Chapter XIV: International Politics--Rapid Transit (1)

(1870-1880)

The journey to England in December, 1869, was taken in order, if possible, to effect the consolidation of the Anglo-American and the Atlantic Cable companies; this was done, the latter losing its name and being absorbed in the other. Mr. Field also made a working arrangement between the Anglo-American Telegraph Company, the French Cable Company, and the New York, Newfoundland, and London Company, and a division of revenue was arranged between the three companies.

He returned to his home in February, and he was in Washington in March, and while there had a talk with Mr. Sumner on the settlement of the _Alabama_ claims.

The New York _Herald_ of March 22d says:

"Mr. Field proposes that the United States shall name three eminent
persons, crowned heads, as arbitrators, from whom Great Britain
shall select one, and his decision of the case shall be binding on
both parties. Or that Great Britain shall name the arbitrators, and
that the United States shall make the selection of the fated
individuals. Mr. Field had a long conference yesterday with Mr.
Sumner upon the subject. The latter does not favor the proposition.
With all his respect for royalty, he does not think the United
States will get a fair show from any of the crowned heads of
Europe. He is opposed to all sorts of arbitration in this matter,
because he considers it beneath the dignity of our government to
submit to anything of the kind."

Fourteen months later a treaty had been made and was before the Senate of the United States.

On the evening of May 23, 1871, Mr. Field gave a dinner to Her Britannic Majesty's High Commissioners. The Marquis of Ripon said in his speech:

"It is sufficient for me to say that I believe--aye, I think that I
may say that I know--that it is an honest treaty, that it has been
the result of an honest endeavor to meet the just claims of both
countries. I do not doubt that if this treaty had been written
exclusively in London or exclusively in Washington it would have
contained different provisions from those now found in it. The
treaties which are not compromises, which represent only one side,
can be dictated only under the shadow of a victorious army. These
are not the treaties, these are not the conventions, that are made
between free and equal people."

Before the evening closed the Marquis of Ripon said that he wished to propose the health of the host of the evening, and then added:

"He trusted that both branches of the late commission had done
their share ... but far greater credit was due to the little wire
which tied the two nations so close together."

He had written to Mr. Field two weeks before from Washington:

"I am delighted to hear that you are inclined to look with favor
upon our work. I believe the treaty to be equally fair and
honorable to both countries; and if it is to be confirmed by the
Senate it will, I trust, lay the foundation of a firm and lasting
friendship between the two nations."

On May 18th Professor Goldwin Smith wrote:

"No doubt you rejoice, as I do, in the treaty. I suppose it is
safe."

Thirteen years later the Marquis of Ripon wrote, expressing regret that he would not be able to dine with his host of 1871, and added:

"Also because I might thus have had an opportunity of bearing my
testimony to the very important part which the telegraph cable
played in the negotiations for the treaty of Washington. If it had
not been for the existence of the cable, those negotiations must
have been protracted in a manner which might have been very
injurious to their success."

And at the same time Lord Iddesleigh, who as Sir Stafford Northcote had served as a member of the commission, wrote of the use of the Atlantic cable during the Washington negotiations:

"There can be no doubt that it was a main agent in the matter. We
usually met our American colleagues at midday, and we were by that
time in possession of the views of our home government as adopted
by their Cabinet in the afternoon of the same day."

At a dinner given by Mr. Field in London on Thanksgiving Day, November 28, 1872, Mr. Gladstone said:

"The union of the two countries means, after all, the union of the
men by whom they are inhabited; and among the men by whom they are
inhabited there are some whose happy lot it has been to contribute
more than others to the accomplishment of what I will venture to
call that sacred work. And who is there, gentlemen, of them all
that has been more marked, either by energetic motion or by happy
success in that great undertaking, than your chairman, who has
gathered us round his hospitable board to-night? His business has
been to unite these two countries by a telegraphic wire; but,
gentlemen, he is almost a telegraphic wire himself. With the
exception of the telegraphic wire, there is not, I believe, any one
who has so frequently passed anything between the two countries. I
am quite certain there is no man who, often as he has crossed the
ocean, has more weightily been charged upon every voyage with
sentiments of kindness and good-will, of which he has been the
messenger between the one and the other people."

It is appropriate here to introduce a note from Mr. Beecher of May 7, 1870:

"_My dear Mr. Field_,--On Friday noon, as I sat writing in the
_Christian Union_ office, about twelve of the clock, it suddenly
flashed across me that I had engaged to breakfast with you at nine
of the morning, alas! and have only to say in excuse that I forgot.

"Ordinarily that would be an aggravation, for it would argue
indifference; but in a man who forgets, he is grieved to say,
funerals, weddings, and social engagements; who forgets what he
reads, what he knows, it ought not to be considered as a specific
sin so much as a generic infirmity. I pray you forgive me, and
_invite_ me again! Then see if I forget.

"I am very truly yours, "HENRY WARD BEECHER."

It was about this time that Mr. Field's thoughts were turned to the possibility of laying a cable across the Pacific, and in that way carrying out his favorite project of completing the circuit of the globe.

In writing on April 22, 1870, he says:

"I enclose a memorial and bill before Congress in regard to a
submarine cable from California to China and Japan."

