New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1882-06-16
MR.. FREL1YGHUYSENS METHODS.


Mr.. Trescot's humiliating experience III South
America reminds us fOrcibly of Mr.. Gladstones
defence of his foreign policy few months
after the downfall of the Beaconsfield Admin
istration. Before the general elections the
Liberal leaders had denounced the wars in
Afghanistan and South Africa, and when they
entered upon Office it was expected that they
would reverse without delay the foreign policy
of their predecessors. They went about their
work with caution and deliberation, dealing
with the annexation questions as they found
them deferring the evacuation OF Candahar,
retaining Sir Barte Frere in office, and striv-
ing to carry out his scheme of confederation
in South Africa. This course naturally excited
unfayorable criticism from the Liberal benches
They were in not haste; the Government had
a proper sense of responsibility The charge
was made that the leaders were misrepresent-
ing the country and neglecting to live up to
the declarations made during the canvass.
Finally, when a round-rObin against Lord
Kimberley's delIberateness in dealing with the
author of the Zulu war had been signed by at
least a fourth Of the Governments supporters,
Mr.. Gladstone rebuked the premature impa-
thence of his party. He grounded his defence
on the broad principle that every Government
upon acceding to Office is under obligations
" to maintain. so far as conscience and consist
"ency will permit, the continuity of action of
+" the country eve have to represent he
added, "a great Power in the councils of the
world, and it would be indeed unworthy of
"men of character and honor if we sought
needlessly to dissassociate ourselves from
"what may have been said or done before"
Accordingly he avoided anything like exagger-
alton of the differences which prevailed be-
tween his own views and those of the great
rival who had preceded him. New lines of
policy were gradually introduced and delib-
erately followed. There was no sudden break
in continuity.
Now if that were a valid defenCe-and we
do not think that the prOpriety of Mr.. Glad
stones course can be called in questiOn-what
shall be said of the precipitate haste with
which Mr.. Frelinghuysen separated himself
from the foreign policy of his predecessor
Mr. Trescot and Mr.. Walker Blaine had gone
to South America with positive instructions to
pursue certain lines of policy in performing a
most delicate and important diplomatic duty.
An invitation had also been sent out to various
States on this Continent to attend Congress
TO be nclU III lHc Interests OI peace unutI Vic
auspices of the United States. Without max
ing the slightest effort to maintain continuity
of action, Mr.. Frelinghuysen abruptly reversed
the diplomatic policy. He countermanded Mr..
TrescOt's instructions and abandoned the
Diplomatic Congress. He seemed to take wanton
pleasure in "disassocating himself from what
had been said and DONE" and in exaggerat-
ing the differences which prevailed between
his own views and those of Mr.. Blaine. The
honor and dignity of the great Power, which
had offered its good Offices after bloody war,
and had summoned the South American States
to a Peace Congress, did not concern him.
He was bent upon reversing the diplomacy OF
the country without reference to administrative
continuity or public honor For that change
of policy he did not have the pretext which
the English Liberals urged il 1850. There