The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1872-05-11 00:00:00

MR. RUUD BUItRIII AND MR. CYRUS IELD ON

THE " INDIRECT." CLAIMS.

The New York papers of the 24th ult. publieh letters
from Mr. Elihu Burritt and Mr. Cyrus }laid to Judge
Peters, at Washington, condemnatory of the indirect
claims.
Mr. Burritt writes:

I think I do not attribute to others only what I feel myself
when I express the belief that thousands of intelligent, and ,
patriotic Americans are at this moment deeply afflicted by the
sentiment that the immediate Jewel of our honour as a nation
has been imperilled by the presentation of those ' 'consequential
claims." 1,10 not think it isgoing too fat to say that the whole
thinking mind of this country regard them as fictitious,
groundless, and hopeless. They present, both at home and
abroad, no aspect of fairness or sincerity. No intelligent
mind could believe, if our own Supreme C airt at Washing-
ton were substituted for the Geneva tribunal, it would
award a dollar on three unfathomable "fanciful claims."
No one expects a dollar of award by the Court of Arbitra-
tion of Geneva, if they go to its bar. As you have put it
most clearly in your resolutions, im country in the world
could have greater reason for abstaining from raising the
question of the consequential responsibilities of neutral
nations than ours, for our past history shows that no people
on earth are more susceptible of active sympathy with
foreign struggles, or more tempted to clatidestioe and illegi-
timate enterprises if this very kind, by the very t °mance as
well as profit of contraband commerce. I think it is not too
much to say that these consequential claims are costing Viet wo
nations 20,0, 0,000 dollars weekly, In their effect upon trade,
stocks, and all those sensitive Interests that draw their life
from even permanent public confidence. The erection of
the Iligh Court of Arbitration at Geneva is, to my mind, the
grandeat act that was ever consummated by two great
nations. It was a noble and lofty remonstrance lifted up in
the view of the whole world against the insensate arbitra-
meet of the sword. Slaving erected this gr at white throne
of Impartial justice, why should we bring to its liar a case
soiled with confessed rettenneis—clalins that sos know and
confess to be wortliliss, and which the tribunal itself knows
that we do not expect it will admit or treat WI sincere and
serious ? lean find no simile adequate to represent my sense
of this sharp practice and its over-reaching folly. Ti day
that it laths dead fly that taints the apothecary's ointment
is to use a small figure ; but it is the moat expressive that I
can apply to a policy which 1 mutt deeply feel touches our
national dignity to the quick.
Mr. Field, in his letter, states :

I have visited Newhaven, Phiisdeiphla, Baltimore, and
Washington, and I have hardly found a person who does not
regret that these cl tins hsve been put into our case, and who
is not desirous thAt they should he at once a ithdravrn. One
item included in these claims lithe expenses of the vb,r from
the battle of Get.ysburg, which would amount to over one
thousand milliousof dollars. Can any one believe that the
English Commissioners ever intended that such a demand
should be considers I by the arbitrators, particularly as one
clause of the treity stipulates that the anioutd of the rew rd,
if say, should bo paid in gold at the &Ay of Washington
within one year? Would they have consented to pie 'ne
their government to the possible payment of wi amount that
could not be liquidated a Win the time? Why, if such
enormous claims were to be preferred, did not the Americsn
Commissioners insist upon their being lusert:d in the treaty,
and thereby prcvent the possibility of any misunderstand-
ing ?