On April 23d:

"If I obtain (as I hope) my telegraph bill, I propose that the
Pacific Submarine Telegraph Company make an agreement, offensive
and defensive, with the submarine lines from England to China _via_
India. Our cable would give an alternate route from China to
England, and I would suggest that we have a joint office in China,
and that parties there have the option of sending by either line;
and in case one line should be down, messages should be immediately
forwarded by the other."

"_August 20, 1870._

"At the request of prominent members of the United States
government we have decided to adopt the following route for the
Pacific cable:

San Francisco to Sandwich Islands 2,080 miles.
Sandwich Islands to Medway Island 1,140 "
Medway Island to Yokohama 2,260 "
Yokohama to Shang-Hai 1,035 "
------
6,515 "

"Medway Island is the new coaling station of the steamers between
California and Japan."

He writes to Captain Sherard Osborn in August, 1870:

"In your letter of 10th June you state the total length required
for the Pacific cable as 7842 nautical miles, and give the price
for the whole, complete, as £2,900,000 sterling. This is at the
rate of over £382 9_s._ per nautical mile."

From a letter written on January 21, 1871:

"It is uncertain what Congress will do with regard to the Pacific
telegraph."

On the 13th of June, 1871, he sailed from New York as one of the deputation from the American branch of the Evangelical Alliance, commissioned to wait on His Majesty the Emperor of Russia in behalf of religious liberty for all his subjects.

It was upon his return to England that he wrote the following letter to the Grand Duke Constantine, and the one of September 19th on his return to New York:

"LONDON, _11th August, 1871_.

"To His Imperial Highness the Grand Duke CONSTANTINE:

"_Sir_,--With this I have the honor to enclose a memorial addressed
to His Majesty the Emperor of Russia respecting the establishment
of a submarine telegraph communication between the west coast of
America and the eastern shores of Russia, China, etc.

"I shall esteem it a great favor if your Imperial Highness will be
so good as to forward the memorial to His Majesty, with any
observations on the subject which may be thought desirable.

"With respect to the gentlemen mentioned in the memorial as
prepared to join me in the enterprise, I may explain that they are
among the very first merchants and capitalists of the United
States.... As I am leaving for the United States this evening, my
address will be Gramercy Park, New York. I would express my sincere
thanks for the great kindness shown to myself by your Imperial
Highness, and for the interest you have taken in the subject I have
so much at heart.

"I beg to subscribe myself, "With great respect, "Your most obedient servant, "CYRUS W. FIELD.

"'_To His Imperial Majesty the Emperor of Russia_:

"'The memorial of Cyrus West Field, a citizen of the United States
of America, respect fully thereto,

"'That having taken an active part in the establishment of electric
telegraph communication across the Atlantic Ocean between America
and Europe, and having been also interested in the laying of the
existing submarine telegraph lines between Europe and the East, he
is now desirous of submitting to your Majesty a project for
completing the electric telegraph circle round the globe by uniting
by submarine cables the western coast of America with the eastern
shores of your Majesty's dominions, and with China or Japan, or
both, as may be found most expedient.

"'Having regard to the complete success, both scientific and
practical, of the submarine telegraph cables now working, which are
in the aggregate about 40,000 miles in length, your memorialist
deems it wholly unnecessary to enlarge on the perfection attained
in the manufacture of telegraph cables, or the facility and
certainty with which they are laid in all parts of the world.

"'Experience has proved that submarine telegraph cables can readily
be recovered and repaired in case of accident, so that there is
practically no limit to the length of line which may be employed
or the depth of the water in which they may with perfect safety be
submerged.

"'Memorialist is aware of the strong desire existing in the United
States of America for the establishment of a telegraph cable across
the Pacific Ocean in order to the furtherance of commercial
interests and to the strengthening of the friendly relations which
have for so many years existed between the United States and your
Imperial Majesty's government.

"'From communications which memorialist has had with the government
of the United States and with many leading members of Congress, he
is able to say with confidence that both the government and the
legislature take a deep interest in the subject, and that, as
memorialist believes, they will readily join with your Majesty in
making such arrangements as may be found necessary to carry out the
enterprise.

"'Memorialist has made diligent inquiry from the persons best able
to advise with respect to the practicability of uniting the two
great continents by telegraphic cable, and he has received most
satisfactory assurances on the subject.

"'The proposed line would be about 6000 miles in length, and would
be made in at least two lengths, landing at one or more of the
islands of the Pacific Ocean.

"'From this point the line would extend on the one hand to Russian
territory, where it would be connected with the imperial system of
land lines, and on the other hand it would run to the western coast
of the United States, joining there the American wires, and thus
give direct communication between Russia and the whole continent of
America, and, by means of the cables now laid, with every important
telegraph line in the world.

"'Your Majesty will not fail to appreciate the importance and value
of such a communication to Russia as well as to the United States
of America.

"'It would be an act of presumption on the part of memorialist to
affect to point out to your Majesty the advantages of the line in
its international and political aspect. The cost of the line cannot
be ascertained until the route is definitely settled, but it will
be manifest that for such an undertaking the very best description
of cable must be used.

"'From the best information which could be obtained, and from the
experience of existing lines, memorialist is led to believe that
for some years such a line would not in itself be remunerative as a
commercial speculation, although there would doubtless be a large
amount of business passing through it; and, further, that having
regard to the risks necessarily incident to so great a work, it is
and will be impossible to raise the capital required for
establishing the line without material aid from the governments
directly interested.

