INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS 205 
cate negotiations at Washington. He said: ‘““We usually met 
our American colleagues at mid-day, 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.” 
This use of the cable to expedite and smooth international 
differences was in accordance with Field’s hopes of many 
years back. 
The negotiations at Washington ended in what was called 
the Treaty of Washington, and well-wishers on both sides 
hoped that an amicable end to the quarrel was in view. But, 
as often happens,- self-seeking politicians on the opposing 
sides interpreted the terms to suit their own purposes. So- 
called “patriotic” defenders of each nation’s honor continued 
to make inflammatory speeches. A fiery speech made in 
Brooklyn on Washington’s Birthday of 1872 by Schuyler 
Colfax aroused indignant feeling on both sides of the At- 
lantic. The speech called for huge payments for “indirect 
damages” as well as direct damages—a preposterous claim. It 
was a Critical moment. 
Field was in London at the time, but he wrote a long letter 
to Colfax. The great length shows how deeply he was con- 
cerned at the dangerous turn that events had taken. The 
sentiments expressed in this letter show Field’s understand- 
ing of Anglo-American relations and his influential work to 
improve them. The letter shows him at his best. It was as 
follows: 
London, 24th February, 1872. 
My dear Mr. Colfax,—Having read this morning a brief tele- 
graphic 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 be- 
hooves every one who can assist to bring about a better under- 
