The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1869-07-03
TIE ALABAMA CLAIMS.
Reverdy Sohnson ON the Beihserent htge's
Observation-Disclosures 10 MIR. .Johnson-tn-
published Care spondencc on The Question.

observation-disclosures 10 mr. JoInson-th-
published Correspondence on ti'e Question.
WASHINGTON, July 2, 1863.
The following letter rrom Reverdy johnson so Mr.
Seward forming a part CT the correspondence on
the Alabama claims, has never been published. A
few weeks ago a garblei extract nom it, supposed
TO have been furnished by Senatoi sumner, ap-
peared IN the Washington column u q New York
paper. That extract was intended 80 answer y GER
tain purpose, TO wit. 10 show mat Is late as last
February Reverdy Johnson held tile same views
concerning the recognition Of the oeIgerent rights
of the rebels by Great Britain IN connection with the
Alabama claims az were advanced b' senator sum-
ner IL w be seen, however, that the letter, taken
as whole. does not sustain this assumption On the
contrary. Mr.. Johnson rdcules the idea OF holding
Great Britain to account for recognizing the rebels
as belgerents, and shows that ground TO be untena
Bile In law as well as IN reason. The letter was com
muncated TO the Senate, in confidence, on the Sd OF
March, by President Johnson, with some other cor
respondence on the same subject, but for some
reason ths was printed separately
MR.. JOHNSON TO MR. SEWARD
LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES
LONDON, Feb. II, ls6g.
SiR--The negotiations which resulted In the pro
toeoi on the subject OF naturalization oil the
9th OF October last, aud In the convention
OF the l4th Of January last for the settle, Tie
POSSESSIONS Of tue United States and those Of
her Majesty's government provided for by The first
article Of the treaty between the two countries OF
the 10Th of June lSA6 and the convention in re.
latlon to the claims, including Tie class known as
the Alabama Gains, OF the same nth Of January,
were conducted by Lords Stanley and Clarendon
anu myself in personal interviews. deem IL, there
fore, proper TO state The motives which nave IN
nuenced me In relation To these several subjects ana
the grounds upon which am satisfied that the ar
rangements are perfectly satisfactory and embrace
all that our government has heretofore desired or
can obtain. Two OF the matters IN controversy
wneD | accepted the mission had been OF long
duration. The first OF them. involving the
Engsa co nUfr nnI nnaer pv be-
renowned by any native subject OF TINS government,
was coeval with the beginning OF our government
and from that period until me signature OF the
protocol reIerred to uniformly acteu upon ny The
political aud judicial departments OF Great Britain.
Tne second, what Is called the san Juan boundary,
Great Britain has uniformly maintained gave TO her
that island ana all bng west OF IT, Our construc-
ton OF the treaty Of 1910 gives the island Of san Juan
and all west, with the exception OF Nancouvers
Island and few dminutive islands in its immediate
viclnlty TO the United States. This dispute more
tnan once threatened TO involve the two naions IN
war. a calamity winch was only averted by an
agreement made In March, 1850, To mold
san Juan. in joint occupancy; The third
involves still more serious difficulties. From the
date OF the ratification OF the treaty OF the Sth oil
February 1868, up TO the commencement or our Iate
civ war Claims were made against e.aef govern gov "a
wrongs alleged TO have been committed upon tnem
respectively. During thar war these claims have
greatly increased. This government insisted tnat
the property of their subjects had been seized 10y tue
miitary and naval authorities OF the United States
IN vocation OF the law Of nations Tor when me
the other hand the United states complained
that this government had caused the de-
struction Of the property Of their citizens
upon the ocean by premature and unau-
tberized recognition of belligerent rights to the
Insurgents, as also by not preventing ~ tney mght
their neutral obligations by the subjects OF her Ma
)esty in the fitting out OF armed vessels TO cruise
with known hostile intent against the commercial
marine of the United States, and by suffering such
vessels afterwards, from time to time, to come INTO
and OBTAIN supplies in her colonial ports. NY spe-
troversies. When arrived III this country her
MAJESTY q visit TO the Continent, attended ny
her then Secretary for Foreign Affairs Lord stan
| ley They did not return until September, and my
nrst interview with Lord Stanley was on the 10th OF
esv an on e S ~ the same month";
| In the interval between my arrival IN
London, on the 17th OF August, and the above
opinion OF tins government was upon either OF THESE
controversies. only knew that the doctrine OF ma.