"'Memorialist is therefore led to look to your Majesty and the
United States government for assistance in carrying out this great
undertaking, and, having taken counsel of his associates in former
telegraphic enterprises as to the best means of effecting the
desired object in the shortest time, he respectfully submits to
your Majesty the following project:

"'1. That the proposed Pacific telegraph line should be established
by a company formed by responsible persons experienced in
telegraphic business, under the sanction and supervision of your
Majesty's government and the government of the United States of
America.

"'2. That the respective governments should each appoint a
permanent director of the company.

"'3. That the course of the line, its termini and stations, and
other needful arrangements be determined under the joint approval
of the official directors representing the two governments.

"'4. That each government should guarantee for twenty-five years
interest at three per cent. per annum on the cost of the line, the
net receipts for each year (after providing for maintenance and
repairs) being applied pro rata in relief of the guarantees.

"'5. That one-half net profits above six per cent. per annum be set
apart as a sinking fund for return of capital, and the balance
divided equally between the stockholders and the government.

"'6. That at the end of twenty-five years of guarantee the company
shall retain the cable and other property, but without any
exclusive right.

"'Memorialist believes that with such assistance as is indicated
above the cables could be made and laid within three years.

"'The following eminent citizens of the United States have
expressed their willingness to join memorialist in this important
enterprise:

"'Peter Cooper,
Moses Taylor,
Marshall O. Roberts,
Wilson G. Hunt,
Prof. S. F. B. Morse,
Dudley Field,
Wm. H. Webb,
Darius Ogden Mills.

"'Memorialist now humbly seeks your Majesty's approval of the above
project, believing that if so approved the government of the United
States will give their concurrence, and that the work will be
speedily accomplished.

"'CYRUS W. FIELD, "'of New York.'"

"GRAMERCY PARK, "NEW YORK, _19th September, 1871_.

"_Sir_,--Referring to my personal interviews with you, and to my
letter of 11th ultimo, in which I enclosed a memorial to His
Majesty the Emperor of Russia respecting the establishment of a
submarine telegraph cable between Russia and the United States of
America, I now beg respectfully to submit to your Imperial Highness
the following modifications of the propositions contained in that
memorial, which I think will commend themselves to your good
judgment:

"1. The proposed guarantee of three per cent. _not_ to commence
until the day the cable is completed and in successful working
order.

"2. The amount of capital guaranteed _not_ to exceed £3,000,000.

"3. The company to bind itself not to kill seals, nor to deal in
furs on any portion of Russian territory.

"4. The cable not to be landed on the island of Saghalien.

"5. In the event of any dispute arising between the cable company
and any subject of His Imperial Majesty, the question to be
referred to the Russian courts. In disputes between the cable
company and American citizens, the courts of the United States to
have sole jurisdiction.

"May I respectfully solicit your Imperial Highness to take these
proposed modifications into your consideration, and, should they
meet with your approval, I would beg the favor of your laying them
before His Majesty the Emperor, with such suggestions as may seem
to you advisable.

"It is important that I should know the views of His Imperial
Majesty's government at the earliest moment, as the Congress of
the United States meets on the first Monday in December.

"I beg again to express my sincere thanks for the great kindness
shown to myself by your Imperial Highness, and for the interest you
have taken in the subject I have so much at heart.

"I have the honor to subscribe myself, "With great respect, "Your Imperial Highness's most obedient servant, "CYRUS W. FIELD."

In January, 1872, he was again in Russia, but after that time there appears to be no mention made of that government's taking any interest in a Pacific cable, and it is only possible to give bits of correspondence in connection with this project, to which he gave so much of his time and thought.

On the 27th of November, 1876, he wrote:

"I strongly advise that the Pacific cable be landed a few miles
south of San Francisco, at a spot which I selected two years ago.
There is a most excellent sandy beach, and the cable could be
easily connected with the existing telegraph lines across the
continent."

"_July 11, 1878_.

"When the Hawaiian government fulfil their promise to me in regard
to landing cables on their shores, the question of a Pacific
submarine telegraph may be entertained by me. Until then I
certainly shall do nothing towards the accomplishment of the
enterprise _via_ the Sandwich Islands."

"HAWAIIAN LEGATION, _March 10, 1879_.

"_Sir_,--The twenty-fifth anniversary of the formation of the
company for laying the Atlantic cable seems an appropriate occasion
for giving an impulse to the great work of extending a cable across
the Pacific.

"I am sure that you will not be satisfied with anything less than a
cable round the world.

"The Hawaiian Islands have a very central position for the
navigation of the North Pacific. They are a great resort for the
naval and mercantile marine of the commercial countries.

"His Majesty the King has long realized the great importance of a
submarine cable to his kingdom, as well as to all nations whose
vessels and citizens visit there, and has authorized me, by advice
of his Cabinet, to grant you, your associates and assigns, the
exclusive privilege of landing a submarine cable or cables on any
of the Hawaiian Islands, and for using the same for connection with
the United States, or any other country, and crossing any or all of
the islands, and this for the period of twenty-five years.

"Any land which you may find necessary to have for any of these
purposes will be furnished by the government free of expense to
you, not intended to include land for offices or houses.

"It is to be understood that if you do not within five years begin
the construction of the cable necessary to connect the islands with
the United States, and establish the connection within ten years,
this grant is to cease.

"The King and Cabinet, having the greatest confidence in your
ability and energy, anticipate the completion of the cable to the
islands at an early day.

