It was because the President and Mr. Blaine were convinced that the British Government at home could not fulfill the stipulations agreed upon that they accepted Salisbury’s proposal for arbitration, believing he had done his best.  That was a very sore disappointment to Mr. Blaine.  He had suggested that Britain and America should each place two small vessels on Behring Sea with equal rights to board or arrest fishing vessels under either flag—­in fact, a joint police force.  To give Salisbury due credit, he cabled the British Ambassador, Sir Julian Pauncefote, to congratulate Mr. Blaine upon this “brilliant suggestion.”  It would have given equal rights to each and under either or both flags for the first time in history—­a just and brotherly compact.  Sir Julian had shown this cable to Mr. Blaine.  I mention this here to suggest that able and willing statesmen, anxious to cooeperate, are sometimes unable to do so.

Mr. Blaine was indeed a great statesman, a man of wide views, sound judgment, and always for peace.  Upon war with Chili, upon the Force Bill, and the Behring Sea question, he was calm, wise, and peace-pursuing.  Especially was he favorable to drawing closer and closer to our own English-speaking race.  For France he had gratitude unbounded for the part she had played in our Revolutionary War, but this did not cause him to lose his head.

One night at dinner in London Mr. Blaine was at close quarters for a moment.  The Clayton-Bulwer Treaty came up.  A leading statesman present said that the impression they had was that Mr. Blaine had always been inimical to the Mother country.  Mr. Blaine disclaimed this, and justly so, as far as I knew his sentiments.  His correspondence upon the Clayton-Bulwer Treaty was instanced.  Mr. Blaine replied: 

“When I became Secretary of State and had to take up that subject I was surprised to find that your Secretary for Foreign Affairs was always informing us what Her Majesty ‘expected,’ while our Secretary of State was telling you what our President ‘ventured to hope.’  When I received a dispatch telling us what Her Majesty expected, I replied, telling you what our President ‘expected.’”

“Well, you admit you changed the character of the correspondence?” was shot at him.

Quick as a flash came the response:  “Not more than conditions had changed.  The United States had passed the stage of ‘venturing to hope’ with any power that ‘expects.’  I only followed your example, and should ever Her Majesty ‘venture to hope,’ the President will always be found doing the same.  I am afraid that as long as you ‘expect’ the United States will also ‘expect’ in return.”

One night there was a dinner, where Mr. Joseph Chamberlain and Sir Charles Tennant, President of the Scotland Steel Company, were guests.  During the evening the former said that his friend Carnegie was a good fellow and they all delighted to see him succeeding, but he didn’t know why the United States should give him protection worth a million sterling per year or more, for condescending to manufacture steel rails.