National Republican., 1883-03-02
Mr.. BIaine's Diplomacy.

Under the head of "Mr. Frelinghuysens
diplomacy" the New York Tribune reiterates
the old falsehood that Secretary Frelinghuy-
sen, upon taking tho State department,
countermanded Mr.. Trescots instructions"
The Tribune knows and Mr.. Trcscot knows
and cx-Secretary Blaine knows that the only
point in tho instructions to Mr.. Trescot
(written by Mr.. TrescOt, adopted by Mr..
Blaine, and allowed by the President, with
verbal construction Of the same) was that sim
gle one authorizing him TO break off diplomatic
relations between Chill and the United States,
if he should not be satisfied with the answer
Of Chilli to the inquiry as to whether the
arrest of Provisional President Calderon was
made in spirit Of unfriendliness TO the
United States. Before Mr.. Trescot reached
the place Of his destination Chill, through
her minister at Washington, had fully
made the desired disavowal. 1t seemed
to grieve the friends Of Mr. Troscot that he
was not allowed to retain the diplomatic 'chip
on his shoulder" with which he started, and
he and Mr.. Blaine have ever since been held
up as injured and blighted beings. Mr..
Blaine rushed excitedly into print with the
bold declaration that the Presidenth had acted
dishonorably, and violated promise, by re-
spending to an inquiry Of the senate as to the
mission of Mr. Trescot and Mr.. Walker Blaine.
In fact, the President was merely exposing
the falsehoods Of those who were maliciously
treating the revocation of the paragraph con-
cerning Calderon as a revocation of his main
instructions. To draw away attention from
this exposure the din was raised about the
divulging of an alleged secret by the Presi-
dent, whose sole property of course it was
There was never greater fraud than the pre-.
tense that Mr.. Blaine had different duOUed
policy from that Of his successor as to the
Chili-Peru matter. If there was any actual
difference it was in tho intention of Mr.
Blaine to compel Chill to quarrel by the quar-
relsOme manner in which she should bt
asked simple question by Mr.. Trescot
and Mr.. Walker Blaine. That question
| was "Was the arrest Of Calderon, after
recognition by the United States of hi
| provisional government, intended by Chill
as an oflense against this country p
The President allowed Mr.. Trescot to star
with the authority to ask this question ant
to judge Of the suflicieucy of the answer Mr.
| Trescot knows whether or NOT he had any
verbal admonition to put the question in
spirit calculated to elicit the friendly an
swer which all knew would be the tru
one. While he was on his way tn
President did that part of the work himself
and had the honest, friendly answer of Chill
He then revoked so much of Mr.. Trcscot's in
structions, and no more, as related to this Cal
deron arrest and the option of breaking Of
diplomatic relations between the two countries
1t may be that this decided a question Q
peace or war. If it did not, it was trivia
matter, and not change Of policy
How many more times, then, is tn
stale falsehood TO be revived tina
Mr.. Trescot and Mr.. Walker Blaine woul
have snatched Peru from Chilli and mad
peace through the humiliation of the latte
but for the revocation of Blaine's instruction
by FrelinghuysenH As often as Mr.. Blaine
leading organ, the Tribune repeats the insult
dicted by THE NATIONAL REPUBLICAN.