"I have the honor to be, sir, "With great respect, "Your obedient servant, "ELISHA H. ALLEN,

"His Hawaiian Majesty's Envoy Extraordinary and Minister
Plenipotentiary."

It was on the evening of the 10th of March, 1879, that he said:

"One thing only remains which I still hope to be spared to see, and
in which to take a part: the laying of a cable from San Francisco
to the Sandwich Islands ... and from thence to Japan, by which the
island groups of the Pacific may be brought into communication with
the continents on either side--Asia and America--thus completing
the circuit of the globe."

Two months later this note was sent:

"NEW YORK, _May 17, 1879_.

"_Dear Judge Allen_,--I sail for Europe on Wednesday next, the 21st
instant, and shall be absent five weeks from this city. During my
visit there I shall confer with my friends in regard to the Pacific
cable, and I am willing to head a subscription list with my own
subscription of one hundred thousand dollars.

"I shall be happy to confer with you on my return to this country.

"I have had a bill introduced into Congress granting permission to
land and operate cables in the United States, which I hope will
pass during this session.

"With great respect, "I remain, dear Judge Allen, "Very truly your friend, "CYRUS W. FIELD."

To follow his steps more closely, it is best to turn back to the fall of 1871. It was on October 10th that he cabled to London:

"A great fire has been raging in Chicago for the last two days, and
more than 100,000 persons are homeless and destitute of food,
shelter, and clothing. Five square miles in heart of Chicago
utterly destroyed. Loss between two and three hundred millions. All
principal business houses, banks, and hotels destroyed. Could not
you, Captain Hamilton, and Mr. Rate call upon the large
banking-houses connected with America, such as Morgan, Baring, Jay
Cooke, Morton, Brown, Shipley, and others, and endeavor to organize
a relief committee for the purpose of rendering the assistance that
is so much needed? The large cities of the United States are acting
nobly in this fearful calamity that has befallen Chicago, and the
citizens subscribe liberally."

The cablegrams that he received and forwarded on this occasion were numberless. Those that follow were sent by Mr. Mason, the Mayor of Chicago:

"We are sorely afflicted, but our spirit is not broken."

"God bless the noble people of London."

"Receive our warmest blessing for your most noble response to our
stricken city. It was received by our committee in tears."

"Your generosity defies space, as these wonderful gifts have been
flashed to us from all parts of the earth. We are lifted from our
desolation. The arm of the civilized world is thrown around us.
Heaven bless you for this needed help and for the language of
encouragement and deep love which it speaks to an afflicted
people."

"Our people, lifted from despair by this regal aid, are to-day in
the work of restoration, full of hope. We read in these gifts the
determination of the universal world that we shall go forward."

Mr. Field received an official invitation from the Italian government, and he was also the representative of the New York, Newfoundland, and London Telegraph Company, to attend the Triennial Telegraphic Convention of representatives from the various governments and telegraph companies of the world appointed to meet in Rome in December, 1871.

On the 4th of that month Professor Morse wrote:

"I have wished for a few calm moments to put on paper some thoughts
respecting the doings of the great telegraphic convention to which
you are a delegate.

"The telegraph has now assumed such a marvellous position in human
affairs throughout the world, its influences are so great and
important in all the varied concerns of nations, that its efficient
protection from injury has become a necessity. It is a powerful
advocate for universal peace. Not that, of itself, it can command a
'Peace, be still' to the angry waves of human passions, but that,
by its rapid interchange of thought and opinion, it gives the
opportunity of explanations to acts and to laws which, in their
ordinary wording, often create doubt and suspicion.

"Were there no means of quick explanation it is readily seen that
doubt and suspicion, working on the susceptibilities of the public
mind, would engender misconception, hatred, and strife. How
important, then, that in the intercourse of nations there should be
the ready means at hand for prompt correction and explanation!

"Could there not be passed in the great international convention
some resolution to the effect that, in whatever condition, whether
of peace or war between nations, the telegraph should be deemed a
sacred thing, to be by common consent effectually protected both on
the land and beneath the waters?

"In the interest of human happiness, of the 'Peace on earth' which,
in announcing the advent of the Saviour, the angels proclaimed with
'good will to men,' I hope that the convention will not adjourn
without adopting a resolution asking of the nations their united,
effective protection to this great agent of civilization."

This telegram was sent from Rome on December 28th:

"Telegraphic conference to-day, after a long debate, by a unanimous
vote, adopted Mr. Cyrus Field's proposition to recommend the
different governments represented at the conference to enter into a
treaty to protect submarine wires in war as well as peace, and
recommended that no government should grant any right to connect
its country with another without the joint consent of the countries
proposed to be connected."

In speaking of this convention he said:

"It represented twenty-one countries, six hundred millions of
people, and twenty six different languages."

The proposal of Professor Morse was so obviously in the interest of peace and humanity that it may seem that its adoption was a matter of course. In fact, however, the opposition to it was at first so strong and general that it would have been defeated but for the personal exertions of Mr. Field in its behalf, and his own narrative of how the adoption was brought about is so interesting as to deserve being given in full. In his report, dated Rome, January 14, 1872, to the directors of the New York, Newfoundland, and London Telegraph Company, he said:

"The International Telegraph Conference adjourned this afternoon
after a session of six weeks and three days....

