New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1869-01-08


full eloquence of John Bright, the classic pen
of Goodwin Smith, and the earnest denuncla-
tons of Newman Hall and other leaders OF
the Reform Party, to the facts that the con-
duet of England toward America had been IN
shabbiness without precedent or parallel anu
that Laird and his abettOrs, iii sendlng OUT
their piratical craft, had trampled not only on
the rights of America but on the honor OF
Great Britain. An uneasy feeling had begun
to pervade the people of England-a desire
that some atOnement should be MADE, a
satisfactory settlement had, and per-
feet harmony restored between the two
peoples. The Americans had ceased to
think or care about pressing the adjustment
of their claims. In comparison with the
loss of their commerce, the amount they
had asked was mere bagateile
and if England was ready to let stand the
precedent she had set of international courtesy
international law, and international morality,
they were content. But, as the indifference OF
the Americans became more marked, the
anxiety of the English increased, and Lord
Stanley, on his accession to Office, plumply re-
versing the decision Of Lord RUSSELL SAID he
would submit the matter TO arbitration.
Mr. Seward replied--whether wisely or not
we stop not to inquire--that tho arbitration
must include the question of tho premature
recognition of the Rebels rs belligercnts. This
demand Lord Stanley promptly rejected ana
the matter again stood still.
Soon after this came the interesting debate
in the House Of Commons on the American
question, which was telcgraphed in full to us
by Mr.. Cyrus W. Field, and published far and
wide throughout the continent. In that debate,
Lord Stanley took another and very long
step toward a settlement of the dispute. lie
virtually gaze up the point of the liability OF
England, and significantly expressed his opn-
ion that "the American claimants, or some OF
them, were very likely to get their money"
Mr. Mill cordially welcomed the broad hint,
and said that "Indeed, he did not see for what
"arbitratiOn was specially required. lie be-
"leved that there were very few in this country
"at present who were disposed to deny that we
lowed repatriation in some sort or degree to
"the United States. This, therefore, was not
"a case in which arbitration was wanted. If
eve owed any thing, we must pay it; and what
eve wanted was some one to say, not whether
eve ought to pay, but how much; and this
"a mixed commission" Mr.. Mill went on to
"say THAT negotiations should be reopened
"on the basis of an admission that we owed
"them something"
Such was the new position of affairs when Mr..
Revcrdy Johnson appeared TO reopen the nego-
tialion, and to cultivate his peculiar and in
discriminating aflubility" toward Roebuck,
Wharncliffe, and Laird. He found, if we may
believe Mr. Mill. Every few in that country dis
"posed to deny that they owed reparation to the
Omitted States Lord Stanley himself had
yielded the point OF liability and had intimated
that the claimants were entitled to recover.
England was ready tn settle the claims rs 4 mat
ten of military necessity and, with this basis for
negotiation. llr Reyerdy johnson and Mir.
Seward agree that the question of liability
shah be determined by the opinion of one or
more referees. The position of the negotiators
is, to say the least of it, curious one-Lord
Stanley ready to admit the liability of England
and to submit the claims to arbitration, and
Mr. Revcrdy johnson and Mr.. Seward gene
rously consentng that England shall pay moth
ing unless compelled to do 50 on q reference.
Mr.. Johnson will be satisfied with the King OF
Prussia: Mr. Seward prefers a Mixed Commits
sion.
What the individual claimants may think OF
this phase of the negotiation may be ques-
ton; but ii is clear TO us that the American
people will tolerate no adjustment of the Ala
bama claims which does not include on the
part of England a voluntary and utter renun-
citation Of the principles and precedcnts on
which her convenient neutrality was based, and
which she desires us to repudiate in our future
relations toward Great Britain.