The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1896-07-18
ENGLISH COMMENT.
On the Correspondence Between
OIney and Salisbury

On the Correspondence Between
OIney and Salisbury.
LONDON, July 17.-All the London
journals this morning have comments
on the statement made by Lord Sails
bury in the house of lords yesterday
and on the correspondence between the
United States and British governments
on the Venezuelan question. An edi
torial in the Graphic says of the blue
book:
1T shows that it is not Lord Sails
bury's fault if the negotiations for an
arbitration treaty and for the settle
ment of the Venezuelan question have
proven abortive. The attitude of the
United States is uncompromising. Mr.
Olney wants his own way or he will
accept nothing. This is not the temper
in which profitably to discuss schemes
for the permanent avoidance Of quar-
rels"
The Daily News GiberaD in it's com
ments points out Lord Salisbury's I'M
usal concession to the Democratic
spirit in inviting the opinion of the
country upon the arbitration question"
The Daily News considers that the
difference between Mr.. Olney and Sal
isbury is one of degree and not one of
principle. Lord Saisbury's dispatch
es, the News says, ARE unduly fear
full and Mr.. Olney's on the other hand
are some times too slap-dash and alb
solute. Lord Salisbury should pluck
UP courage and risk something for an
experiment so eminently desirable as
a permanent court of arbitration. Mr.
Olney should recognize that even a few
steps are preferable to standing still. ;"
The Chronicle also liberal, takes the
view that the Venezuelan blue book is
the possible foundation stone of an
edifice to replace war among civilized
nations. THE intellectual sword play
between Mr.. Olney and Lord Salisbury
is indeed fascinating reading" says
the Chronicle. 'fMr. Olney produces a
very strong if indeed, it is not an un-
answerable argument in reply to Lord
SaliSbury'S fears for the multiplication
of claims under arbitration. We feel
sure that the reply to Lord Salisbury's
appeal to the country will be an over
whelming mandate to continue the
negotiations.
The Times says editorially: ''It is ap-
parent from the somewhat entangled
correspondence that the British and
American governments have not
reached a common basis for an agree
ment, though both Of them are anxious
for an amicable settlement. We are
entitled to assume that both nations
will recognize the ruling power of COM
mon sense The country should ap-
prove the moderation and firrnness
which the governments have shown"
The Conservative Standard thinks
that the deliberate judgment of the
nation will cordially sustain Lord
Salisbury. THE blue book shows" the
Standard thinks, that there has been
progress, however slow, towards a
peaceful and friendly arrangement
which the best citizens of England and
America earnestly DESIRE
The Daily Telegraph GiberaD says:
Lord Salisbury's statement has. left
nothing to be desired but speedier pro-
gress in the negotiations. Even if we
lose somewhat by arbitration it will be
worth while for the sake of shaking the
odous incubus Of the Venezuelan ques-
ton from the national shoulders
The Morning Post Conservative, has
an editorial which says: "A perusal of
the blue book leaves the impression
that Mr. Olney is less anxious for a
settlement of either of the questions
under discussion, than for chance Of
putting Lord Salisbury in the wrong
1t must not be forgotten that Mr. Oiney
represents the defeated section of the
Democrats 1t is just possible that old
fashioned Democrats would be ready
to retrieve their position by preparing
quarrel with Great Britain by which
American national feeling would be
aroused and in the conduct of which
they might find an opportunity to de-
feat both their Democratic and Repub-
lican rivals