Volume XVIII, Number 13

Thursday, 28 March, 1895

*The aim of this journal is to reflect public opinion. The utmost care is taken to treat each question upon which extracts are given in a perfectly fair, non-partisan and unbiased manner. The editors do not assume to determine the politics of any paper quoted, the political credits being taken from the publishers' own statements.

Unless otherwise indicated, the condensed extracts printed in these columns are not rewritten, but are in the language of the original article.

FROM OUR OWN POINT OF VIEW

The press dispatches from Washington during the past week have been filled, if not with rumors of wars, at least with rumors of foreign complications that in some contingency more or less remote might lead to wars. Among the foreign powers with which the United States is known or supposed to be involved in more or less serious diplomatic trouble are Great Britain, France, Spain, Belgium, Germany, and Hawaii. To go into details with regard to all the matters that have led to these complications would more than fill our columns. The substance of the various grounds of grievance will be found in our news summary and in the editorial comment reproduced from various newspapers. If we accept the views of one group of papers, representing all parties and no party, we must conclude that the status of our relations with these various foreign countries is extremely grave, in some cases close upon the verge of war; while if we accept the views of another group of papers, likewise representing all parties and no party, our fears are at once calmed, and we find in "jingoism" a sufficient explanation of the heated dispatches and editorials. Doubtless the truth is to be found somewhere in the middle ground between these two extremes.

One fact, however, is noteworthy. The cable dispatches and the newspapers that come to us from the foreign countries with which we are supposed to be on the verge of war, bring no evidence of a corresponding warlike spirit in the press and in official circles in those countries. Even the latest weekly London letters to the New York Times and Tribune, which might be expected to reflect such hostile spirit if it existed in England, are absolutely silent upon this matter-not a word about either Nicaragua or Venezuela.

How far does President Cleveland approve or disapprove the instructions sent by Secretary Gresham to Minister Taylor at Madrid and the peremptory demand upon Spain for satisfaction in the Alliança affair? It would be interesting to know, but the reports from Washington upon this point are not agreed.

There is another fact which is noteworthy, and which may possibly account in some degree for the amount of space devoted by the press of the country just now to our foreign relations. Since the adjournment of Congress

ness.

there has been comparatively little in the field of National politics to furnish topics for political pencils. There is a very general disposition on the part of the people of the country to drop politics and attend strictly to busiThis disposition is reflected in the columns of the daily press devoted to business news and to editorial discussion of business affairs. Our readers will find in our department of Business and Finance this week a very interesting and encouraging symposium of views upon the business situation. While the revival is not so rapid as was hoped and indeed expected earlier in the season, yet the sentiment in business circles is practically unanimous that such improvement as has been made is steady and substantial, and gives promise of continuance for a long time to come.

The official snub adminstered to Prince Bismarck by the German Reichstag, and the shooting of Li Hung Chang, have been the sensation of the week in foreign circles. Emperor William promptly made a personal matter of the Reichstag's action, and the incident will probably result in bringing to the aged ex-Chancellor a fuller measure of National homage and a richer tribute of National affection than he would have received had the Reichstag passed a courteous and perfunctory resolution of congratulation.

Dispatches from Japan published this (Tuesday) morning with regard to the shooting of Li Hung Chang are conflicting; one account stating that the wound is serious and that the surgeons have not been able to extract the bullet, while another quotes the surgeons as saying there is no cause for anxiety. The Emperor and the Parliament have officially expressed their profound sorrow for the occurrence. It will delay the peace negotiations, and the effect of it will most likely be to make Japan more lenient in dealing with her vanquished foe. It is rumored that Prince Li will refuse to cede any territory to Japan, but will offer instead a greatly increased money indemnity. It is also reported that the outlook for peace is not good, since there appears to be some secret force behind China.

For the present Spain has displaced Italy as the most harrassed country in Europe. What with a change of ministry, a mob of military officers attacking newspaper offices in the Capital, an insurrection in Cuba that will not down, and the loss of a great warship with her entire crew, to which list of disturbing elements at home must be added the ruffle of diplomatic relations with the United States, Spain is indeed a fit object for sympathy.

The Manitoba school question has again become a burning topic in the Dominion, both politically and socially. The dispatches from Winnipeg published this morning state that the feeling between the Catholics and Protestants is extremely bitter. Violent anti-Catholic sermons are preached in the Protestant churches, and the Protestant press is equally pronounced. It is expected that the Manitoba Legislature will take up the Dominion order to-day and promptly reject it, thereby inaugurating an interesting conflict of powers.

