The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1902-01-22
EURoPEAN-AMERICAN RELATIONS.

The statement made in the House of
Commons by the under secretary for for
eign affairs relative to Englands friendly
attitude towards the United States during
the war with Spain furnishes official con-
firmation of what was generally understood
and freely commented on at the time. The
statement made by Lord Cranborne, in re-
ply TO a question, was that while the Brit
ish government did consent to join the con-
tinental powers in advising a peaceable
solution of the Cuban problem before the
war began, lit declined to associate itself
with other subsequent proposals, which
seemed open to the objection of putting
pressure on the government of the United
States and offering an opinion on its
ton While the under secretary, for OBJ
vious reasons could not go into the details
of state secrets, press dispatch makes
the following statement on the authority
of the British Foreign Office:
The occasion upon which Great Britain
deliberately put down her foot was, accord
ing to the Foreign Office. when the Aus
trian ambassador at London interviewed
Lord Salisbury and asked him if Great
lectiVe note from the European powers
urging the United States to desist from
with Spain. Such note was not to
threaten reprisalS or Intervention, but was
to be in the nature Of a strong protest and
a plea for arbitration Lord Salisbury,
the representative OF the Associated Press
was informed, regarded this proposition as
unwarrantabIe interference in the affairs of
friendly country and frankly said so, de-
claring that Great Britain would not be
of the late President McKinley's attitude
toward the ante-bellum efforts of European
powers to avert war. The Foreign Office
heard nothing more on this subject. the
matter of a collective note apparently be-
ing dropped.
1t was further stated that while this
proposition came from Austria alone it
was understood at the time as an attempt
to sound the British government, and that
France, Germany and Russia stood behind
Austria in the matter. This statement is
not surprising as TO France and Germany
both of whom were understood at the time
to sympathize with Spain. but it is
prise as to Russia. There is no documen-
tary evidence in the British Foreign Office
to show what powers stood behind Austria
in the movement, and until such proof is
furnished the American people will believe
that the surmise that Russia was in it is a
mistake. AS to the other powers there need
be no doubt. Austria and France were
known at the time to sympathize with
Spain on family and racial grounds. and
Germany had not yet developed any friend
ly feeling for us. On the other hand Brit
ish sympa thy with the United States was
undisguised both before and after the war
began Public opinion to that effect found
expression in the British press, and the
fact was so patent that enemies Of the ad-
ministration in this country raised the
charge OF an Anglo-American alliance A
contemporary review of the situation in
1899 said: 1.-The rapprochement between
Great Britain and the United States
reached its full flow with the revelation
during the war with Spain that England
stood ready 10 oppose. with all the might
OF her empire. any anti-American coalition
emanating from the courts or chancelleries
OF continental Europe" In short. from the
beginning Of our war with Spain. during
its entire progress and after its conclusion
It was notorious that British sympathy was
wholly with the United States and that
this was not true OF any continental power
with the possible exception OF Russia
which. as far as known. gave no intima-
ton of sympathy either way. The truth
OF history cOmpels the admission that the
conduct OF German subjects and sailors.
naval officers and men, Immediately after
Dewey's victory at Manila and later in
Samoa, was decidedly offensive and that
IL was not reDudiated or condemned by
] their government. Nor does this imply any