Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1882-10-13
Baby gen'rfbef Journal.
Augusta. Friday Morning. Oct 3D.
Mr. Blaine,s Diplomacy.

RhC@~@~~-
amused by the work Of diplomatic anna
teur." The sterner moralists were shocked
by 90 shameless display Of Ignorance,
ssbad manners and Yankee smartness'
on the part of Foreign Secretary who
apparently had not learned the rudiments
of international law. Croakers and satir-
lists were agreed on one point--that Lord
Granville in replying to Mr.. Blaine COM
pletely refuted the American argument.
Yet strangely enough. large section OF
the English press is applying Mr.. Blaine >
.sscatterbrain'' logic to the Suez Canal.
The Spectator, for example. has proposed
that England should be vested with the
wardenshIp of the canal and heempowered
to station permanent garrisons at Port
Said and Suez.
These are the lines on which the Ameri-
can Secretary Of State would have settled
the Panama Canal question. lie claimed
for our government the privilege Of keep
ing garrisons at the mouths of the canal
and of invading the adjacent territory
when occasion should require. The one
conclusive mode he wrote, sol preserv
ling any isthmus canal from the possible
abstraction and destruction of war is
ITO place it under the control of that
government least likely TO be engaged
..in war. and able in any and every event
ito enforce that guardianship which il
Twill assume. The United States offer
.'by such control that absolute neutralza-
''tion OF the canal respecting European
"Powers which can in no other way be
certainly attained and lastingly Sc
''cured." The argument which Lord
Granville was credited with refuting 80
successfully ten months ago is now taken
up by large majority ofEnglish journals
and pronounced worthy Of the most Sc
rious and deliberate attention.
Mark another fact. The English jour
mails are unable to justify their own action
in Egypt on the grounds defined by Lord
Granville in his replies to Mr.. Blaine's
letters nor can they make any effective
use of the Clayton-Bulwer treaty as pre-
cedent in determining the future of the
Suez Canal The Pail Mall Gazette, in
opposing the wardenship plan on the
score that the permanent occupation OF the
terminal points of the canal would be con-
trary to the whole spirit of Mr.. Gladstone
policy. suggests that the channel and its
approaches shall be exempt by interna-
tional action from all naval or military
operations. The war ships and transports
shall be free to go in and out at all times,
but mo act of belligereney shall be per
emitted within the Isthmus, or within
''three miles of Port Said on the one hand
cor Of Suez on the other This would
be literal application of the principles
Of the Clayton Bulwer treaty. II there
should be war between Great Britain
and the United States the vessels of either
belligerent would be by this treaty exempt
from blockade. detention or capture
within the channel and distance of three
miles from either mouth. and the adjacent
territory could not be invaded. Lord
Granville suggested that the United States
by calling an international congress might
make this principle binding upon the Eu-
ropean powers.
In like manner, the Pail Mall Gazette
favors the adoption of a similar rule in re-
lation to the Suez Canal. preeluding any
act OF belligerency within the channel and
the country through which it passes. But
1t is forced to admit that cit is easy to
point out the anomalies of such an arrange
ment." 1t is 50 easy To do it that the
scheme is utterly impraeticable. The
Clayton-Bulwer rule would render such a
campaign as has recently been waged in
Egypt. with the canal as base 81 opera
tons, glaring violation of international
law. English prestige on the Nile is now
based on the assurance of a repetition of
the campaign if there be another military
revolt, or the influence of any other for
eign Power becomes predominant there.
It is idle to suppose that Mr.. Gladstone's
Government will impair that prestige by
International action which may preclude
military or naval operations on the 18th
mus.
Of one thing, therefore, Americans may
be sure. In relation to the Suez Canal
Lord Granville will not act upon the be-
nevolent advice which he gave to Mr..
Blaine regarding the Panama Canal. On
the contrary. if the wardenship of the Suez
Canal be accorded to Great Britain. with
the privilege Of occupying and tortifying
Port Said and Suez, Mr.. Blaine's position
in the Panama controversy will be logi-
cally affirmed so far as analogy goes.
English editors with quick perceptions,
like Mr.. John Morley appreciate this fact.
and give warning that Lord Granville
latter repudiating that doctrine in his
controversy with Mr.. Blaine cannot
..sdopt it as a principle of action at Suez."
For diplomatist whose work was origi-
nally pronounced Ignorant and amateur
ish." Mr.. Blaine's argument seems to-
have borne the practical tests of time and