The new North-west. [volume] (Deer Lodge, Mont.) 1869-1897, 1882-01-06
OUR RELATIONS WITH ENGLAND.

OUR RELATIONS WITH ENGLAND.
Notwithstanding the millennial amity 80
gracefully deiIneated by President Arthur In
his recent Message as existing between the
United States and foreign powers, there are
constant growls from the British Lion not
entirely indicative Of peace on earth and
good will TO America. Notwitlsi anding
victoria's womanly friendship for Mrs. Gar
field and English sympathy In our national
bereavement, the salute to the British flag al
Yorktown and the reciprocal courtesy during
the Lord Mayors procession, the facts are
that the more ostentatious formalities and
protesiation are covering good deal of bad
feeling between the two countries. Ii Is
probable that IL will subside; but IL is posi-
BILE the United 81 ates are In position where
they will have to act with adecisiveness that
will lead TO unpleasantness or recede with
out glory from the diplomatic field.
The "Monroe Doctrine" is familiar.
While Europe has not hitherto denied this
doctrine, IL has not exactly assented to 1t ex-
cept by the silence that implies consent. Re-
cent Presidents have asserted and continued
TO assert this doctrine in terms Of increasing
strength and expansiveness and the country
has continued accepting the theory with all
II implies, or is construed to imply, until the
idea has become as sacred as one Of the fun
damental principles Of the government. This
doctrine as originally promulgated sixty
years ago simply meant that North aud South
America were not to be colonized by Euro
pean powers and their systems Of govern
ment set up In them, as that would be re-
sarded by the United States as dangerous to
their peace and safety and would be opposed
accordingly. That this was its extent is evil
dent from the terms of Mr.. Mouroe's Mes
sage IN 1923, and that 1t did not mean the
United States proposed TO exercise the sole
protectorate and guardianship over the West
ern Hemisphere Is evidenced in the fact that
Ia 1850 Secretary of State Clayton negotiated
with England the Clayton Bulwer treaty,
subsequently ratified by both governments,
wherein they agreed, first: That neither one
nor the other would ever obtain or maintain
tor itself any exclusive control over the ship
canal then projected TO he built across the
sthmus through Nicaragua; I'd, that they
would not erect or maintain any Notifications
commanding the same /; aud, Sd, that they
would by treaty stpulations exercise joint
protectorate over whatever canal or railway
might be built. This treaty still exists, but
h- canal has never been built aud many OF
he contingent details Of the treaty were
| never determined.
Since this treaty was made there have been
vast changes In the United States. The EN-.
tire system Of Pacific States aud Territories
las arisen aud become All important portion
| II the Union. An istlmus canal would now
lie virtually part Of the coast-line OF the
| United s. a,es. That canal which would then
nave been only gateway Of as little import
TO the United States as to other maratime
| cations, has now assumed vital import ance
| IN its relations TO this country. As long as
| no canal exists no harm comes; but when one
is constructed the naval protection the United
States can extend to its Pacific coast depend:
upon having absolute control Of that canal
| The Judgment of the ablest American 81 ates
men is q unit OH this point, aud the Amerl
can people are quick 10 see and prompt to &C
ept the idea of United States protectorat
| guaranteeing absolute freedom TO all nation:
except such as may menace the rights ant
Interests of our government.
| In the way Of this con ummation stands
| he Clayton Bulwer treaty. Mr.. Blaine. Sec
| reiary of ST ate, in November last addressed
| A letter to Minister Lowell, our representa-
| i've IN England, asking him to open negotia
ions with the British Government looking
10 a modification of the Clayton-B ulwel
realty, the main suggestion being that every
part Of the treaty preventing the United
States from certifying the canal and, in con
function with the country through which i
passes, exercising political control over 1t
should be cancelled. Mr.. Blaine was moi
entirely felicitous In the terms of his letter
and England has so far rather complained o
The undplomatic phrases and the erroneous
analogies cited than to meet the proposition
on its merits. Had Secretary Blaine beer
more diplomatic and approached the ques
ton less abruptly, the object sought NIGH
| have been reached without breach Of COR
diality. 1t Is evident, however, that En-
gland is opposed to the American sug
gestion, In the form it has come up
and as the President, December 18th
sent to Congress, in response TO resolution
the letter of Secretary Blaine to Ministe
Lowell, IL is highly probable the question
will assume prominence in both countries
| within the next few weeks. While IL is no
the original Monroe Doctrine that Is undo
consideration, it is a legitimate outgrow'h o
development of it, aud the sympathies of al
monarchial Europe will be with England II
The issue. II Is a matter Of great Importance
not only MS to the United States securing
control of the canal, when built, but as 4
the reiaiio of the two countries pending
and succeeding the negotiations. Secretar,
Frelinghuysen has an opportunity to distin
| suish himself as diplomatist.
| NORTHERN PACIFIC LANDS.