The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1871-05-30


surrender. Like the conference of three
months ago, the commissioners net without
any foregone conclusion, but with q, result
which might be easily foreseen, as it was in
volved in the terms of their appointment.
There could be no objection to their concur
renee in prospective alteration of
international law. Times and circum-
stances have changed; and it may
perhaps be expediept to impose on neutrals
further restriction in their dealings with bel
hgerents. Many politicians hold that the pro-
hibition of the equipment of vessels which
may afterwards be armed as cruisers would
be highly valuable if England were seprinci-
pal in maritime war. 1t is agreed on all
hands that, according to the existing law, an
armed vessel fit for service cannot be law
fully allowed to issue from a neutral port;
and throughout the Alabama controversy the
English Government admitted, perhaps with
an excess of candor, that on sufficient evil
deace the ship might have been prevented
from leaving the Mersey. The subsequent
judgment of the Court of Exchequer threw a
doabt on the soundness of the opinions of
Lord Russells law advisers; but the Americans
may fairly rely in argument on the virtual
acknowledgment of the legitimacy Of their
protests. In his long correspondence with
Mr.. Adams Lord Russell clearly proved that
according to European and American prece-
dents the English Government was not re-
sponsible for the escape of the Alabama, but
it was impossible to fall back on position
which had been abandoned by his successors
at the Foreign Office.
The sting of the convention, apart from
considerations of national honor and self
respect, lies in the retrospective effect which
is given to the new provision Of international
law. There is much difference of opinion as
to the soundness of the policy embodied in
the Declaration of Paris; and it has been con-
tended that the maritime power of England is
diminished by the rule that free bottoms make
free goods; but it has never been alleged that
the declaration Involved any compromise of
national dignity. If the old rule had been
enforced during she Crimean war, demand
that enemyss goods captured in neu..
trail vessels should be restored
would have been summarily rejected.
The deliberate change of the, law
implied that the right of capture existed up
to the date of the declaration. 1t appears,
that the commissioners, having agreed on
certain proposition of law, have further pro-
vidsd that the Alabama question shall be de-
termined in conformity with the new enact
ment. 1t woald have been a simpler course
to state that the conduct of the English Gov
ernment in the Alabama case was q breach
of international law; bat the English
commissioners may be excused. for
preferring a form of expression
which partially wells the real character of
their decision. The machinery which they
have provided for determining the claims is
highly decorous, and even ornamental. Ii is
perhaps plaasanter to be fined by Court of
Kings and Presidents of Republics than by
vulgar board of arbitrators. 1t is not known
whether the Emperor CT Brazil can command
the services of accom- plished iurists among
his own subjects but there car be no doubt
that the Governments which have been Sc
lected to,give dignity TO the arrangements will
take cace that they are respectfully repre-
sented at Washington. A difficulty asising
from the possible refusal of the Hcnse of
Representatives to vote any money which
may be required may perhaps cause future
complications.
The ssoond convention is, properly made
| subject to the ratification of the Canadian
Parliament, as welaas of tho Imperial Gov
ernment but it may be supposed that Sir
John Macdonald represents the feeling and
| opinions of his fellow coloaists. In this case
also the Government of the United States
has succeeded in its main contention. Ameri-
cans are henceforth to be allowed an equal
right in the Canadian fsheries> and the in
habitants of the Dominion are on their side
admitted to q share in the fisheries in the
Northeastern States. As the reciprocal privi-
leges are confessedly of unequal value, the
American Governments is to pay to Canada G
sum to be determined by arbitration; and il
may be hoped that the Canadian Parliamsnt
will apply the amount in some form to the
benefit of the districts which are
Immediately interested in the fisheries
The dispute which is now to. bt
settled in favor of the Americans dates from
the close of the war of 1912, which had ter
minated the rights of fishing enjoyed before
the Revolution and preserved by the tyoaty Of
1888. In the late negotiations the Americans
have contended that their vested interest il
the fisheries was not mere matter of contract
but rather property analogous to tesritoria
ownership; but it seems clear that
covenant is merely a covenant, an(
and by the treaty of 1918, in.which the right o
fishing was conceded as part of an arrange
ment for commercial intercourse, the CLAIM
Of prior right was virtually abandoned. Al
the Canadians have borne with the interfer
ence of the American tisherRen during tht
greater part of the interval since the estab
lishment of the republic, there is N
reason to suppose that they will suffe
any intolerable hardship. The main
tenance of the exclusive right to the fishesie
might possibly have been useful as an equiva
lent to be conceded for some future CONNER
cial concession; but there can be no doub
that American legislotiOn is tending in tn
direction of free-trade, and that the forme
intercourse will be revived, not as an act O
liberality, but for the obvious benefit of tn
United States. The arrangements for set
tling the San Juan dispute, which has beef
revived by the American Government, ar
not yet known. An open arbitration woul
be the most satisfactory method of securing
in one instance at least, the interest an
honor of England.
J |