THE ALABAMA CLAIMS.

Hawke's Bay Times, Volume 19, Issue 1302, 18 April 1872, Page 2

THE ALABAMA CLAIMS.

THE BRITISH CASE BEFORE THE ARBITRATORS. New York, February 27.—The New York Tribune publishes an abstract of the British case submitted to the arbitrators at Geneva. In this statement, her Majesty's Government complains that it has had to reply to an argument not yet presented. When that shall have been presented, and the claims of the United States shall be denned precisely, her Majesty's Government will exercise the right conferred on it by Article 4 of the treaty, and submit it to the Tribunal, with additional or more extended facts as the case may exact, until a comparison of the ca'-es presented by both parties shall determine the points really in dispute between the two Governments. It will refrain from all discussion intended to sustain its own position, and will limit itself at present to the judgment of the Tribunal the followiug considerations :—The ships, whatever mav be the circumstances, were procired in British ports for war purposes, and were employed as belligerent cruisers against the United States, while Great Britain herself remained neutral. These events have been the cause of displeasure to the Government of her Britannic Majesty, and this regret exists despite the following facts, which, it must be conceded, are important in order to arrive at a just appreciation of the question : —The vessels were procured by cunning and clandestine means, and baffled the vigilance of Government officers. Not one of them had the least armament; some had been censtructeel as ordinary merchant vessels, having nothing which would adapt them specially for war. In number they were very small. And, final!}, the persons who obtained possession and control of them and employed them for belligerent purposes were themselves American citizens, which the United States Government has always admitted. Such facts should seriously affect, in the mind of every impartial man, the question relative to the responsibility of a neutral Government. The United States Government professes to have the right ot pecuniary indemnity for the damage which it says resulted from the acts of these vessels • that is to say the warlike operations carried on by means of these ships by the persons who had them in their possession. It is evident that pretensions of this nature are such that her Majesty's Government, animated as it is with amicable sentiments towards the United States, could not, in viitue of the respect it owes to its rights and those of neutral nations in general consent to admit, since it believes that they are not founded on justice. It devolves on us. to establish the proposi-

tions it has advanced : to &tate clearly the international duty, or duties on which they are based, and to. demonstrate the violation of which it complains. Charges against a Sovereign GovernmeDt having evinced culpable negligence in the exercise of one- of thepowers of its sovereignty is an imputation which should be sustained by, strong and solid reasons. A nation ought not to be held responsible for a delay or omission which may be due simply to accident, and not to want of foresight or reasonable care. Finally,, it does not suffice to demonstrate that an act has been committed which the Government should have foreseen. What must be advocated and proved. is that the Go\ernment failed to exercise the same amount of care as it usually employs in internal affairs, and which it may reasonably be required to use in matters affecting international interests and duties. If the tribunal decides that Great Britain has incurred any responsibility whatever toward the United States, the question will then arise as to what shall be the just measure and extent of that responsibility. Her Majesty's Government abstains, at present, from entering on this question, and reserves, for a more advanced period of the discussion, all observations that it shall determine to submit on this point in the name of Great Britain. If claims of this kind were admitted without reserve, a belligerent could ask to be indemnified by a neutral for results which certainlv ought not to be laid to acts of the latter, but, should be placed to his own incapacity and inactivity. Her Majesty's Government is obliged to point out that, in regard to the ships m hich formed the object of the preceding statement, the United States Government, or its officers, evinced extraordinary tardiness in emplo.ing the naval force at its command; and that,.if ordinary had been exercised capture these vessels, the losses of. which the United! States complain to-day would have been, in great part avoided. Whether the decision of the Tribunal, is or is not favorable, Great Britain is ready to yield to the decree. She has only one wish—that is to be just. She raises, only one point—that it be founded on faithful and equitable interpretation of the rights of man, and on principles which herself and all other Powers willnot repent of recognising and observing,, either as neutrals or belligerents, in. time to come. Washington, February 23.—The note of Earl Granville, sent to Secretary Fish through t General Schenck, was: reaii to the Cabinet to-day. A general conversation ensued, continuing for several hours, in which the questionspresented concerning the interpretation of the Treaty of* Washington were discussed. There may be a further conference on the subject when the reply of (he Secretary ol State to the friendlynote shall have been prepared. While this Government does not seem disposed' to modify its statement of the case, it will doubtless respond to the British, objections in such a spirit as will show its earnest desire for a settlement of the questions at issue in a manner altowether honorable to both nations,, o through the tribunal of arbitrators provided by the treaty. This is known to be the desire of the President and members of the Cabinet. It was said to-night by a high executive officer that not even the substance of the British note could now be communicated through an official source, nor had it been repeated to any private parties. At the same time it was remaiked that the note was of a friendly character, and couched in elegant language, and the reply would be in a like temper. There was, therefore, nocause whatever for apprehension as to* the continuance of peace between the two countries. February 26.—The Cabinet was in session about two hours today. The reply of Secretary Fish to Earl Granvilles note is not yet completed, though; the points are agreed on. The American statement of the case will not healtered. By the treaty full provision is made for an amicable adjustment of all differences, through the Tribunal of Arbitration, both parties having pledged themselves lo accept their verdict as a full, perfect, and final settlement of alt claims..

The News of the World says that the Alabama indirect claims have been laid before the Geneva Arbitrators. It is now universally believed that no trouble can come out of the matter, as both countries must abide by the decision of the arbitrators. The prospects of a .subsidy from the United States to the Australian line brighten, and a bill for the purpose is on the point of presentation by the house Committee on Commerce, at Washington.