"The conference opened on Friday morning, December 1st, but I did
not arrive here till the 20th ultimo. On my arrival I was very
sorry to learn that the representative from Norway had on the 4th
of December proposed to the conference that they should recommend
to their different governments to enter into a treaty to protect
submarine cables in war as well as peace, and that his proposition
had met with such opposition that he had withdrawn it, as he was
sure it could not pass. As soon as I got all the facts, I
determined my course. It was to get personally acquainted with
every delegate and urge my views upon him before bringing them
before the conference. Finally, on Thursday, the 28th ultimo, I
presented my views in a carefully prepared argument to the
conference. Every single member was in his seat, and finally, after
a long discussion, in which there were forty-nine separate
speeches, my propositions were carried without a dissenting voice.
The representatives of nine governments, although personally in
favor of it, were not willing to take the responsibility of voting
without positive instructions from their governments, so they
simply abstained from voting.

"The Minister of Foreign Affairs of Italy, Visconte Venosta, will
prepare a circular and send it to the different governments,
inviting them to enter into an international treaty to protect
submarine cables in time of war.

"I shall leave here to-morrow morning for New York _via_ Vienna,
St. Petersburg, Berlin, Paris, and London. In each of these cities
I hope to persuade the American minister to help on this treaty,
which I believe will add much to the security of submarine
telegraph property."

Soon after he reached London he received this note from Mr. Gladstone; he refers, doubtless, to the letter already given in this memoir, setting forth the view he entertained, during the early part of the civil war, of the hopelessness of endeavoring to restore the Union by arms. It had not, however, been published in 1872, nor has it appeared until the publication of this volume.

"11 CARLTON HOUSE TERRACE, "_February 10, 1872_.

"_Dear Mr. Cyrus Field,_--Will you kindly refer me, if you can, to
a letter of mine, I think addressed to you respecting my
declaration in 1862 that the leaders of the South had made a
nation--as to its date, and, if possible, without inconvenience, as
to any publication in which I might find it, though probably the
date will suffice?

"Believe me, "Very faithfully yours, "W. E. GLADSTONE."

Mr. Field was in London during the excitement caused by the claims for indirect damages which were to be put forward by the American agents at Geneva. These letters refer to that controversy:

"HOUSE OF COMMONS, "LONDON, _March 1, 1872_.

"_Dear Mr. Field,_--As I hear, with regret, that you are detained
here by illness, I take the liberty, as an old acquaintance, of
asking whether you cannot do something in your compulsory leisure
to help our countries in this untoward business as to the case.

"If you, who are so well known here, believe your government to be
in the right, and that they never did waive, or meant to waive, the
claim for indirect damages, and if you will make this statement
publicly here, in any manner you please, it would certainly go far
to induce me, and I think most of the other public men who were
strong Unionists during your civil war, to advocate the submission
of the whole case as it stands to the Geneva board. On the other
hand, if you cannot do this, I really think we may ask for your
testimony on the other side.

"If you do not see your way to taking any action in the matter,
pray excuse this note, for which my apology must be that this is no
time for any of us who are likely to get a hearing to keep silence.

"I am always yours very truly, "THOMAS HUGHES."

He thanked Mr. Hughes for his "kind note," and at the same time gave to him the letter he had written to Mr. Colfax on February 24th, and this letter Mr. Hughes sent to the _Times_:

"LONDON, _24th February, 1872_.

"_My dear Mr. Colfax,_--Having read this morning a brief
telegraphic summary of the speech which you delivered at Brooklyn
on Washington's Birthday, I feel constrained to address you on the
subject upon which you have spoken with so much emphasis. I refer
to the Treaty of Washington. I share your opinion that neither
nation will dare, in the face of civilization, to destroy the
treaty; but nevertheless the crisis is a grave one. It therefore
behooves every one who can assist to bring about a better
understanding on the points of difference between the two countries
to make his contribution to that end. This is my apology for
addressing you.

"The grave misunderstanding which has arisen between Great Britain
and the United States is due to the widely different manner in
which the Treaty of Washington has been from the outset interpreted
by the two nations. I have not met a single person on this side of
the Atlantic who expresses any desire "to back out" of the treaty,
or refuse the fulfilment of any one of the obligations which it is
believed to impose; nay, more, my conviction is that if the British
people were satisfied that the principle of referring vague and
indefinite claims to arbitration had somehow or other crept into
the treaty, they yet would, while passing emphatic votes of censure
on their representatives at Washington, at the same time never
dream of calling back the pledge which Lord Ripon and his
colleagues had given on their behalf.

"The excitement which followed the publication of the American case
was occasioned by the belief--universal among all classes of the
English people--that their own interpretation of the treaty was the
right one, and that indeed no other interpretation had ever been
or would be given to it. It is desirable that Americans should
remember this fact--that until the publication of the American case
nobody on this side of the water had the remotest idea that the
Washington Treaty contemplated more than arbitration with reference
to the direct losses inflicted by the _Alabama_ and other
Confederate cruisers which escaped from British ports during our
civil war. This is not a matter of surmise; it is demonstrable on
the clearest evidence. I therefore contend that whether the public
sentiment of England be well founded or not, its existence is so
natural that even if we Americans are wholly in the right we ought
to make every allowance for it--in fact, treat it with generous
forbearance.