AMB

MERICAS
AFFAIRS

Political and General

A Medley of Foreign Complications Baltimore American (Rep.): President Cleveland is beset with international questions of the gravest character, and it will require the utmost skill and statesmanship to determine them so as to prevent serious consequences, and, at the same time, maintain the honor and traditions of the nation. Spain, so far as any information is vouchsafed to the public, has not deigned to answer the peremptory demand of Secretary Gresham for explanation and apology in the Allianca affair. The latter, though a deliberate insult to the American flag, is in reality not so serious as any of the others mentioned. Spain can be brought to terms at any time. The Bluefields incident is more serious than was imagined a few days ago. The demand of Great Britain on Nicaragua now turns out to be a most arrogant one, which contains a scarcely veiled insult to the United States. The gravity of the Venezuelan affair has not been lessened by anything given out from the State Department. Minister Bayard's efforts to bring about a satisfactory arrangement seem to have been a complete failure. The conviction and sentence of an American citizen by a French court-martial in Madagascar, if the facts are truly reported, is a no less serious international offense. This country has never recognized any French protectorate over Madagascar, but has dealt directly with the Hovas, and, of course, has not recognized any state of war, which has not been proclaimed. The administration has only itself to blame for the situation. It began with the determination of Mr. Cleveland and his Secretary of State to shake off all precedents, and reverse the foreign policy of the government. Each of these officials cherished an unreasoning hatred of his predecessor in office, and they proceeded on the principle of doing precisely the opposite of what President Harrison and Secretary Blaine had done. They thereby drifted into a shilly-shally foreign policy, which has earned the contempt and indifference of European nations.

New York Sun (Dem.): It is important to keep before the public eye the precise nature of the question presented by the boundary controversy between British Guiana and Venezuela; for then it will be clearly seen that the Monroe doctrine imposes on our Government the duty of insisting that the dispute shall be submitted to arbitration. The question is simply this: Shall England, by refusing to permit an international tribunal to define the western limit of the Guiana Provinces acquired by of her from Holland, and by committing successive acts encroachment on the territory of Venezuela, eventually obtain control of the basin of the Orinoco? There are five great river systems in the habitable part of the New World-namely, those of the St. Lawrence, of the Mississippi, of the Amazon, of the La Plata, and of the Orinoco. Of these England already possesses one, that of the St. Lawrence; unless we interpose to shield Venezuela from violent aggression, a second, that of the Orinoco, will fall under British dominion, and a great monarchical power will be built up in the southern half of this hemisphere, a counterpart of that already erected in British North America. What we did for Mexico against the French, we must do for Venezuela against the English.

Philadelphia Record (Dem.): It is extremely fortunate that the good sense of the British Government has apparently inclined it to overlook the shabby conduct of Congress with respect to the Bering Sea award, and that Ambassador Bayard should be able to report a disposition of the British Cabinet to submit the Venezuelan question to arbitration, notwithstanding the discredit into which Congress had brought this method for the settlement of international disputes. In a recent comment upon the action of the House of Representatives at Washington the London Spectator expressed itself to the effect that such "conduct must prevent arbi

tration in the future, unless the stakes are previously deposited in the hands of third parties." This comment, though bitter, was just. The recommendation that the Guiana boundary dispute be settled by arbitration came with very bad grace from a Congress which had done its utmost to make arbitration ridiculous.

Springfield Republican (Ind.): The jingo newspapers act disappointed at the probable settlement of the Nicaragua and Venezuela affairs without a war. It is a serious grievance with some of them that the administration should succeed in bringing the Venezuelan dispute to arbitration. It is no slander to impute these feelings and wishes to these jingo partisans, for their utterances have been so full of them. Their attitude toward the administration during the critical period which has not yet passed, has been uncompromisingly hostile and is so now. If the country is safely piloted by these shoals it will be in spite of them, therefore, for they have done everything they could to make the pilot's task a hard, if not an impossible one.

Indianapolis News (Ind.): Word comes from Havana that the Allianca had on board the two Cuban rebels at the time she was fired upon by the Spanish cruiser, and that she has succeeded in landing them safely in this country. Unquestionably Spain would have had no right to stop an American steamer on the high seas, even if it was known that there were Cuban rebels among her passengers. That point was settled by the Trent affair. But was the Allianca on the high seas? If she was not, she was, of course, under Spanish jurisdiction, and subject to Spanish law. So it will be necessary to find out just where the Allianca was, and then to learn whether she was in Cuban waters. Certainly Spain has the right to arrest her own rebels in her own waters. The American people do not want any apology unless a wrong has been done them and their flag. If such a wrong has been done, there need be no trouble about securing ample reparation for it.

