The New York herald., 1868-03-24
The AIab anna Claims.

The Alabama Claims.
At the present moment the British public
are in high state of excitsment on the ques-
ton of the Alabama claims. The desire
seems to be universal to have the difficulty
over with as little delay as possible. The recent
debate in the House Of Commons on the sub
ject was unquestionably calm, dispassionate
and dignifed but to us on this side the debate
had value chiefly because of the disposition 1t
evidenced on the part of the entire House OF
Commons to do what was just and right. Stub
born as Lord Stanley remains on one point
the right of Great Britain to recognize tho
belligerent South-he is no longer opposed to
arbitration; and to have the question sub
mitted to arbitration is clearly the desire OF
the House of Commons and Of the entire
British people. The pompous and dogmatic
Mr.. Harcourt, alias sHistoricus," notwith-
standing the snubbing he has received from
Lord Hobart, Mr.. John Morley and others,
continues to give the British government and
the British public the benefit Of his legal lore;
but there is noticeably less swell in his style,
less force in his dogmatism, and indications are
not wanting of growing conviction that
after all Great Britain may have been in the
wrong. s'Historicus" does not object to arbi-
tration, although he is rather angry with the
NEW YORK HERALD for suggesting that such
names as those Of John Morrissey, Mike
McCoole and Dooney Harris should be put on
the mixed commission. It might not be diff
cult to discover reason for Mr.. Harcourts
antipathy to these honored names. The sophis-
tical reasoning Of ''Historicus" would have
small chance Of success if opposed by the
more vigorous and direct logic and by the less
merciful ''sockdollogers" of these doughty
champions
We can have no objection to having the en-
tire question submitted to the decision of an
umpire or of mixed commission, but the re-
verse. It does appear to us, however, that our
friends on the other side either fail to see or
wilfully close their eyes to the real difficulty in
the case. They make great deal too much of
the mere money part of the question 1t is
not money we want 80 much as redress for
our wounded honor. Ten million dollars is the
most we could expect to be adjudged by any
COikAuloSlUus DuV WAoS 40 eCN
million dollars to us? We do not require the
money. But even if we did, is it to be i'm
agined that the wrong done us could be righted
by any such sum? 1t is not conceivable. No.
Let them keep the money and welcome if we
can have no other redress 1t is well for them,
however, to be reminded that our opportunity
may come. Nay, it is not to be doubted that It
will come. We can well afford to wait. The
condition of Great Britain at the present mo-
ment does not forbid the belief that our oppor-
tunity is near at hand. The three kingdoms
are rapidly tending towards republicahism.
But the monarchy and the aristocracy will not
fall without tremendous struggle. In spite Of
the marvellous skill of the Jew Prime Minister,
the empire will be convulsed to its very centre.
The need of troops at home will leave the de-
Tendencies and the colonies defenceless and
weak. Then will be our opportunity, and then
it will be our privilege to pay back in kind.
With this prospect in view we can afford to be
patient under delay. Kind for kind, that is the
best redress we can have.