tive allegiance had always been asserted and actei
upon by their courts III every case where the ques-
ton was presented the trial OF cases growing out
| OF the disturbances in ireland. l also only hnew
tnat this government had uniformly denied Its re-
sponsibty for the losses sustained by our citizens
from the pratica acts OF the cruisers referred TO-,
| and that this determination was 80 decided q ona
that Lord RUSSELL when at the head OF the Foreign
once had refused even to agree to submit the ques-
ton TO any arbitration whatever. In despatch
August 1866 he states that her Maesty's govern
ment s'deciiDes either to make repalation and COM
pensation for the captures made by the Alabama or
| 10 refer the question TO any foreign state"
/ further knew that Lord Stanley, although wllilng
TO submit 10 arbitration the question OF responsibility
arising IRON the alleged absence OF proper digence
IN preventing the sailing Of the Alapa!na and 9sAar
vessels positively refused to submit the question:
! which our government deemed important, whether
| TINS government mad not preniaturely and contrary
to International law recognized the insurgents as
behgerents. In this state OF things deemed IL I'M
| portant TO ascertain what the public sentiment OF
| nfry
with view 50 have that sentiment as favorable to
their amicabe adjustment as we could wish, TO cu-
the frendy feelings OF her Msjesty's subjects. From
| the nature OF this government the opinion Of the
| country on every important point OF policy or
duty Is sure IN the end to be not only persuasive
but controlling, aud although the oplnlons Of her
Maesty's government renamed as they had been,
believed that should they dnd the sentiment of tho
country TO be decidedly In favor OF such amicabie
| adjustment as our government desired they would
cAeerlully agree TO IL. la order to obtain clear
| manifestation OF the public opinion on the subject
| OF the Alabama claims III answering an address
| made to me by large association Of influential men
| AT sheffield, on the 4th of September sald:-
If either wrongs he other, suffers The other to be
tate convinced OF the error 10 redress he
dence in the enlightened judo men. OF your and
its love Of justice and have ike confidence Ia own tha
convinced II either commits such wrong win,
satisfied Of IT, confess and DO whatever may be necessary
/ TO redress II.
/ That answer was not only received approvingly
Il
| was published with appreciation by almost the en-
! tire press OF the country. When therefore, com
| menced my negotiations with Lord Stanley had
tue strongest hopes Of being able to settle 18th him
! all the matters In controversy between the two
countries and this hope became an ar our
FIRST interview, as found him ~ anxious for theii
settlement as ! was IA directed by your instruc-
tons, / addressed myself first IT, the question oil
! naturalization. The English doctrine SO wholly
unfUunded In reason that has Lordship did not hest
tate TO abandon u. Growing out OF leuda policy
| It unsuited to the rights OF lree people, II
| assumes that allegiance - due 80 the
| SOIL upon which a man Is born. it makes
biB therefore, political seH and denies
10 hm the power 80 change for The better his coDdi
! uon. No Tree people can consent to such doc
tFiHe, and Notwithstanding the un1orm decisions Of
her Najesty's courts, n0ary with age and never ioi
a moment questioned by any judicial decision, even
up 70 tue moinentEWNep our protocol was signed, II
fell at before the light OF British and American
freedom. A Will be seeG the protocol Is more
prehensve than the tIsaties concluded on the same
| point with the North German Cor sdlration and
other continental states. These later are subject 10
, restrictions ana qualifications that are not 10 be
found iD the former, IN that the American principle
| Is recognized pure and simple Whenever subject
OF her Majesty becomes naturaIze1 under any exist
ing Jaw OF the United states hs rights are identical
with those which belong 10 native citizen. His re-