New York Mail and Express (Rep.): Secretary Gresham has on his hands many serious diplomatic imbroglios. The Cuban affair, the threatened invasion of Nicaragua by England, British encroachments in Venezuela, and the Hawaiian unpleasantness all require firmness and dignity to carry them through without causing a rupture of diplomatic relations with foreign nations or discontent at home. This country is too big to be in the position of a bullying school boy terrorizing the little fellows and allowing the larger ones to dictate. We should rather be lenient with those countries with whom a contest would be all in our favor, and should see to it that the great powers pay proper respect to the Stars and Stripes.

the

Washington Times (Labor): It now transpires that President Cleveland has called a halt on the jingo policy of Secretary Gresham, and that both he and his Cabinet are disposed to give Spain ample opportunity to investigate and report on Allianca incident. This decision is in keeping with the wellknown liberal views of the President on foreign questions, and is a blow to the flash-in-the-pan policy of our Secretary of State. Demanding an apology from a foreign Power is a serious question, especially before opportunity is given for an investigation. Had Secretary Gresham reported the incident to Spain through her accredited American Minister, and asked for an explanation, no fault could have been found. But his ignoring the Spanish Minister here and making a peremptory demand on the Spanish Foreign Office was jingoism in its fullest and broadest sense.

Philadelphia Ledger (Ind.): Spain has a new Cabinet, headed by Señor Canovas, the noted Conservative leader, who has already served twice as Prime Minister. The Conservatives are high protectionists, and favor a severe policy toward Cuba. With the machinery of the Spanish Government in smoothly-working order, the United States has a right to expect a speedy satisfaction by Spain of our demands in connection with the firing upon the Allianca by a gunboat off the Cuban coast. It would be unfair to ask of Spain an immediate reply before she has had time to communicate with her authorities in Cuba, and the crisis at Madrid likewise may afford a reasonable explanation for delay. But Spain should toe the mark without unwarranted temporizing, and there is no likelihood that our State Department will submit to evasive or undue procrastination.

Savannah News (Dem.): Nothing certainly has appeared in the public prints which justify the conclusion that any European government contemplates a violation of the Monroe doctrine. That doctrine broadly and briefly stated, is that this country objects to the acquisition of any more territory or additional authority on this continent by any European power. It is true that

the Monroe doctrine may be ignored by one or more of the powers interested before they get a satisfactory settlement of their demands of Venezuela, but until that doctrine is disregarded there is no reason why this country should interfere in the affairs of any one of the Central or South American republics.

Omaha Bee (Rep.): Events have clearly demonstrated the necessity to this country of an adequate navy, and the American people will not permit our power on the sea to be again reduced to the condition it was in a few years ago.

The Standard (Bapt.), Chicago: "American opinions of England," appears to be a matter now deemed of some importance. The New York Sun declares that "hatred of Great Britain," on the part of Americans, "is deep-rooted and unslakable." The Independent, on the contrary, is quoted as testifying that "there is no country that descendants of the soldiers of the Revolution love more than they do their mother land." There is evidently, here, a pretty wide difference of opinion. A companion query might be preposed as to English opinion of America. In some of our reading, lately, of books in general literature by English authors, we have almost imagined that the spirit of Mrs. Trollope, and of Charles Dickens in his earlier authorship, were returning to the world. It might be well for both journalists and writers of books to keep in mind that sentiments of mutual goodwill on the part of nations may do more to preserve friendly relations among them than all that which statesmen and diplomats may be able to devise or do.

What Would I Do With the Tariff If I Were Czar? ANDREW CARNEGIE, in the Forum, New York, March. Condensed for PUBLIC OPINION

I rather like the swing of the question. First, my aim would be to keep free of duty the necessaries of life used by the many, and to tax highly the luxuries of the few. The masses who wear and consume home products I should not tax, but the luxurious man and woman of fashion who will wear at whatever cost the fine woolens and the exquisitely fine silks and the delicately fine linens of Europe should pay the tariff duties. It should never be forgotten that imported articles are used by the rich few, and home products by the masses. The increased duties proposed upon foreign articles de luxe would not be levied with a view to protection, but purely for revenue. That incidentally this policy might slightly benefit the manufacturers at home would not be considered an objection. Home manufacturers, however, almost completely control the market for goods of ordinary quality, which are those used by the masses. The reverse of this has hitherto been the policy adopted. This is not a party question, for neither party has made the primary object of the tariff the collection of the revenue from the luxuries of the rich regardless of either free trade or protection. To double the tax upon champagne, for instance, or upon fine foreign china, woolens, silks, linens, laces, embroideries, etc., would not greatly deter the rich class from purchasing.

