The Charleston daily news. [volume] (Charleston, S.C.) 1865-1873, 1867-12-20
England and the Alabama Claims.
RIGHTS In THE RECOGNITION OF BELL1GEBENTs.

The cable dispatches Of December announced
that a second instalment of the correspondence
upon the Alabama claims, between the British and
United States Governments, had been laid before
Parliament, among which was dispatch from
Lord Stlnley to Mr.. Ford, British Charge de AT
faires in Washington, in which Lord Stanley is
represented as saying that England will never
consent to submit to the arbitration of o foreign
power claims involving her right to recognize be-
ligerents. This somewhat obscure statement is
made clear by the dispatches as published in full
in the London papers, received by the steamer
City of Boston. The purport OF Lord Stanley's dis
patch is that he cannot accept the proposition OF
Mr.. Seward to refer to any tribunal the policy OF
her Majesty's Government in recognizing the Con-
federate States as belligerent power. In any re-
ference to the Alabama claims to arbitration it
must be assumed that an actual state Of war exist
ed between the Government Of the United States
and the Confederate States. That point being con-
ceded, it would be for the arbiter to determine
whether there had been any such failure on the
part of the British Government with duties as a
neutral as could be deemed to involve moral re-
sponsibility on the part OF the British Government
to make good losses of American citizens caused
by the Alabama and other vessels Of the Same
class.
Lord Stanley, in the following paragraphs of his
letter, which bear date November 1G, while agree
ing to limited reference OF the Alabama claims
distinctly announces that England cannot consent
to submit to any tribunal her policy in recognizing
the Confederate States as belligerent power:
"The language thus used by Mr.. Seward appears
to her Majesty's Government to be open to the
construction that it is the desire Of the United
States Government that any tribunal to be agreed
upon in dealing either with the so-called Alabama
claims or with tho general claims, might enter
into the question whether the act of policy OF her
Majest Government in recognizing the Confed-
crate States as beligerent power was or was not
suitable to tho circumstances OF The time when the
recognition was made-a construction which, alter
the distinct and repeated avowal of her Majesty's
Government that they could not consent to refer
once of such question, her Majesty's Government
can hardly suppose that it was INTENDED, by MIR.
Seward that the passage III his dispatch should
bear.
"But to prevent any misapprehension on this
subject. her Maiestys Government think it neces-
sary distinctly to say, beth regards the SOCIAL
ed Alabama CLAIMS brought forward by the citi-
cral claims, that they cannot depart directly or in
directly from their refusal to refer to foreign
power to determine whether the policy OF recog-
nizing the Confederate States as beigerent
ces of tho time when the negotiations was made
GAS regards the so-caed Alabama claims, the
only point which her Majestys Government can
consent TO refer to tho decision Of an arbler is the
question Of the moral responsibility OF her Mnjcs-
ty's Government, on the assumption that an
acual state Of war existed between the Gov
ernment of the United States and the Con-
fedcrate States, and on that assumption it
would be for the arbiter to determine whether
there had been any such failure on the part
of lf0yprnment nOutrll
the observance, legally or morally, OF any duties
or relations towards the Government OF the Unit
cd States, as could be deemed to involve moral
responsibility on the part OF the British Govern
ment to make good los. os of Ameri can citizens
caused by the Alabama and other vessels OF the
same class.
''As regards the general claims, the question Of
moral responsibility OH the part of her Majesty
Government does not, and cannot, come into dis
pute at ALL"
From Washington city, last night we received
the following, which shows the close OF the ques-
ton in diplomatic form:
Mr.. Adams, United States minister at London,
writes, on the 4th OF November, to Mr.. Seward
that, in view of Lord SANKEY'S reply, sit seems
plain that nothing moro can be expected from this
negotiation" and advising the Secretary Of State
that hereafter he (AIr. Adams) would give it out
as 50 understood.
On the Goth November Mr.. Seward writes to Mr.
Adams US follows
Sir: Mr.. Ford has given me copy Of letter
which Lord Stanley wrote to him on the 18th OF
November instant, concerning the question of ar
bltraton upon the so-callcd Alabama claims.
have submitted Lord Stanley's remarks to the
President and have received his directions there
upon. The Government of the United States ad-
heres to the views concerning the proposed arbi-
traton which I have heretofore had occasion to
make known, through your lcgation to Lord STAN
ley. We are not distinctly informed by Lord Stan
lcy's letter that the limited reference of tho So
called Alabama claims which Lord stanley propos-
cs is rendered upon tho condition that the United
States shall waive before tho arbitrator the posi-
ton thoy have constantly maintained from the be.
ginning, namely: that the Queens proclamation of
1861, which accorded beiligerent rights to insur-
gents against the authority Of the United States,
was not justified any grounds either of necess
ty or moral right, and therefore was an act of
wrongful intervention, departure from the obl-
CATION of existing treaties, and without the sane
ton of the law of nations. The condition being
inadmis:able, the proposed limited reference is
therefore dccncd.'
This letter, Mr. Seward subsequently informs
Mr. Adams-date December 3D. instant-that he is
expected to give to Lord Stanley.