Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1868-1875, 1869-05-25
THE ALABAMA QUESTION.


When the text of the Johnson
Stanley treaty, for the settlement 0
the Alabama claims, was first pub
hshed in England, nearly all th,
most influential journals of tina
country expressed the opinion tina
Lprdu Stanley had conceded too
Much. Objections were also made
to the vagueness Of some of Tho
provisions. But as an agreement
had been reached which il was sup
posed would lead to an amicable
adjust4ent of an exceedingly vexa-
aous question, they were content
TO waive all further criticism. The
confident assurances of Mr.. Reverdy
Johnson that the treaty would prove
acceptable To the people Of the
United States, led them 10 believe
that it would meet with no opposi-
Ron in the Senate, especially as all
the points insisted upon by Secre-
tary Seward had been conceded. lis
prompt rejection startled, but can
not he said TO have offended them.
1t seems still TO have been very gen
orally thought, that with some
slight notifications, the treaty
would be sanctioned and the honor
Of the adjustment transferred to the
new administration. Itwas reserved
for Messrs. Sumner and Chan
dler, by their species in executive
session, says the Baltimore Gazette,
to Ayaken England to a sense Of
the extent of the claims set up, and
to bring into common accord the
English journals of every shade of
Political opinion. Liberals, Radi-
Gals, and Conservatives, all concur,
with unusual unanimity, in scouting
the idea of sentimental damages.
The legal question of responsibility
for the damages inflicted by the
Alabama they say that England is
quite willing TO have adjudicated,
and to submit frankly to the award
of the commissioners. Further
than this, they assert she will not
go; nor will she allow any question
to be raised, which touches her
honor, or consent to apologize as
well as TO pay. They scorn to en-
terrain any proposition looking to
the cession of Canada. Such are
the utterances Of the English jour
mails, and such appears to be the
fixed determination of the people
of England.
And now, what have the Radicals
gained by the rejection of the
treaty. They have set up pre-
posterous claims to indemnity
which they know that England will
never allow. They have turned the
whole tide of public opinion in that
country against them. They have
utterly Disguised even their own
friends, and in the midst of the
storm of indignation they have
evoked, they change their tactics
from menace to procrastination by
sending Mr.. Motley to England
practically without instructions, and
thus keep the question open until
something shall turn up. OF course
Lord Clarendon, who is again at the
head Of Foreign Affairs, will make
no new advances for a settlement,
and, under the circumstances, he IS
preclnded by his own previous &C
ton, and by the larger concessions
made by Lord Stanley, from allows
ing any material modification
Of the terms of the treaty as
agreed upon between the latter and
Mr.. Reverdy johnson. In thus
bringing matters 70 dead lock,
what DO the Radicals expect TO
gain Z 1t seems clear that England
viii yield nothing to the sentimental
sOphisms of Sumner, OF TO the true
ulence of Chandler. 1t seems
equally clear that any demand upon
her which includes "a frank apol.
ogy, and an expression of regret
either for the course she pursued,
or for the earnest sympathy felt and
avowed by portion of her people
for the Southerners in their struggle
for independence-will meet with
prompt refusal. Ii is inconceivable
to the English mind that private
sympathies should be made the
1asis of new charges against, and
rev claims upon the government
The Pal Nal Gazette (London)
says:
"The sum total of our offending
is, that a portion of our people sym,
pathized with n portion Of the
American people. Neither more
nor less. Did the Lancashire opera
tiyes, the impoverished Liverpool
merchants, ruined Manchestel
manufacturers, express any sympa
thy with the shareholders or any
hostility towards to the North
Did either house Of Parliament
Did any cabinet or government
official of either political party
Cany any single action or declara'
ton of the administration, any sin
gle dispatch of Secretary of State
any vote of either Lords or Com
mons, be pointed to as expressing
unfriendliness to the United States
or anything except grief and pair
at the unnatural civil strife2 Di,
our House of Commons ever max,
the faintest approach in this resDec