compromises and concessions without
which it is impossible to settle long-standing
controversies among free peoples. The
best thing about it, in our opinion, was
that it gave to the principle of Arbitration
wider and fuller scope than it had previously
had. The High Commissioners, 1ndlng IL lh-
possible, in view of former committals ana
strong national prepossessiOns to settle amica-
bly, the details of the arrangement when Doth
sides desired, agreed to refer them to the rep
resentatives of friendly Powers named In the
Treaty. The limitations of the powers OF the
Court were of course left somewhat underlined,
for obvious reasons. If the High Commits
sioners had been able to define precisely what
we're admissible claims under the Treaty,
they might have settled the whole difference
in Washington without recourse to the cum
brous machinery of the Arbitration.
When our Case was presented, it was found
to include, besides the demand for compensa-
ton for losses of individual citizens, claims
for damages sustained by the nation at large
through the acts of the Anglo-Rebel cruisers.
There was certainly no novelty in this. The
principle had been stoutly contended for by
Mr.. Adams and Mr. Seward through several
years of constant controversy with the British
Government. The fact that it was virtually
ignored by Mr.. Reverdy Johnson in his Con-
yention contributed to the rejection of that
instrument in the United States Senate. 1t
was not excluded by anything in the Treaty
or Protocol, and unless every gentleman who
represented us in the High Commission has
lost his conscience or his memory, there was
no understanding around the Council Board
in Washington which estOpped us from the
presentation of these claims.
When, therefore, the clamOr against the
American Case burst out in England, started
by the Opposition as a weapon of attack, and
still more fiercely brandished by the Govern
ment as weapon of defense, we defended
the substance of the Case. Even when the
clamor had produced a certain effect upon the
organs of opinion here, when Wall Street began
to tremble, and sciolists began to scribble,
when the Administration press was happlng
in the wind not knowing which way to head,
and the Democratic press was savagely at
tacking the President for what they called
his blunder, The TRIBUNE still sustained the
A administration in what it considered the side
of Justice and the side of the country. We
refrained from calling attention to the faults
and shortcomings of the Case We did not
care, while q suit was in progress. in which
our country was a party, to strengthen our
adversary's case by pointing out the weak
points of our own. We took our stand on
this impregnable ground-that we had the
right to include the indirect" claims in our
Case, and no power on earth except the
Tribunal at Geneva had the right to decide
A. hos
said over and over again, England could not
prepare her Case and our own also.
But there came a moment in which we had
reason to know-as usual, in advance of all
our cOtemporaries-that our Government had
been 80 far moved by the buster in Parlia-
ment and the clamOr of the Press, as to pro-
pose compromise which should evade de-
cision of the Board upon our claims. We
promptly published this fact, and gave our
reasons for disappearing such action, consid-
ering it equivalent to a surrender of the posi-
ton we had held 80 long. Even this cOnces-
sion, however. was apparently not enough to
satisfy the Government of Great Britain, who,
it is now reported, demand an absolute with
drawal of our Case before the Arbitration
shall proceed, threatening to withdraw from
the Geneva Conference If their demand is re-
fused. We are told from Washington that
Gen. Grant declines to accede to this peremp-
tory summons. We cordially approve and
sustain this decision of the President, as re-
quired alike by the honor and the interests of
the country.
These things sorely perplex and scandal
ize the partisan newspapers, and those which
are the organs of nothing but their own small
hates and jealousies. But we hope, after
while. to familiarize them with the sight of a
first rate newspaper which shall not be fet-