"So early as June 12th last, when Lord Russell, in moving a
resolution for the rejection of the treaty, charged the Americans
with having made no concessions, Lord Granville retorted by
pointing to the abandonment of the claim for consequential damages.
'These were pretensions,' he said, 'which might have been carried
out under the former arbitration, but they entirely disappear under
the limited reference.' There could be no mistake as to his
meaning, because in describing the aforesaid 'pretensions' he
quoted the strong and explicit language which Mr. Fish had
employed. We are bound to believe that Lord Granville spoke in
perfect good faith, especially as the American minister was present
during the debate, and sent the newspaper verbatim report of it to
his own government by the ensuing mail. When the debate took place
the ratification of the treaty had not been exchanged. If Lord
Granville was in error, why did not General Schenck correct him?

"On the same occasion the Marquis of Ripon, also replying to Lord
Russell's taunt, remarked that 'so far from our conduct being a
constant course of concession, there were, as my noble friend
behind me [Earl Granville] has said, numerous occasions on which it
was our duty to say that the proposals made to us were such as it
was impossible for us to think of entertaining.' This, also, was
understood to refer to the indirect claims.

"Turning to the debate which took place in the House of Commons on
the 4th of August, one searches in vain for any remark in the
speeches of Mr. Gladstone, Sir Stafford Northcote, or Sir Roundell
Palmer which indicated any suspicion that the _Alabama_ claims had
assumed the portentous character which now attaches to them. The
doubt which Lord Cairns at one time entertained had been set at
rest by the ministerial explanations made at the time in the House
of Lords, and not a single argument advanced in the Lower House,
either in support of or in opposition to the treaty, touched upon
the question of these claims. Even Mr. Baillie Cochrane, the
well-known Conservative member, who denounced the treaty on all
sorts of grounds, and whose avowed object was to pick as many holes
in it as possible, was unable to allege that England had consented
to an arbitration which might involve her in indefinite
liabilities.

"Sir Stafford Northcote, in the course of his humorous speech--a
speech instinct with good feeling towards the United States--said
that 'a number of the claims under the convention which was not
adopted [the Johnson-Clarendon Treaty] were so vague that it would
have been possible for the Americans to have raised a number of
questions which the commissioners were unwilling to submit to
arbitration. They might have raised the question with regard to the
recognition of belligerency, with regard to constructive damages
arising out of the recognition of belligerency, and a number of
other matters which this country could not admit. But if honorable
gentlemen would look to the terms of the treaty actually contracted
they would see that the commissioners followed the subjects very
closely by making a reference only to a list growing out of the
acts of particular vessels, and in so doing shut out a large number
of claims which the Americans had previously insisted upon, but
which the commissioners had prevented from being raised before the
arbitrators.' All this points unmistakably to the definite and
limited character of the claims which, in the judgment of the
English negotiators, were alone to be submitted to arbitration.

"It seems to me that Judge Williams, in the speech he made at the
banquet I had the honor to give to the British High Commissioners
in New York, expressed sentiments which can only be similarly
construed. 'Many persons,' he said, 'no doubt, will be dissatisfied
with their [the Joint High Commissioners'] labors; but to deal with
questions so complicated, involving so many conflicting interests,
so as to please everybody, is a plain impossibility; but in view of
the irritation which the course of Great Britain produced in this
country during our late rebellion, and in view of the one-sided and
generally exaggerated statements of our case made to the people,
the American commissioners consider themselves quite fortunate that
what they have done has met with so much public favor in all parts
of the country and among men of all political parties.'

"That true friend of America, the Duke of Argyll, speaking in the
Upper House, was equally emphatic. 'The great boon we have secured
by this treaty,' he said, 'is this: that for the future the law of
nations, as between the two greatest maritime states in the world,
is settled in regard to this matter, and that for this great boon
we have literally sacrificed nothing except the admission that we
are willing to apply to the case of the _Alabama_ and that of other
vessels those rules, I do not say of international law, but of
international comity, which we have ourselves over and over again
admitted.' It is impossible that the duke would have expressed
himself in language so hopeful and so contented if behind 'the case
of the _Alabama_ and that of other vessels' he had seen looming up
the colossal demands which were originally embodied in Senator
Sumner's memorable oration.

"The views thus put forward sank deep into the public mind, and the
treaty was accepted and ratified by popular opinion on this basis.
General Schenck, several months after the delivery of the above
speeches, in addressing a Lord Mayor's banquet at the Guildhall,
bade the English ministry and Lord Ripon 'congratulate themselves
upon the success with which they have endeavored to bring about
friendly relations between the United States and Great Britain.'

"People here ask how he could congratulate the British government
if he knew all the while that their construction of the treaty,
which was to cement the friendship of the two countries, fatally
differed from the construction put upon it by the government at
Washington.

"I have not given my own but the English view of the matter. When
such momentous issues are at stake--when a false move on the
diplomatic board may endanger the peace of two kindred nations--it
is absolutely necessary that our people should know what is the
English side in this controversy. The first duty of a loyal
American citizen is to ascertain the whole truth, and not by
ignorance or obstinacy to commit himself to a wrong course.

"Many hard words have been lately spoken and written about Mr.
Gladstone. I therefore feel it incumbent upon me to bear my
testimony to the large and statesmanlike view of American affairs
which he has taken for several years past, and to the cordial good
feeling he has shown towards our country since he has been at the
head of the present government. In spite of temporary
misunderstanding, I will continue to hope that the Treaty of
Washington will bear the fruit which he anticipated; that, to quote
his own eloquent words in the House of Commons on the 4th of
August, that treaty will do much 'towards the accomplishment of the
great work of uniting the two countries in the ties of affection
where they are already bound by the ties of interest, of kindred,
of race, and of language, thereby promoting that strong and lasting
union between them which is in itself one of the main guarantees
for the peace of the civilized world.'

