New-York tribune., 1873-01-17
4 DISPATCH WHICH FAILED TO ARRIVE

A DISPATCH WHICH F1ILED TO ARRIVE.
There is no reason to anticipate any serious
complications between our Government and
that of Spain as result of the question of
veracity which has arisen between them. The
contradiction is itself rather implied than di-
rect. The Secretary of State has submitted to
Congress a note of an unusual character, I'M
der date of October 90, 1872, in which he di-
rects the American Envoy to administer to
the Spanish Government one OF the most re-
markable lectures ever delivered by one
power to another The instructions were as
clear and explicit as they were severe, and
amounted to little less than formal arraign
ment of Spain on the charge of continued
duplicity and bad faith, and demanded in
summary manner the puDctual and exact
performance of the repeated promises made by
Spain in relation to emancipation and colonial
reforms. II is in the highest degree improbable
that Minister so sagacious and experienced
as Gen. Sickles should have neglected to act
upon these instructions. The published CORE
spondence, however, threw no light upon this
question. We were left to infer that the
Minister obeyed his orders that the presenta-
ton of the considerations 80 cogently set
strong an effect upon the mind of SenOr
Ruiz Zorrilla and his Cabinet as to induce
them to lay before the COrtes scheme for
the immediate abolition of Slavery in Porto
Rico. Tie publication of the correspondence
before these salutary measures were accom-
plished seemed to us extremely impOlitic and
inconsiderate toward the Spanish Cabinet.
But we attributed it to the natural desire of
the State Department to lay before the coun-
try the record of an earnest and apparently
successful exercise of our moral influence In
right direction.
But the dispatches of yesterday morning
from Madrid bring the astonishing news that
the President of the Council, in speech in
the Cortes, positively and categOrically denied
that any correspondence had passed between
the two Governments on this subject; that he
had instructed the diplomatic representatives
of Spain to deny that the Spanish Govern
ment had received any notes from Secretary
Fish upon the subject of Slavery; and,
growing more and more exhaustive in
his denial, he said he was unaware
of the existence of note from
any foreign Government on the matter; and
so as to avoid any room for equivOcation he
declared that if Mr.. Fish had sent any such
note to Mr.. Sickles the latter had not COM
municated it to the Government of Spain. 1t
would not be easy to frame denial more
complete and satisfactory than this. 1t places
the Department of State in a position OF ex-
treme delicacy. When the correspondence
was first published we pointed out the compli-
cations which would arise from publication so
indiscreet, but we were not prepared for so
prompt and effective demonstration from
the Cabinet of Madrid. The dilemma has no
favorable horn. If Mr.. Fish knew his instruc-
tons had not been carried out in Madrid, there
is an apparent disingenuousness in printing
this note to create the impression in America
that our pressure was the cause OF the pro-
jected reforms. If he did not know this, the
discipline of the Department is extraordinarily
lax, and the publication was piece OF reck-
loss thougbtlessness.
In any event the effect of the incident can
not but be unfortunate The Spanish Gov
ernment will be greatly embarrassed in its
plans of reform by the suspicion that il had
yielded to foreign influence, and if there are
any members of our own Congress who care
anything for the honor and dignity of our
relations with foreign powers, they will require
some explanation of an occurrence so unusual
and 80 disagreeabe. We may not by strict
diplomatic rules have the right to question
the Government of Senor Ruiz Zoriila in
relation 10 q communication made by him 10