To reduce duties upon articles which are all luxuries of the rich, furnishing two-thirds of the whole tariff revenue, is the chief result of the Wilson act. When brought face to face with the fact that the principal change produced by the Wilson bill was thus to reduce duties upon two-thirds of the total tariff revenues exclusively for the benefit of the rich, who alone use imported goods, one asks how so able, honest, zealous, and pure a man as Mr. Wilson could represent himself as "lifting the unnecessary burden of onerous tariff taxation from the masses of the people" -the explanation is easy: he was inexperienced. He had not studied the question. I very much doubt whether he would to-day produce a measure so foreign to his published intentions. It is a matter of serious import that such a man as he is relegated to private life simply because one district votes for another. Our

custom of choosing only Representatives resident in the district loses us many invaluable men. Mr. Wilson is to-day capable of performing work of the best character, because he has now the only quality he lacked before-knowledge of affairs. We need just such men as he in public life, and I for one hope for his speedy return to it. Some day he will advocate a tariff, I believe, upon the floor of the House, which will tax higher the luxuries of the few, not reduce duties-solely for their benefit.

In regard to coal and iron ore, so-called raw materials, the new tariff should make no further reductions, because a reduction of nearly one-half of the duty at one time, just made, is serious, and time is needed before any industry can adjust itself to so great a change. Besides, the tax of forty cents per ton upon ore and thirty cents per ton upon coal is comparatively trifling. This applies to iron and steel generally, which have suffered two reductions recently; for the McKinley act reduced these as much as the Wilson act did-about 30 per cent. in each case. Making cotton-ties free of duty when all other forms of steel were left dutiable is the greatest blot upon the present tariff-a piece of pure sectionalism, the bane of the Federal system. One-half of the former duty should be restored.

One important point in the tariff receives not one tithe of the attention it deserves—that paragraph which permits all parties to import materials and to use them in making any article for export. Ninety-nine per cent. of all duties are in this case remitted. This is statesmanship and deserves to rank with reciprocity as a valuable step toward securing extended trade for the Republic. Such qualities of foreign wool as cannot be produced in our country, owing to climatic causes, and yet are valuable for mixtures with our home product, would remain free of duty. There would be no income tax. While it is in theory a just tax, in practice it is the source of such demoralization as renders it perhaps the most pernicious form of taxation which has ever been conceived since human society has settled into peaceful government. A bounty upon home-grown sugar would be given for the present by the new tariff in the hope that this country might ultimately succeed in producing its own supply. The beet-root and sorghum experi ment should not yet be adandoned. The policy of reciprocity would be restored to the fullest extent.

Although I am opposed to taxing the food and the necessaries of the people, I should make an exception in regard to products of Canada, and this without regard to the doctrines of either free trade or protection, but as a matter of high politics. I would tax Canadian articles so long as Canada continued the subordinate of a European Power.

Art of all kinds should be free because art treasures inevitably flow into public institutions sooner or later.

The tariff once settled, there should be tariff legislation only in the second year after each census, except in an emergency like the present when a deficiency in the national revenues and sound policy require additional sums to be collected from such imports as are luxuries of the extravagant rich, and not the necessaries of life of the frugal poor.

The attitude in which the committee appointed for the purpose of tariff revision should approach the subject of revision should be that in which a lover of the country approaches the question of felling a tree. It should consider always, as I know the lover of the country considers, how easy it is to cut down the noble tree he loves, how impossible to restore it. It matters comparatively little to the country whether there be 5 or 10 per cent. more duty upon a foreign article for a few years than required. But it makes all the difference whether there be 5 or 10 per cent. less than is necessary to enable the struggling home manufacturer to continue the contest which may ultimately result in victory. In tariff legislation, the rule should be, in all cases of doubt, to take the safe side. In a committee devoted to this duty there would seem to be little play for partisanship, as its functions would partake of a judicial character. The end aimed at by all would be to obtain a home supply of such articles of general consumption as can finally be produced under the flag, through temporary protection, so successfully as to supply the consumer upon terms as favorable as could be obtained if dependent upon a supply from any other part of the world.