The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1871-05-21


summer and His BeIliserens Rights.
Mr.. Senator Sumner has delivered to
the Senate his objections 70 tho
great treaty. Like Lord John RUSSELL
be adheres to his original position
on the subject OF the Alabama claims, and il
the settlement Of this controversy were left to
these two men 1t could be settled only by war.
Oily few days ago Lord Russell in the
British Parliament strongly objected to tho
treaty because of the regret il expresses on tho
part of her Majesty's government for the
escape from British ports, under whatever cir
cumstances, of the Alabama and her confeds-
rate Anglo-rebel cruisers and for their depre-
dations upon our commerce; and because tbs
treaty proposes to settle these Alabama claims
on the basis of certain principles Of neutrality
laid down, which practically yield the whole
ground in dispute to the United States. These
concessions Lord John opposes as beneath the
dignity, the consistency and the principles Of
international law which justified his extraor-
binary course of neutrality toward US during
our late Southern rebellion. But IL Lord Rus
sell has stood still his successors in the
British government have made some advances
on this subject with the general ripening Of
British public opinion, and hence this joint
High Commission and the important British
concessions in this new treaty
So, on our side, if Mr.. Sumner on belllge.
rent rights, as applied to the Alabama claims,
adheres to his old argument on the Clarendon
johnson treaty, American public opinion has
since that day materially softsned down on
this question, and has become perfectly indif.
ferent to Mr.. Summers distractions, so that
we get the substance of our just demands
touching the depredations Of the Alabama and
her confederate cruisers, and the application
to these ships of our doctrines Of neutral obli~
cations. We agree With Mr.. Sumner, that in
point Of fact our insurgent States were not
entitled to the belligerent rights given them
by England; we agree with him as to the
costly consequences to the United States
of this recognition of the JEFF Davis rebel
usurpation by Lords Palmerston and Russell;
and yet, in point of law, President Lincoln, in
proolaiming his BLOCKADE" of the sesports Of
said insurgent States, recognized them himself
as bclligersnts; for nation on going to war
does not BLOCKADE" Its own seaports against
the enemy-it ''closes" them. Mr. Seward,
as President Lncoln's Secretary Of State,
endorsed his proclamation Of BLOCKADE"
and Mr.. Seward can hardly be accused Of not
knowing what he was doing in this endorse
ment. In any event we cannot hold England
responsible for our own mistakes in this bust
ness.
In abandoning this question Of rebel belG-
gerent rights as profitless in any further dis-
cussion, therefore, we cannot shut the door
to these British claims; and 80 Mr.. Summers
argument against them falls to the ground
The great treaty gains strength from its dis
cussion. We expect that within the next two
or three days it will be ratified by a very large
vote in the Senate, including some Of the lead.
ing democrats Of the body; and we expect
that, having defined his position, Mr.. SumneI
himself will vote for the ratification. We cam
not suppose that he will deliberately put him
self upon the record in the face of all the
weighty considerations which so strongly
recommend this great treaty to the United
States Senate and to all the people of the twu
great nations concerned