New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1868-12-14
REVERDY JOHNSON.
rur AMERICAN OPINION AT LAST on0"" -.
'"~ ENGLISH READERS.
~. Jopdon Neus of Dec. prints the 1oiio"-

TO we ,,n ,o,ypals agree in assuring the English
osoDe that much has lately been done to""iu to
ont NJ tho Alabama claims and tnat much Vi 'uo
n o,a.neration against England which survivor 'no
90, ma, lately been smoothed away Iheir mann "ur'Vi
W. ~ hotb points is Mr.. Reyerdy johnson. Ills oinoia'
o, cves weight TO his statements SO far as they oo"
sro his dealings with Lord Stanley they ought I" 10
authoritative - such Of them. at least as arc oo
uAad by himself to be authentic tnoue" Nv
4, a,nears all those which escape MIN ln
p" IIisI roood of n Lord Mayors banquet As to |
.n.,co, feeling also, Mr. JOhnsOns assurances aIe
deemed 20 be Trustworthy because OF MS character q"
envoy and what he has so often repeated on ls 'oPo
ba, been nut forward In an equally posu'e tone II
what Mr. johnson has said both points Is correct
ehyndany iustifes the general congratulations OF the
rnv.b press and people II 1t not correct IT Is es-
entav the reverse of correct. think you will agree
With me that the real truth ought to be told ana Iha no
continent Of Difference TO Mr.. Reverdy Johnsons minis
ersl character ought 10 prevent man who knows the
truth from declaring it in public way. what nave 10
both points st 1t not true that the Alabama
onoson settled ads Mr. Reverdy Johnsons representa-
toms the state OF American opinion are grossly incorrect
Ipass over the discrepancies between tho various ac
counts 10y Mr. johnson himself by Lord staney' Dy MT
Disraol by the Government organs, and by me IneS
Of what has been agreed on between the two diploma
tlsts Assume which OF them you please TO be the cor
rect version They all upset by the TACT tha what
aver Mr. Reyerdy Johnson has done, he has done on MS
individual responsibility; that he had, and couid nave
had. no authority conclude convention Win 1Viu
stanley that his agreement has validity until ratified
first by the State Department and Executive al WASH
lngor secondly by the United States Senate What Mr.
Johnson affirmed at the Gudhallhat the Alabama dihF
culues were at end-n a more collected moment no
felt himself compelled to withdraw; but at Brighton no
soaHlrmsd substantially his original statement Yet there
reason 20 believe that between the TWO speeches. he
had received dispatch from Mr.. Seward, dissenting
strongly from the point Of his convention with Lore
stanley MIR Johnsou--I have Ii on authority cannot
doubt-came to England with no more power 10 Seuls
the Alabama claims than his predecessor Mr. Adams had
Whatever advance has made in the business has been
made by eoncedng those points on which Mr. Adams
held out 1t remains 10 be seen whether be VIII persuade
Mr. Seward and the President to recede whether the
Senate will approve the surrender. and-more import
ant than an-wheher tho people OF the United states
viii DO content with the terms proposed
will say why think they will not The new eOnven
ton provides the preliminary question of liability
shall he referred to arbitration Mr. Seward originally
proposed arbitration TO the Russell Government; IL wa
rejected when Lord Stanley came into the Foreign
Ofce reOpened negotiations with profession OF bis
II readiness to accede 10 Mr. Stewards proposal. The
III American Secretary replied "NO that WAS not con-
" tnuing oer and has once been refused; but VIII still
arreo 20 arbitrato II you will include the question Of pre-
mature recognition OF the COnfederacy as well rs the
Alabama liability" This Lord Stanley in turn rejected
aud matters that point when the Alabama debate
was brought on by Mr. Shaw Lefevre In the House OF
Commons March of this year. think It was well un
III.
FOR arbitration in obedience 10 the popular demand IN
Aueroaha the principle OF liability should be conceded
outright by the English Government 1t Is plain. at any
that Lord SaDeys mind had arrived at the eoncu
sion that arbitration the main question mere
rouay III the able and eonciliaory speech which he
made that night In the House he did indeed dwell upon
arbitration ia historical way and anticipate "a settle
eut OF all pending disputes by arbitration or by commits
SION. But practically yielded the whole question.
Replying the argument for haste Lord Stanley re-
81 I{utf hen n ia NOn 10
natter at once. you will have quarrel I am as
anxious 20 settle IL any In this House can be; but
DO not believe in the Likelihood OF the quarrel Why
Because l have concealed my opinion that the
American claimants of them at least under the
reference proposed by very likely 10 make out
their and 10 get their money" With negotiation
s his hands, Lord Stanley could hardly be expected
to make more explicit confession, but complete euc
dton D his meaning supplied tho same evening In
speech Ivy Mr Mill Lord Stanley sitting opposite. Mr..
Mil said that ho cordially welcomed the hints thrown
By the noble lord the probability OF settling this
Ia other way than by arbitration. Indeed he
did what arbitration specially required.
believed that there few In this country at pres
who disposed to deny that owed reparation
In degree to the United States II quite
the noble lord Of tins opiulon This there
fore. not in which arbitration wanted II
owed anything must pay II, and what We wanted
to say, not whether ought TO pay, but
much, and would be best decided, by arbtrs-
ceeded urge that negotiations should be reOpcued OIL
the basis OF admission that Owedlhem PREPARATION
He earnestly hoped that something of this kind In
tended IN the hint which Mr. Seward had thrown out" II
deserves to be borne in mind that this debate tee
graphed IN full to NewYork and produced immediate
and most favorable impression the public mind IN
America.
Undoubtedly Lord Stanley as diplomatist Is 10 be
,ompueuted upon the cleverness with which he has in
iuced the American Minister to consent to accept arbl
tration the question Of liability. which Lord Stanley
had himself six mouths before practically surrendered
Why Mr. johnson should plane himself upon negotia-
tiOn every step OF which has teen his part
sion. is more difficult TO understand But IN reality,
neither Lord Stanley Mr. johnson has any cause for
rejoicing. since this Is 1.-THE very point upon which the
convection likely 10 20 10 pieces Whatever Lord |
Stanley by tho declaration have quoted, it was
accepted by the American people admission that
could not afterwerd be withdrawn You can readily
dsrstaud that they viii not DO swift to welcome con-
vention which reopens the main question They win !
readily the proof Of individual claims mixed
cojsmiSsOn; but Tie question Of liability Of England
to pay for the damages 1.-THE Alabama may he proved
have caused believe they viii insist informal
acknowledgement of Lord starley shall be officially
corded in a state paper dispatch,
This opuion does rect upon inference merely II is
supported by the testimony OF the Washington
correspondents Of the EewYOrk papers A dispatch 10
The Svetn0 Post OF Nov says that dissatisfaction
ls openly expressed by the State Department at the J
course Mr.. johnson is pursuing" that Secretary |
Seward is thinking seriously OF recalling him." and that
aft he has ageeed 10 such propositions mentioned
in the cabo dispatches his course Will be promptly dis
avowed by our State Department" The correspondent
OF Tue TRIBUNE asserts authority which he claims as
Official that Secretary Seward Is disgused with the
new minister and says that his disgust squaled
a -