"With great respect I remain, "My dear Mr. Colfax, "Very truly your friend, "CYRUS W. FIELD."

Mr. Bright wrote to him at this time:

"This trouble about the treaty is very unfortunate. I think your
letter admirable, and I hope it will do good in the States, where,
I presume, it will be published. I confess I am greatly surprised
at the 'case' to be submitted to the Geneva tribunal. There is too
much of what we call 'attorneyship' in it, and too little of
'statesmanship.' It is rather like a passionate speech than a
thoughtful state document. And what a folly to offer to a tribunal
claims which cannot be proved. No facts and no figures can show
that the war was prolonged by the mischief of the pirate ships; and
surely what cannot be proved by distinct evidence cannot be made
the subject of an award. This country will not go into a court to
ask for an award which, if against it, it will never accept. An
award against it in the matter of the indirect claims will never be
paid, and therefore the only honest course is to object now before
going into court. Has the coming Presidential election or
nomination anything to do with this matter? Or is Mr. Sumner's view
of the dispute dominant in Washington? I should have thought your
government might have said: 'We will not press the claims objected
to before the tribunal, but we shall retain them in our "case" as
historic evidence of our sense of magnitude of the grievance of
which we complain.'

"This, I dare say, would have satisfied our government and people,
and practically it would have satisfied every reasonable man in the
States. To such as would not be content with it, friendship and
peace would, in the nature of things, seem to be denied."

Soon after his return home he received the following letter, and returned the answer to that of Mr. Bright:

"WASHINGTON, 1512 H Street, _29th March_.

"_My dear Mr. Field,_--I cannot tell you how grieved I have been at
the difficulty which has arisen respecting the Washington Treaty.

"I do not think that anything would have induced me to accept the
appointment which brought me here but the pride I felt in taking a
part, however humble, in the execution of a treaty which I thought
the glory of the age and which seemed to me so full of promise to
all civilized nations.

"I cannot think with patience of all our hopes being dashed to the
ground by what Bright truly describes as a 'passionate speech,'
followed by a claim utterly extravagant, from which the party
making it never expected to get a farthing.

"I confess that I should not have been afraid to go to arbitration
upon it, but I see the difficulty which any government would have
in justifying themselves to their people in leaving it to any five
persons to say whether a fine of two hundred millions should be
inflicted on them.

"You have done your part excellently, but why do not others raise
their voices against this tremendous folly which is not unlikely,
sooner or later, to lead us into war?

"I fully believe that both governments are very anxious to
accommodate matters, but I confess that I do not see how that
accommodation is to be brought about without a concession, which it
is very difficult for a government to make on the eve of a
Presidential election.

"Believe me "Very sincerely yours, "RUSSELL GURNEY."

"GRAMERCY PARK, "NEW YORK, _2d April, 1872_.

"_My dear Mr. Bright,_--I arrived on 25th March, after a very rough
passage of sixteen days....

"Since my return I have devoted much of my time to ascertain the
real sentiment of the people of this country in regard to the
Washington Treaty, and as far as I can judge, after seeing many
persons of different political parties, it appears to be almost
unanimous that our government has made a great mistake in including
these indirect claims in the 'case.' I am convinced that the best
people in England and America desire to have this question settled
in a fair and honorable manner. In fact, many say to me that they
have got tired of hearing about the indirect claims....

"With great respect and kind regards to your family, "I remain, my dear Mr. Bright, "Very truly your friend, "CYRUS W. FIELD."

It was while he was in London, in December, 1872, that Mr. Junius Morgan said to him that he had just received a letter from Mr. John Taylor Johnston about the Cesnola collection, then in London, and he asked him, if he had the time to do so, to examine it and give him his opinion. Mr. Field went at once to see it, and he was much impressed with its value. Of this time General Cesnola writes:

"The officers of the British Museum had already examined the
collection, and it was perhaps on their report that Mr. Gladstone
came to see the collection; but whether he came with a view to
securing it for the British Museum or not I cannot say. Your father
asked me to drive back with him to Mr. Morgan's office, and
suggested to Mr. Morgan (as agent for Mr. Johnston) to close the
purchase of the collection with me _verbally at once_, and a
payment was made on account without delay, and without waiting for
the papers to be drawn up.

"It was through your father that my collection became the property
of the Metropolitan Museum of Art. It was he who introduced me to
Mr. Gladstone, Earl Granville, Mr. Adams, then United States
minister in London; also to the Dean of Westminster and Lady
Augusta Stanley, and to many other of his English friends. He
invited a large party to meet me at dinner, and also brought many
to see my Cypriote collection. I doubt if, without the great
personal interest shown by your father, it would ever have become
the property of the Metropolitan Museum; because it was only after
this that the London press went wild over securing it for England.

"I have said, and shall always say, that it is chiefly, if not
wholly, due to Cyrus W. Field that my discoveries are in this city
to-day."

The sale of the New York, Newfoundland, and London Telegraph Company was made early in this year, and on July 2, 1873, he writes to Mr. Orton, the president of the Western Union Telegraph Company:

"The New York, Newfoundland, and London Telegraph Company, having
been consolidated with the Anglo-American Telegraph Company,
Limited, drafts will hereafter be made upon your company, and
communications made in the name of the said Anglo-American
Telegraph Company, Limited."

