New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1891-10-05
coon ENGLISH EXAMPLE.

Mr.. Gladstones speech at Newcastle was al
most as remarkable for what was left unsad
as for what was said. 1t did not contain word
of denunciation of the foreign policy OF the
Salisbury Government. A splendid and ag-
eressive speech in favor of Home Rule and Eng
lish Radicalism, it did not involve an arraign-
ment of the diplomatic work of the Foreign
Office. There was not trace of partisanshp
in the g:eat Commoners references to Lord
Salisbury's special department of the admins
tration. He spoke in terms Of high commenda-
ton of the general spirit in which diplomatic
issues had been met, and of the beneficial
changes which had been wrought in Tory con-
duct of foreign affairs since Lord Beaconsfield's
time. So far was he from criticising Lord Sails
bury's course that he went out of his way in
what was really a general electoral speech for
next years canvass to express hearty approval
of it,
There are good many Americans who have
besetting weakness for initiating anything
that is English Here is an example which
politicians and journals will do well to follow,
and they will show strength rather than weak
| ness of character in needing it, There are scores
of local State and National questions on which
political parties can properly divide but there
ought to be sufficient patriotism in the country
to exclude matters of foreign policy from par
tisan discussion and criticism. The English
people wisely make this distinction, and Ameri-
cans in this respect can well afford 10 be equally
patriotic An administration has a right to ex-
pect that its conduct of foreign affairs shall be
exempt from censorious criticism and partisan
assault. In its relations with foreign countries
| II IL md - dor
| obligation to maintain the continuity of Amerl-
can diplomatic policy as unfolded in long array
of precedents and rulings of the State Depart
! ment. 1t ought always to have the moral sup
port of united public opinion behind it.
The reverse is what is seen in the United
States. We could name journals which are
constantly charging. Secretary Blaine with hav-
ing trcked the Brazilian Minister into the Reel
procity Convention by making false promises
to him; or that are nsinuating that Admiral
Brown and Minister Egan with the connivance
| of the Administration have been violating diplo-
matte and naval usage in Chill; or that the
State Department has been seeking to carry out
corrupt bargains in Hayt These journals are
thoroughly English in their devotion to abstract
questions of Free Trade and finance. They are
very I'M English in the fragrant lack of patriot
ism and public decency which they display in
making partisan capital out of every idle rumor
and silly tale affecting the Administrations
dealings with foreign Governments.
TO these narrow-minded partisans we COM
mend thoughtful consideration of Mr.. Glad
stones generous tribute to Lord Saisburys
diplomacy. If they will persist in being English
in their sympathies on economic questions af-
fecting the industrial prosperity or ruin of their
country why can they not initiate the sterling
patriotism of English public life? Partisanship
is excluded there so far as possible from gen.
eral discussion of foreign relations. The State
Department here ought to enjoy the same i'm
munity from captious, unjust and reckless de-
nuciation of its diplomatic policy o