The Charleston daily news. [volume] (Charleston, S.C.) 1865-1873, 1872-02-23
INDIGNANT ALBION.
ENGLISH FEELING IN REGdRD TO
THE YANKEE DEMANDS.

| ENGLISH EEELlNG LIN hh1dIbD IL
| THE YANKEE DEMANDS.
Indifference to American Opinions-The
Withdrawal from Arbitration Ger
tain If the American Claims arc Main
taincd-Anxfety to Concilfate the
Opinion OF Europe.
| CORRESPONDENCE of the New York Tribune.l
LONDON, February5.
We are still almost without news of what
YOU are thinking and saying about the Eng
lish withdrawal from the treaty. Until within
a very few days it hardly seemed to occur to
the British public 10 inquire how America
might take it. The papers were ss much oc-
cupied In proving that they had an undeniable
right to retire from an arbitration their own
government had proposed, that they had little
leisure, apparently less inclination, to specu-
late on the possible American view OF their
proceedings. have been asked In converse
| tion, 1t is true, what the effect was likely 10
be in the United States, but in every case my
/ suggestion that 1t was conceivable that we
might resent O violation Of the treaty, and
| that at all events. we should probably con-
slider 1t an act of bad faith, has been received
Il
did not seem 10 occur to any ofthe news
papers that the Atlantic cable might supply
1 uositive information about The state ofopinion
| In America, and that very little positive in
| formation would be more valuable than
great deal of ingenious speculation.
The truth is, suppose, hstprvate advicee,
and especially Menkers' teegrams, had sup
piled the Stock Exchange with all the infor.
nation 1t needed; and the general public Is OF
/ less consequence. Men, whose fortune de-
pended upon 1t. had learned from their Amer.
| can correspondents that the American press
of British hostility to the treaty with singular
moderation, almost, should Judge, with IN,
crednlity. or perhaps should say without full
knowledge of the purposes entertained aud
expressed In England. Why you should not
have known last week that, according 10
the declarations OF semi official papers, the
British Government was about to give
notice It would not 20 on with the arbltra.
tion, It Is not easy to conjecture. With tne
execution OF q valuable dispatch 10 the Daily
News, the kilograms from your SIDE nave oeen
very vague. The correspondent OF the Daily
News informs us that Mr.. Fish has contradicted
the statement, telegraphed from London, that
negotiations for the suspension OF the Geneva
Arbitration have been opened between Eng
land and America; adding that no such action
is anticipated by the United States Govern
ment; and that no apprehension Is expressed
of a rupture of the treaty. AS cannot dOuot
the accuracy of the latter statement, am
you have been receiving from this slde.. As
wrote last week, there ls demand well nign
universal from The press and from the pnollc
In general that England shall refuse 10
go on with the Arbitration unless the
United States withdraws all claims 1o[
the Daily Telegraph AMI Daily News and
other papers likely to be accurately IN
formed. it has been inferred, and is to-day
assumed as q fact, that the English Govern
ment has addressed communication In tnaC
sense 10 our government. So lnueh mas oeen
understood IN London for some days AS 70
| Secretary Flsh's contradiction, that ts easily
explicabie on the theory That Lord Granville
did not send his dispatch to Sir Edward Thorn
| ton unlil Friday or Saturday, and that 1t was
not received by Sir Edward In season 10 be
read by Mr.. Fish on Saturday. WHAT Is not ex'
plIcable Is that you should have been lefc 10
such Ignorance Of the language used here last
lion NAV not seem Important, but In my judg-
ment ills important, because SO much Turns
on public opinion, and public opinion on either
side is at the mercy Of the cable dispatches.
As to the feeling here, need not add much
| to what 1 said on Saturday. 1t Is impossible
to modify or soften that account. People do
sincerely hope that you Will not De very
angry. but The fear of your anger does not
seem likely to affect their resolution. Things
nave gone too far. The government has
allowed, If not encouraged, an ebuliilion OF
| popular feeling which may be stronger IMAM
| they desired, but which Ia no longer within
their control. If they don't meet Parliament
| mi, week with an explicit declaration that
| they have given notice to the United States
Government of their Intention 10 renounce ar
bitratlon unless the remote claims are
| abandoned, they will be driven from
office. do not give that as my
opinion only; am repeating what ON one
urday. Perhaps quoted him 10 Saturdays
letter. If the papers afford any index OF all
to the state OF public feeling. yon cannot
form any other opinion than This. Their tone
To-day Is perhaps little more reflective, q
little graver; there is gleam of coming con-
sciousness that the possible result OF this out
break may be more serious than they imag-
med: but they are as firm as ever. There Is
| no hint OF disposition to recede. There lie,
| on the other hand, manifest anxiety to stand
we'll with European opinion. There Is. per.
haps, q sudden consciousness that the lam
guage they have used has been need!e:siy
Violent, and a desire that somebody
earnest. The Times, which Is still
the most moderate of all the great
Journals, declares that 1t can appeal 10
every dispassioDate and neutral foreigner
whether there has been any unseemly vio-
ence on this side the Atlantic In referencet 10
the probable suspension of proceedings under
the treaty. But its appeal is too general.
Limit 1t TO It's own columns, and the dispas-
siouate and neutral foreigner may tally give
| the verdict It seeks. I am very far from be-
| ing neutral, but repeat what said last week,
that the leading journal of England, while
taking a line which think deplorabiy wrong
has, nevertheless, absained from offence, and
| laid It's hands on the treaty with visible reluc-
| tance repeat it because The Times s great
power for good or for evil, and In Amer
| lea is deemed TO be greater pow
er than 1t is. I do not suppose 1t has
any more love for us than 1t used to have.
| But it plainly does not want an open quarrel,
! does not want war. that is, If one can be
averted. IN its dislike to that, 1t represents,
| | am sure, the Immense majority Of the Eng
| ish people. 1t represents Them also In their
determination to renounce this arbitration
even at The cost of what they 80 much
dislike. The alarm about our claims may
seem to us very absurd. The willingness
10 sacrifice the treaty rather than submit
| to claims which they regard as preposter.
ons and sure to be rejected, may seem bolh
| absurd and dishonest. 1t does seem 80 to me,
but what we Americans think about 1t will not
and cannot alter the fact. The situation Is felt
10 be very grave. People have grown sober
about 1t. There Ia intense anxiety, which !
share, 10 know precisely what this govern