Lamoille newsdealer. [volume] (Hyde Park, Vt.) 1860-1877, 1869-04-27

| An inspection oil the treaty she W how iron
beginning to end it is merely for the set
tement of individual claims on beth sides
putting both patches on an equaliiy-sC
that the sufferers by the misconduct o.
England may be couerbalanced by Brit
ish blockaderunners 1t opens with a
preamble, which, instead of Announcing
the unprecedented question between the
two countries, simply refers TO individual
claims which have arisen since 1853
which was the last time of settlemen -
some of which are still pending and re-
main unsettled. Who would believe that,
under these words of comonmplace was
concealed that unsettled difference which
has already 50 deeply stirred the Ameri-
can people, ani is destined until finally
adjusted TO occupy the attention Of the
civilized world?
The treaty not merely makes no pro-
vision for the determination of the great
question, but it seems to provide express
ly that it shall never hereafter be pre-
sented. The pretty provision for indivi-
dual claims, subject TO a SET fl from the
individual claims of England, so that in
the end our country may possible receive
nothing, is the consideration for this
strange surrender. | borrow term
from an English Statesman on another
occasion, If | call it a 'capitulation. v
Epr the settlement of few individual
claims we outdone the original, far-reach-
ing, and destructive wrong
There is no provision for the real ques-
ton, which, though thrust out Of sight, or
declared to be ''Gual|y settled and barred
according to the terms Of the treaty, must
return to plague the two countries.
Whatever the treaty may say in terms,
there is no settlement in fact, AMI until
this IS made there will be Il constant men,
ace of discord. Nor can it be forgotten
that there is no recognition of the rule OF
international duty applicable to such
cases. This, too, is left unsettled.
While doing so little for us the treaty
makes ample provision for all known
claims on the British side. As these are
exclusively "inlividuaI' they are COM
pletely covered by the text, which has no
limitation or exception. Already II is au-
nounced III n'l1ngland that even those oil
confederate bondholders" are included.
have before me an En-; ;lish Journal which
describes the latter claims as f0unled on
"immensc quantities of cotton, worth al
the time Of their seizure nearly two shill-
ings a pound, which were then in the lc-
gal possession Of those bondholders; > and
the same authority adds, these claims
will be brought, inditierently with others,
before the designed joint commission
whenever it shah Sit" From another
quarter | learn that these bon1holders
are very sangane of success under The
treaty as it Is U3rded, and certain, it is that
the loan went up from 0 to 10 as soon az
il was ascertained that the treaty wa'
signed. doubt if the American people
are ready just now to provide for any
such claims. That they have risen in the
market is an argument against the treaty
THE CASE AGAINST ENGLAND. .
Passing from the treaty, come now tt
consider briefly, but with proper precision
the true ground of complaint; and here
again we shall see the constant inadequacy
Of the remedy now applied 1t Is witt
reluctance that | enter upon this state.
mcnt, and do it only in the discharge
Of duty which cannot be postponed.
Close upon the outbreak of our troubles
Just one month after the bombardment o
Fort Sumter, when the rebellion was still
undevelcped, when tie national govern
ment was beginning those gigantic efforts
which ended 50 triumphautly, the couutr,
was startled by the news that the Britisl
government had intervencd by a proclama
ton, which accorded balligerent rights #
the rebels. AT the early date when thl
was done the rebels were, asthey remain
ed to the close, without ships on the ocean
without prize courts Of other tribunals fo
the administration Of justice on the ocean
oithom any Of those conditions which ar
Tie essential prerequisites to such a con
cession and yet the concession was gener
al, being applicable to the ocean and tn
: lanl, so that by British fat they becam
! ocean bclligerenta as well as land bclligc
rents. In the swiltness of this bestowa
there was very little consideration for
friendly powcr nor does it appear tha
}. there was any inquiry into those cond
: iions-,recedent on which il must dcpenC
t Ocean belligercncy being "Eaci," an
: not ''principlc," can be recognized onl
S on evidence showing its actual eristeac
: according to the rule, first stated by NJ
0 Canning and afterwards recognized |