New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1869-02-03

to enforce for tho benefit Of America, on the
ground that they surpassed the bounds OF In
ternational Obligation. Let there be mutu-
ality of treatment based not upon the rejected
policy of Washington, as declared IN the IN
structions of Hamilton, but upon the modern
British policy exhibited in the parliamentary
and judicial arguments Of the supporters OF the
Government and by the persistent course OF
Lord John Russell in demanding, in regard TO
Laird's iron-clads proof sufficient to convict
instead Of prima fdcie evidence adequate TO
detain them-baclled as it was by delays, neg
Ggence, and official treachery. And it may
chance that, so soon rs England becomes bel
ligerent, her commerce may vanish from inc
seas as suddenly as did that of the United
States.
The merchants and the Government of En-
gland are not insensible to the danger when
threatens them from their own ill-advised pre-
cedents; and it is England and not America
that is pressing for a settlement or the Alabama
claims. How constant and profound is their
anxiety to unsettle the Alabama precedent may
be seen in the changing tone OF their diplo-
matte correspondence, from the curt refusal OF
Earl Russell to submit the matter to arbltra-
ton, when first proposed by Mr.. Adams, to the
offer of Lord Stanley so to submit 1T, and the
frank assurance given by Lord Clarendon to
Sir Frederick Bruce at Washington in regard
TO an amendment of the International Code OF
both nations, that he could not "exaggerate the
"importance attached to it by Her Majesty's
Government" Indeed, the liability of En-
gland for the depredatiOns of the Alabama was
virtually admitted both by the Government
g I'm rutil Ravprdy
Johnson-misled, perhaps uncOnsciously, by
Laird, and Roebuck, and Wharncllffe-walVed
the admission Of liability, and agreed to leave
that question to an umpire chosen by lot, and
if he should prove favorable to America, then
allow England to withdraw it from his decision
and gain one more chance OF escape by
referring it to some friendly sovereign"
However excellent may have been Mr.. X.
Johnson's intentions, however aniable and
sincere his desire to restore the friendship
of the two nations and to avoid the danger or
future collisions, it would have been difficult to
have invented protocol less calculated to effect
these objects
Upon the grave questions of international
neutrality involved in the dispute, the Treaty
is silent. 1t proposes to settle our claims by
the decision of an umpire chosen by lot
but such a decision decides no principle,
and would leave America with her strict views,
and England with her looser code, without any
mutual agreement for the avoidance of the
future difficulties which are certain to arise,
unless the United States, thoroughly satisfied
with the reparation offered by England, cor
daily unites with her in revising 1.-THE neutral
code on a fair basis of equality. 1t is idle to
suppose that America will continue to practice
for the benefit Of England the strict principles
which England rejects, or that some OF her cltl-
zens will fail, when the occasion arrives, to
remember the precedent set by England in her
treatment of us, unless these precedents are for
ever disposed of by their frank reputation on
the part of the English Government, and
satisfactory reparation for the damage which
they caused TO American merchants.