New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1900-02-07
AN ANSWER TO MR. BRYCE.

we called attention a few days ago to what
seemed to US strange contradiction between
the utterances of Mr.. James Bryce in ParIis-
ment ana the utterances of the same distin-
gulshed gentleman in a book written by him
le" years ago. In another column of to-days
paper we give space to another criticism of Mr.
Bryces present position upon the South African
question, in the form of letter written TO the
Editor of The Tribune by Mr. James Leslie
Wanklyn, a member of the British House of
commons from Bradford, Yorkshire in reply to
recent article written by Mr. Bryce especially
Tor American readers. Mr.. Wanklyn's letter
answers to the description of mighty inter-
esting reading" and as SUCH and also As an
eloquent and authoritative statement of the
views held by practically the entire British
nation, 1t Is cordially to be commended for care
full perusal
80 much attention may properly be given to
Mr.. Bryce partly because he is a conspicuous
man Of letters, whose works have especially
and favorably introduced him to the American
public, and partly because he is one of those
uncommonly rare beings, a Briton who takes
SIDES against Great Britain in this war We
nave hitherto commented upon the substantial
unanlmity of the British people in supporting
their Government and in maintaining the claim
that, whatever errors there may have been I'm
diplomacy, upon the general moral questions
between BrltOn and Boer the Briton was and
Is emphadcally in the right. 1t has seemed IN
us that is one of the most significant features
OF the whole case. Burke did not know how TO
draw an Indictment against a whole people
Neither are we prepared. to indict a whole peo-
ple-one OF the freest most generous and most
enlightened peoples earth-of deliberate and
wanton wickedness and inhumanity If there
Ji,y;ei
the matter among the British people there
would be more cause for questioning whether
their Government is in the right But when the
opponents of the British cause who are of ma
tional rank are to be counted upon the fngars
or one hand, what are we to think? To CON
denim the cause would be to condemn the neonle
Ihs consideration Is especially pertinent in
view of the case of the United States In tha
war with Spain Beyond doubt there were some
Engllshmen who had strong sympathy with
Spain. The vast majority sided with the United
States But the noteworthy fact was tbst "a q
rule they scarcely entered into a detailed con-
sderation of the case at all. The fact that tbe
people of the United States were practically
unanimous on the subject was sufficient 10 ner
suade Englishmen that this country was in the
right They took cause on faith-faith in
spired by our unanimity If we remember
arlght, there were some two or three shrill
voices raised here about the wickedness of our
aggression upon a smaller and weaker and quite
inofensive nation, and our campaign was by
them denounced with much the same super
heated verbiage of "landgrabbers," "jingoes"
and the like as that which the less than cor
porals guard of British indictments now as
sails the British Government. But Great Britain
CID not regard them the spokesman of this
Nation, and neither, we are convinced. are the