New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1881-12-23
ENGLAND AND AMERICA.
THE PRESIDENTS MEsSAGE-GRANTISM-
PANAMA CANAI-CHILI AND PERU.

| English opinion NlIu IeItIcutc w 'h' ii'''N'''
| Message. Tile Spectator sums it up in those
| very words. Other journals say pretty much the
same thing in n more or less circuitous way. Indi-
vidual expressions. though seldom blunt, are en-
phatlc in disapproval of one point or another which
the President makes Nor do the favorable sum-
maries teleqraphed over here from New-YOrk much
affect the adverse judgment The two chief mat
tiers on which English opinion runs counter to that
of President Arthur are the Panama Canal and the
decided stand he is thought 10 be taking with the
COnkling Grant wing Of the Republican party.
On the latter point the English papers have IA
vorcd the public with a good deal of learned dis
cussion 1t is long since have seen in an American
paper so much about "Stalwarts' and " Half
Breeds" rs may be read in two or three London
journals this week. CatchwOrls of that sort are
much favored by the writers who serve M foreign
politics They look very knowing, and 1t Is not
the average English reader who can detect the
thinncss of the veneer which covers the unseen
Storehoascs of ignorance beneath. The Times IS the
chief sinner in this respect During the early part
of last year it entered upon campaign in behalf OF
General Grants nomination at Chicago. The blum
ders were frequent enough to challenge exposure
and the exposure was 50 damaging that all at
once The Times stopped publishing articles on
America. For months it was silent; then it began
again in timd way and is now writing with its
old vouhiIty but with something less, perhaps,
than its old rccklcs5ncss of statement.
1t is to be noted that "Grantism' Is no longer in
favor with English students of American politics,
or with the better part Of them President Arhur's
supposed relapse into the custody of the Grant fac
ton is seen with regret tn" feeling occasioned by
President Garlieds death is still strong. The
opinion, the intelligent opinion that grew up in
this country at that time, il sill intelligent and
active. People here recognized the value
of the struggle President Garfield was
making. They looked to him the leader
in reform movement Of vital Importance
to the Republican party and to the country. They
regret the retirement of Mr. Blaine from the Cab-
net They regret to be told that Mr.. Frelmghuyscn
is partisan of General Grant and Mr.. Conkling.
They look upon the reference To Civil Service Re
form in President Arthur Message as unsatis-
factory They do not mean to judge the President
harshly but his Message far asst touches on party
matters and purity in politics, has beyond doubt
given rise to a feeling of disappointment.
Wha. the exact feeling is about the Panama Ca
nal business il is difficult 20 define briefly. But
it is not of satisaction-thc less because il is
well understood here that on this subject President
Arthur spoke. not for a section nor for party but
for the country a whole. Mr.. Blame had pre-
vousy laid down tho lines for him. IL would be
too much to expect that England should acquie'cr
at once in a doctrine which, in her view chal-
lenccs her maritime supremacy. and puts her ut n
disadvantage in a matter where She has been wont
to regard her strength A. overwhelming. When the
subject was first preached, the English thought
they had a sufficient answer 10 American
in the Clayton-B u.wcr Treaty. They
are the more taken ablch by what thcy regard a9
the cool proposal Of the President to abroeatc.
rather 10 modify, that treaty. Tho Iihs, contents
Itself with wondering what tho British Govern
mcnt has said or ill say To the proposal that Eng
land shoud surrender hcr rights and submit TO the
notification OF clauses which have stood unque'-
toned Tor more than thirty years. OF course no
country likes to be asked - dO "a thing OF that
kind
There is a feeling here that we are asking n good
deal and asking il rather buntly. On the other
hand il has always been thought that the United |
states were, ] will not say oycTcachcd. but out
lnanuuvreG in the Clayton ulWcr Treaty. Sir |
Henry Buwor was one Of the allret diploma !
tis.s England has known in modern times. lie !
took the trouble to master the questions then n,
issue He saw much further ahead than most men |
Of his day. lie had a better conception Of the COM
ing GREATNESS, Of the Union, and OF the scope of !
American ambition. lie saw 10 what pont We /
should hc led. what sort Of controlling influence no |
United States must claim on that side the Allan /
tic ard how far il might conflict with British inter
cs,s Hr meant TO tie our hands AMI did SO. Good !
Mr.. CLAYTON, not oyrrzifrrG with penetration.
nothing. ald fell readily enough .
into the views Of his astutc adversary. ono
has heard he rcpcnted later. and died
distressed by the consciousness Of his |
mistake ! don't know how tina. is. Bus ii is Ger
tain hat no English diplomatic or mn -tcr Of to-
day would dream OF obtaining the consent OF tie
1 4. La. !. 1.
Bulwcr Treaty if they did not already exist. 10
hold on 70 them is natural Il Is natural that if
they are 20 b, given up some concession should be
expected from us in return. Bur have not yet seen
or heard auythingwhich indicates that this Govern
mcnt would be inclined TO iusis, very s'rcuuou,ly
upon thc impossible The 70 ics will have some
hard words for ~. The Liberals viii regret we
should put forward such demands. We shall
hear something about the rights OF nationaltics.
and Of independent States 20 q control over their
own territory. But English public opinion will. /
believe in the end recognize the force Of our claim
and when once that is recognized tho Government
will have 10 choice but to give way. Diplomacy
ln InomcnOus questions is no longer nm atlairol the
closet.
1t Ought TO be added that the less bugtcr there is
u tho subject in America the more easily we shall
larry our point Anything like Dycrbcaring Ian
luaRc part would make il vastly more diff
'ult for English Government, of no matter winch
party, 10 give way. we won't be bullicd -
s the first answer which rises 10 the
fps Of an English minister in answer to ahg kind
,fdipomAtic hectoring. The annals Of our State
Department arc not wanting in instances OF such
Collisions. We have, and we may as well own 10
ourselves that we have, reputation IN Europe for
controversy with less ccremonions
than is the usage here. In all countries
If Europe the ability with which State Depart
nent and international lawyers and some Of our
nyoys have managed all their causes is freely
conceded. Our general success in such disputes is
natter of history. But is more seldom that Amcri-
an dispatches are cited as models Of style. BY
conviction is that we should not lose but
,ain if we werc to put it very plainly indeed. more