The daily morning journal and courier. [volume] (New Haven, Conn.) 1894-1907, 1896-03-19
IN DEFENSE or BAYARD.
The Resolutions in the House Provoke
Debate.

Washington, March 1S.-After the re-
cess Mr.. Hit, house chairman of the
committee on foreign affairs. called up
the report of the committee upon the
Mccall and Barrett resolutions in rela-
tion to the Bayard speeches. The sub
stitute recommended by the commit
tee recited extracts from them, declare
that they are an offense against diplo-
matte propriety and an abuse OF the
privileges of his exalted position, for
which the house of representatives con-
denim and censure Ambassador Bayard;
and further declare that partisan
speeches by consular and diplomatic
officers impair their usefulness as such
officers and diminish the confidence
which they should possess at home and
abroad. The democratic minority dis
sented from the views of the majority
and recommended that the resolutions
do not pass.
| Mr.. Hit recalled the circumstances in
which the Edinburgh speech was de-
| livered-two days after the elections in
November 1895, in the United States,
resulting in the victory of republicans,
the advocates of the policy of protection
which he denounced The people of
| that city had that day read the result
of the election in the papers, a result
| that was disappointing and unsatisfac-
tory to them. 1t was in such circum-
| stances that our representative had
made the speech quoted upon foreign
platform.
| Mr.. McCreary, dem, of Kentucky, op-
posed the pending resolutions because
they were unprecedented in congress
sional history. No diplomats officer
| had ever in the past been censured or
condemned in the house of representa-
tives for freedom Of speech. Under the
constitution the house was given no au-
thority whatever to condemn or censure
diplomatic representatives.
| The position of an American ambas
sador at London, he said, was unique
| and different from that of any other
American ambassador or minister ac-
credited to any other country in the
world He was an English speaking
ambassador, and represented country
whose laws and institutions were in
many respects similar to those of the
country to which he was accredited. He
was invited to the great college COM
mencements, public assemblages AMI
important banquets. Nearly all Of our
American ministers have made them
selves more or less conspiuous by their
/ speeches while officially representing
! the United States at London.
/ The people of the United States, Mr.
McCreary declared, were behind MI
Bayard in his opposition to protection
and trusts. The people knew that Mr.
Bayard had proved himself patriot,
a statesman, and a faithful public SER
want; that he had done much to pro-
mote good will and friendship between
] the people of Great Britain and the
/ United States; that he had added to the
reputation and Importance of our great
country abroad, and had by long life
/ of usefulness at home and faithful SER
vice abroad earned not the censure, but
the thanks of the American people
! To censure Mr.. Bayard at this time,
Mr.. McCreary said, would be detrimen-
| tai to the cordial and pleasant rela :
tions between this country and Great
Britain, and would detract from the
prestige and confidence that he should
have when he as a diplomatic officer
represents our country in negotiations
concerning important questions now
pending.
The attack made upon Ambassador
| Bayard was not because he made a
brief extemporaneous speech at Boston,
England, when invited to address the
grammar school and present the
/ L
erence in his Edinburgh speech to pro
lection and trusts" The high priests
of protection We're not willing to be
criticised, and they were opposed to
freedom of speech even in an academic
address on the subject of protection
| and trusts.