Among the cable messages sent during the autumn of this year these are of interest:

"September 19th.--Great panic here in money market."

"September 20th.--Confidently believed, reliable quarter,
government will take measures relieve market before Monday, but
thus far panic has exceeded anything ever known."

"Saturday, October 30th.--Most of the firms that have suspended are
those that have been doing too much business for their capital, but
confidence is so shaken that many stocks are being sold at whatever
they will bring. Think perhaps have seen worst, but don't yet see
signs permanent improvement."

"Monday, November 1st.--Western Union sold before panic at 90. Has
sold in last few days less than 44."

We find these entries in his diary:

"January 13th, 1874.--Arrived in London."

"February 14th.--Sailed from Liverpool for New York in the _Cuba_;
fifty-sixth voyage."

This letter followed him to New York:

"11 CARLTON HOUSE TERRACE, "_March 31, 1874_.

_"My dear Mr. Cyrus Field,_--When I was about to thank you for your
kind letter of the 10th, I received that of the 17th announcing to
me the funeral of Mr. C. Sumner, and the great manifestation of
feeling which it called forth.

"His loss must be heavily felt, and his name will long be
remembered in connection with the abolition of slavery, which was
wrought out in the United States by methods so wonderful and so
remote from the general expectation.

"As respects events in this country, they have brought about for me
a great and personally not an unacceptable change. I have always
desired earnestly that the closing period of my life might be spent
in freedom from political commotion, and I have plenty of work cut
out for me in other regions of a more free and open atmosphere.

"As respects the political position, it has been one perfectly
honorable for us, inasmuch as we are dismissed for or upon having
done what we undertook or were charged to do; and as respects the
new ministry, they show at present a disposition to be quiet.

"Believe me, my dear Mr. Field, "Yours very faithfully, "W. E. GLADSTONE."

The following extract is taken from Mr. Field's private papers:

"The bill for the expansion of the currency, which at this period passed both houses of Congress, after exhaustive debates, created much alarm among the leading financial men of New York and the Eastern States. Meetings were held at various places to protest against it, and to request the President to exercise his veto."

A number of the leading bankers, capitalists, and merchants of New York assembled on April 15th at Mr. Field's house on Gramercy Park to consider what action should be taken in the matter. A petition very extensively signed was read, and the following resolutions were adopted:

"_Resolved_, That the following gentlemen be appointed a committee
to take charge of and present the foregoing petition to the
President, bearing the signatures of all the 2500 leading bankers
and business firms of the City of New York, asking him to interpose
his veto to prevent the enactment of the Senate currency bill,
which has recently passed both houses of Congress; or any other
bill having in view the increase of inconvertible currency.

"_Resolved_, That the Senators from the State of New York, and such
members of the House of Representatives from this State as
entertain the views indicated in the foregoing resolution, be added
to the committee, and their co-operation invited. The members of
this committee are:

"J. J. Astor, Rev. Dr. Adams, Ethan Allen, W. H. Aspinwall, W. A.
Booth, James M. Brown, August Belmont, S. D. Babcock, S. B.
Chittenden, E. C. Cowdin, George S. Cole, John J. Cisco, W. B.
Duncan, W. M. Evarts, Cyrus W. Field, Wilson G. Hunt, B. W. Jaynes,
J. T. Johnston, A. A. Low, W. J. Lane, C. Lanier, C. P. Leverich,
W. H. Macy, C. H. Marshall, R. B. Minturn, Royal Phelps, Howard
Potter, M. O. Roberts, A. T. Stewart, J. H. Schultz, Isaac Sherman,
Jonathan Sturges, Moses Taylor, J. A. Agnew, J. D. Vermilye, G. C.
Ward, etc."

Mr. Field, with many influential members of this committee, proceeded to Washington with the petition, and had an interview with the President, who promised to give the subject his mature consideration. It is thought that the arguments adduced by the committee on this occasion had great weight with the President, and, combined with other influences, finally determined him to veto the bill, which he did shortly afterwards in a message in which he committed himself strongly against any further inflation of the currency. Had this bill passed into a law it would have been the first step towards national repudiation, for the wedge once inserted, it is impossible to predict how far it would eventually have been driven, and what effect even a moderate addition to the inconvertible currency would have had, not only on commerce, but on the moral conscience of the nation. A return of government bonds held in foreign countries would have been the inevitable result, and all values would have been unsettled. Reasoning and thoughtful men foresaw the crisis that was impending, and the country owes a debt of gratitude to the Chamber of Commerce for its prompt action, and to President Grant for listening attentively to the arguments of the committee for saving the country from threatened disaster.

On May 6th, Mr. and Mrs. Field were members of a large party which left New York for California, and on the 12th, at Omaha, Canon Kingsley and Miss Kingsley joined them. The journey was a pleasant one, but uneventful. Friday, May 22d, he writes:

"After breakfast I sent a telegraphic message to Dean Stanley,
informing him that Canon Kingsley was well and would preach for us
in the Yosemite Valley on Sunday."

In his sermon on the afternoon of Whit Sunday, Dean Stanley alluded to this message.

Early in June he sailed for England, and of his journey to Iceland, undertaken during this summer, Mr. Murat Halstead writes: