The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1868-10-27
THE Aiabar,a Claims.

The latest statement in regard To Che Ala
bama claims is the most ridiculous of all, and
touches the topmost point in the scale Of absurd
rumor II is to 4 effect that questions of in
ternational law that have arisen in this discus
sion are to be left TO the arbitration of the Elm
peror of Russia, and that the claims Of Ameri-
can citizens for indemnity shall, with the claims
Of Englishmen against the United States, be
haggled over with diplomatic solemnity by
mixed commission of sixteen men, eight to be
appointed by each government. Such ''set-
Element" as this was proposed by the British
government two or three years ago, and our
government was then sufficiently in sympathy
with the spirit of the people to reject it as
scarcely less than on Insult. Are we, then, to
accept it now?
We hope not, and for this reason--it Is only
proposition to cover evasion. For the Ameri-
can people at large the whole point OF the Ala
bama claims lies in the question of interna-
tional law and right. There is nothing else oft.
The money that may be paid is important only
as its payment will be recognition Of the justice
Of our claims. We claim that while we were
engaged in great war for freedom England
came behind us sneakingly, in the spirit OF a
coward and an assassin, and made war upon
pretending that she was selling ships, but
making her dockyards, her ports and her ar
senals bases Of operations against our COM
merce. There is nothing in this on which we
want the opinion of the Emperor Of Russia.
We will not so far admit doubt on our right
in this claim as would be implied in asking any
sovereigns opinion upon it. We want this
claim conceded straightforwardly by England,
and the money paid, as an unmistakable evil
dence Of the concession or we want England
to definitely reject the claims-not under cover
of any phrases from the Emperor of Russia,
but openly, so as to commit her to the declara-
ton that such transactions as the Alabama
piracies are not violations of neutrality.
1t is obvious that we can afford to be indif-
ferent which alternative England shall choose;
self one way or the other. Should she stand
on the Interpretation of law by which she holds
she is not responsible for the depredations Of
the Alabama, then, of course, we in the future
would not be responsible for ships of similar
character that should cruise from our ports
against British commerce, and we would pay
her of handsomely in her next war.
As to the commission Of sixteen that Is to
decide on the claims and hear every claimant
personally or by counsel, when would it reach
the end Of It's laborsp These claims would go
down through more generations than the claim
for the destruction OF the General Armstrong.
There is State prison full Of claimants on the
other side-fellows who were arrested here
during the war for all sorts of petty delinquen-
cies and misdemeanors, and who went home
aud made claims for damages. 1t has been
actually shown that some Of these worthless
were imprisoned for larceny. These are fine
claims to Offset against the Alabama outrages,
and il the government dcgrades its claims to
this level it will do an unworthy and disgrace
full thing.