New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1868-02-05
THE ALABAnA CLAIMS.
Lord Hobart has addressed another letter t

Lord Hobart has addressed another letter to
The Times in reply to " Hlstorcus"
SIR where we are wrong let confess III" "where
the question is doubtful, let refer it, where we are
clearly in the right let assert that right Ike mem
These three exhortaons lin which cordially agree
addressed TO the British public by your correspondent,
Hstoricus" In his letter OF today and IL is to be in
question upon which he writes doubtful" one, he
would publicly advocate its reference to arbitration
ans % one had reprmanded him for so
doing on the ground that the proceeding would have
tendency weaken the hands OF the Government ana
the position Of the country on subject where both ap,
pear entitled to the most cordial support YET TINS ~
mlnistering to me for doing the very same same
thing happen to be one OF those who think
the question doubtful and have s,t, there ERE
precept Of Historieus' what in lies for the
purpose II possible OF having referred and for this
'Historieus" himself takes me TO task as If we're
disloyal subject and maker OF mischief TO my own eou
try hold that II If the duty az well as the privilege OF
every member OF free community who is able to form
Judgment on political questions 10 crlucLe ana con,
state wherever he thinks that conduct in high degree
nexpedent unjust and not TO be discouraged by tne
argument with which "HstoIcus ana tnose , wno ~
dong he yos The idea that there is difference d oiR
adversary perseyero ia his demands. This the old
stock argument-Dy this time more threadbare than any
descend usethe old, eyerready taunt. which has been
thrown by the "warat any price party In the teeth OF
the taunt necessarily eyeled against Mr. Fox twho Is
now admitted even by many of those who disapproye
statesmen that ever devoted his life to his country,
IN his magnificent stand against the French war II mas
been used many times against statesmen scarcely
less ustrous, aud has failed to move them from the
which they were well aware true patriotism pre-
scribed am well content 60 shelter myself under the
shadow Of those great against your correspondence
somewhat selfcontradctoy censures OF course SO far
iice OF the beyond al doubt question what
the side Of the course which has been taken Dy
the British Government In this matter they are entitled
Sc snc consider ft whether our Govern
"a In
condition that all notice Of the recognition 0f the south
"beigerent" by the Royal Proclamation OF 1851 shall
De excluded from the materials submitted TO the arber
Can possibly be commended that this Is question pc
yond all manner OF doubt thnR nave SHOWN n ~
from being "Hisorcus" contends that our Govern
gt because what the United States really de-
,nand in requiring that the whole controversy" shall be
submitted 10 arbitration Is that the question as To the
what loosely phrases 10 form part OF the arbitration"
To which reply that the demand OF the United States Is
bltraiion" in any 10 which justified In oh
Jeotng. The British government out OF regard for the
il admissible and tho United States reply january IL.
that they do not mean TO require That any question
as ouch" The proposal Of the Uued States il that the
dreon of the arbtcr shall be on the simple and single
question whether they entitled To redress account
OF the depredatons OF such vessels the Alabama All
States as beliscren - that the whole controDery
shai be laid before the arbiter But TO ms the b,n
and Independence Of this country. TO this objection
reply that according to the proposal Of the United States
u
degree affecting that dignity and independence He viii
most probably consider the question OF recognition; but,
evant and not consider IT at ALL and whether he has or
has not done either OF these things the wor wi be en-
trcly ignorant Neither directly indirectly, neither
expressly by implication, Will his decision amount to
any opinion upon that question surely TO carry 10 SUCH
OF great nation. weak State may sometimes stand
up to the very extreme Of punctlo upon national dig
nifty which receives small support from its physical
dition; u warlike state may do the same
count OF the necessity imposed upon its rulers
~ wing
OF nation which Is at once powerful and peace
ample In that community Of nations where each is law
tn ITSELF Of the mutual fOrbearance and moderate seas-
sertion which alone prevent lneessant To
Government IN this matter IL oi doubtful expediency,
but that II Is ucsionably wrong And, In spite Of
storicns" claim the right to express that opinion in
the hope that the present or future Government VIII
the possibility Of rupture which, IN the Wow OF
HlstOricus" well In my OYn would be about the
greatest calamity that could happen to the world But,
secondly argued that even assuming that tie proposal
OF the United States refer the whole controversy TO
arbitration did really amount to proposal TO refer for
decision upon It's merits the pending question respecting
the light OF Great Britain IN regard TO the begereney Of
the SOUTH this did not appear TO be reason for refns
ing To agree 10 that proposal Here lslotlcus IONS
issue, and says that no " sane man" in Europe can
doubt for no single mGme" 'he so sGe S Sr GG
ency, by the Queens proclamation. l. ON the con
trary, maintain that no man" who has read the
correspondence, Sho has reflected for himself upon
the subject can deny that there good to be SAID
proposition am Justified IN citing no lees important
evidence than that OF Lord Russell himself who, In his
ccssion OF belgerent privileges TO the South was Gun
preeedented" To say that an unprecedented proceed
has subjected to serious injury is sureyooklng TO
the indefinite character OF International law, especially
il is proceeding open doubt and question point OF
justice and propney. At least 1t is not from eminent
have expected the statement that international
wholly without precedent, and seriously injurious 20
proprety of which no sort OF doubt could by any
possibility be entertained. After this 1t almost
the dispatches Of the United states Minister and appar
emily not denied, that no such proceeding at so early
any nation and especially that In reference to the War
Of Independence carried on by the British North Amer
declared with France was not that she had prema
that was treated out Of the question: but that she had
late stage OF the war; harbored and protected In Her
That HisorIcus" would appear in one out Of nnumer.
able instances to the contrary to have caught Mr. Seward
action OF ciyl war; in no way dminshes the force
Of these facts 1t 10 the whole tone OF the correspond
ence, and not a word two here and there that
against any kind OF admission by the United States OF the
stice.or propriety OF the Royal Proclamation Of 1861
saying THAT tho refusal OF our Government 10
acknowledge any error regard to that proclamation
ned in saying that the assertion that the subject
upon which there be doubt or question whatever
been my fortune to encounter am unable to believe
that this statement will be concurrcd in by any who
has really attended 10 the subject and assuming
entitled to assume that the question In OF doubt and
difficulty. repeat that myself at loss to perceive
how a Power whose minister signed tho resolution In
favor arbitration recorded the protocols of the
Conference 1856 can consistently decline TO refer
arbitration. Allow me, them 10 recapituato my argu
meut which submit has been In no WAY shaken, and
which is as follows: That, in general, State
State by the only existing method except war incurs
most serious responsibility and places Itself by such
peciay tho case where the State declining arbitration is
that by which the injury whether Justably not
inflicted and the State accepting that by which the In
Jury was sustained That II the proposal had been
10 refer TO an arber for decision upon Its merits tho
oueton the recognition Of the southern Insurgents