The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1854-04-18

x~~.us-~x~-~k s--.a4ax-zps
the United States had ciaim differentiation fol
such slaves property He also rendered 10 The govern
ents of the United States and Great Britain his friend
offices for the purpose Of adjusting the mode in which
mixed commission should be organized for the purpose
ascerlaniog the value OF The property with view TO the
ndemniheaon and at page $50 fnd that such treaty
entered into accordingly between Great Britain and the
United States under the mediation Of tho Emperor Of Rus
STA and gned the plenpotentsres Of all three powers
The frs, stipulation OF thai treaty provides that for The
purpose of asceranng and determining the amount OF IN
Identification that may be due under the award of his lmpe
rial majesty commissioners and abirators should
be appointed Ia the specified therein meet al The
city of Washington The second article STIMULATES for the
mode of ascertanng the value Of slaves in order to
trouble in asceraning the value OF each particular
slave.
The third article provides that the average value being
ascertaned the of the United States shall fur
nish definite list of slaves or other private property oi
which indemnity claimed and that the British government
shall nsh all the evidence IN its power TO the number
of slaves which carried away II is then further pro-
vded that the British shall not be liable TO make
compensation for sny claims for private property not ncu
ded in the defnitive list
Subsequently, there being aerenees among the commits
soners in the execution Of the treaty. the United States con-
Guided another convention with Great Britain in reference to
this natter which the convention of 1925 and is to be
found page 35 Of the volume Of the laws Ia that
convention they agreed in OF difficulties having
arisen the execution of the convention concluded nj ST.
Pe,ersburgh the 18th day Of July under the mediation
of his Majesty the Emperor all the Russas that Great
Britain should pay 70 the United States for the use OF the
By virtue of the said decision and convention the
2ol,960 money of the United States in lieu Of
and in full and complete satisfaction for all SUMS claimed or
claimabe from Great Britain by any person or persons
whatsoever under the said decision and conyentlon.
The prior convention being fulfilled, then nus all the
articles except the third which related the enve list
of claims and the second which had been already carried
into effect; and the sum paid to the United Staes and
for that the United States released all the claims arising
under the treaty of Ghont and the decision Of the Emperor
of Russia to the extent OF its obligations The next step
of the ascertain the which belonged
the different individuals; and it provided by hw
be found the 4h volume of the Statutes at Large page
49, that of its should sit at the city OF
Washington, before which all persons who should forward
their claims, and who included the defnitive list
should have the rghto present them for adjudication by the
commissioners appointed Commissioners were appointed
under that law; but the government satisfied with pro-
vdug for those who had forwarded their claims in time
be placed upon the defnve list, which furnished 10
the mixed commission, but regarding the rights Of every
claimant, provided in the twelfth section:
That all claims which deposited in the Department
Of State and by mistake omitted To be placed the defn
tive list delivered to the former commissioners shall be- and
hereby required to be added thereto and the said claim
ants shall be entitled to the rights and benefits as
such claims had been placed the said defnitve st IN
of the third article of the convention concluded at ST.
Pctersburgh on the 18th day of July, 1922"
Here the government did all that it ought do in any
II had stipulated for the preservation OF certain rights
to its citizens TO the utmost extent to which could be ex-
pected defend them The Emperor of Russia had decided
law that Great Britain bound to restore this proper
y whether land on board her vessels, if they
within the territory of the United States and within
The waters Of which the British forces, the date of the
treaty. had the possession provided the property was still
here the ratification of the treaty That property aud
value were be ascertaned. While these
pending, the Uned States agreed take gross
indemnity Now, il surely will not be commended that the
had not the right do that is exactly what
has done in the Florida treaty, and in other treaties II
n, the government is bound to do when acts for
zen, and endeavors obtain remuneration for him. and
ne must allow 1t the dscre ion of ascetainng and liking
he amount, high it obtain 1t, of course If II
the claim Of the cizen and and pays
what it obtains its liability extends TO the received,
and further Such has resemblance 10 the bar
ering away of just claim of its individual citizens by
government 10 obtain release from s prior oblga-
TONS having connection with the claim which thus APP
proprihes for IFS own benefit
The government having acted, provided that judicial
tribunal for the distribution Of the money should be
ganzed; and every person entitled, under The treaty,
portion of the fund secursd, had right to go before
the tribunal, they not placed the dehnitive
list, account of act Of negligence of govern
nent. All the claims presented heard before
nissoners; and, have understood, (and believe IT
will be admitted by my honorable friend from Maryland
the claims equal the whole amount OF the fund,
and there is s balance of il remaining in the treasury
Of the United States, and above all the loss which
proved TO have been sustained within the Of the
treaty II this lie the of the facts upon what ground
be claimed that the government OF the United States
bound 10 remunerate Hodges and Lansdale for the
bneco destroyed by Great Britain in 1914, to
rate forany othcf private property which was not accofd
TO the terms of that treaty. in the possession of Great
Britain, and within the territory of which restitution
to be made the ratification of the treaty of Cheat in
1887 cannot perceive that there any obligation the
part of the under this favor Of the
present claimants The property not in the posses
sion Of Great Britain according to the proof ia the case
the time that the treaty Of Client ratified. II u
not there was obligation 10 pay for lfte
property in the possession of Great Britain when the
treaty ratified which fact there is neither alega-
ton proof the fault Of the claimants themselves
that they did 20 before the commissioners and
the amount to which their claims entitled thcm} and surely
they cannot come TO Congress and ask remuneration,
because they failed 10 present their claims TO the commits
soners under the treaty. There, therefore, cannot he any
ground for the claim unless you that there
default, in The government 10 compelling Great Biap
by stipulation IN the treaty Of peace 10 1884, for any in
jury depreciation she had committed, contrary the
q civilized warore in the Of 1872 TO make
Enumeration 10 the clzs Of the United States There
such stpulston--here could be such No treaty
could have been concluded such ground because
with NATIONS hAvi equal power each remaining unsub-
dued, il s impossible 10 suppose that any nation would ad
that she ha carried contrary the usages Of
civilized warfare Without that express admission there
could &c sroond Of individual claim arising Of the
enormles OF the warfare and the plunderng expeditions Of
the enemy during the ofSl2 The government which
suffers TO be carried may with the
Of the civilized vold but according principle Of the
Law Of nations could there be Claim the part Of ndvd-
usl citizens Of Que begen power against the government
Of the other, because she chose carry devastating
sustained by authority. 5
II am night in these views the ground on With this
claim attempted be sustained by the honorable
from Maryland ~ not tenable Ard having discussed
that VIII the grounds which the committee
in their report ne the grounss for relief which depend