New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1892-03-27
ENGLISH FAIR PLAY.

Mr.. Smalley has performed another valuable
public service in connection with the Dchi1ns
Sea controversy by his cable message this morn
ing furnishing additional proof that the senti-
ment Of the people Of Great Britain does not
sustain Lord Salisbury in the vexatinls course
he is pursuing with regard to the modus viycndi.
The authority Of Mr. Smalley's dispatches will
he unquestionngly acknowledged in the United
States, and the louder the protests of London
newspapers the more certain it will be that they
are talking for effect only. 1t is curious Cir
cumstance that Just when the victory of Ameri-
can diplomacy is assured. the Democratic and
Mugwlmp newspapers have begun to renew
their agitation against what they call the PreSi-
dents "Jingo'' policy. We warned them some
time ago of the penalty which would be surely
exacted of them if they persisted In this coune,
and for time they were quiet and respectful.
They even admitted without. 80 far as We know.
n single exception that the letters OF Mr. Whar-
ton we're both judicious in tone and excellent
in spirit and that the demand they made upon
England was right and necessary. But now
they seem TO fear that they have conceded too
much, and there being no apparent danger in "A
manifestation Of captiOuSness, they have begun
to renew their ridiculous talk about jingoism,
neglechng of course, to point out how demand
can be right in itself and expressed with mcdela-
tion, tact and fmncss and yet deserve anything
except praise and support.
The Presidents last letter needs neither inter-
pretation nor vindicaion. 1t stands for itself
No one who reads it. in this country at least, will
fail to agree with everything it says and to com
mend it's logic tone and language. The fact
that there il to- day serious dispute with Great
Britain is the fault of Lord Salisbury and no.
BODY else Everything has been done by cur
Government to render easy its adjustment. For
several Seasons while the main question was
being argued, and at an enormous sacrifice OF the
property in dispute, we gave practical immunity
to the Canadian poachers and allowed them to
slaughter without interference or retaliation
what we confidently claimed TO be our exclusive
property, and property which we might right
fully defend wherever it was found. Failing TO
induce Lord Salisbury 10 admit in writing the
Justice of our claim, although he had many times
admitted it personally to our Minister at Lon
don failing to induce him TO agree to treaty
which would substantially protect the seal and
al the same time leave his Canadian poachcls
something of an opportunity to attack them, we
offered 10 SatDinl inc "h"o pucsioh VI ""'
rights and Of the proper course to be pursued
in case they were not vindicated' TO an impartial
court of arbitration. In arranging the formal
questions to be presented to this court we were
met with scores of annoying suggestions from
the English Premier, and in spirit distin-
guished for its friendness and its sincere desire
to obtain prompt settlement of the dispute, we
gave him concession after concession.
In all this long and tedious history OF diplo-