The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1868-11-24
REV.ERD Y JOHNSON.
The Alabama Claims. and HOW Lord
Stanley Has CRiOIed Our Minister.

The London correspondent of the New York
Tribune writes relative to the Alabama claims
settlement. Said Lord 6taney:-
~ lave never concealed my opinion that the
American claimants, or some OF them az lea t.
under the reference proposed by us, were very
likely to make out their case and 10 get their
money"
II there be any doubt about the meaning Of
these words, there is a comment upon them aud
an Interpretation of them in the speech of Mr.
John Stuart Mill, on the same evening. Mr.
II CORDIALLY welcome the hints thrown out by
the noble Lord as to the probability of settling
this question in some other way than by arbi-
tIalion. Indeed, do not see for what arbitra
tion is specially required. | believe that there
are few 10 this country at present who are dis
posed to deny that we owe renaration in some
sort or degree to the United States. 1t is quite
clear that the noble Lord (Stanley) is OF this
opinion. This therefore, is not a case in
which arbitration is wanted. II we owe any
thing, we must pay 1t, and what we want is
some one to say not whether we ought to paw,
but how much; and this would be the best de-
cided, not by arbitration, but by mixed com
mission.
Is not that plain2 But it is followed by a
declaration If possible still palmer. Ar. Mill
went on 10 say:-
"If negotiations were reopened on the basis
OF an admission that we owed them reparation,
and that the object was merely to ascertain the
amount, cannot believe that there would be
any considerable difficulty in arriving at n
settlement without going beyond the two dis
putants."
That is Mr.. Mills exposition of Lord stauley's
meaniDg-immedate, complete, and decisive.
II was spoken iu Lord Stanley's presence, and
whoever knows anything OF the usages of the
House knows that if he had been misre presented
by Mr.. Mill, the correction would have been
made on the spot. But there could be no
correction. 1t was what Lord Stanley then
meant. He was at that time ready TO concede
the liability of Englaud for the Alabama claims,
and go into commission to determine
only the amount. Mr.. Johnson's diplomacy
has brought about withdrawal of that con-
cessioD, and a reference of the question of
original liability TO an arbitrator surrounded by
English influences. Whether Lord Stanley had
ever conceded IL or not, the point is one on
which the American people long since made up
their mind. The first step 10 a closing of the
Alabama quarrel is irauk admission by The Eng
lish Government OF their liability for the Ala
bama damages. That made, the question of
amount and proof may readily be submitted to
arbitration, OF course, Mr.. johnson does not
understand the feeling and determination OF the
American people on this point any better than
he does In the matter of his associations with
Roebuck and Laird How should heY He
represents Maryland and the COniederacy.
1t would be lauehable II it were not pitiable
to see the efforts OF Mr.. johnson TO escape the
force OF the criticism ON his friendship with
Laird and ROebuck. He cannot conceive that
people at home should think 1t anything but an
honor for their Minister to be admitted into
such society, He believes they are dissatisfied