The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1871-06-25
Before the Lords.

Before the Lords.
On Monday, the 18th tinst the treaty with the
United States was brought up before the House
Of Lords. About five O'Clock the Lord Chancellor
took his seat the woolsack, ana the business Of
the session was opened by Earl RUSSELL
Earl RUSSELL moved 'rThat humble address be
presented to her Majesty praying that her Majesty
viii DC pleased not TO sanction TO ratify any con-
wnicn her Majesty Will approve OF any conditions,
terms or rules by which the arbitrator or arbitra-
tors win be bound other than the law Of nations
and the municipal Law Of the United Kingdom
existing and In force at The period OF the
late civil war In the United States. wnen
the alleged depredatlOns took place." HE
agreeable task he had ielt 1t ms duty TO undertake,
he tho ght 1t his most convenient course To state
hrst She points on which he made no objection to
the recent treaty. He found no fault with the choice
OF the commissioners TO wnon the DUTY OF nego-
taxing the treaty was entrusted, nor did he OBJECT
70 the selection OF alDltraLors winch they they had
made. What he ald object 10 was that certain
ruIes-some or which departing widely from the
law Of natlOns-should have been laid down FOR the
assessment OF damages on account Of the Alabama
claims, and that these should have been retro.
spectve, so tnat the country would be liable to
made in 1870 with respect 70 o transaction which
occurred In 1852. This was
A GROSS DEPARTURE
from all the rules which nego iatlOn5 had hitherto
been conducted; aud II was all the more objection
able because IL was distinctly set forth In the treaty
that these rules were not consistent with the law OF
nations WHAT humiliation II was tnat we should
submit TO pay FOR property and make COMPENSATION
ting, were not 0nenccs against the law Of nations
when they TOOK place; nor was he any the more
reconcned 10 these rules because 1t was said that
they agreed To III order to strengthen the bonds
OF alliance between her Majesty aud the United
States. He begged their lordshlps 70 consider to
whaG an extent position Of this kmd might carry
us In future negotiations. There was really great
Irritation the part Of the Germans account OF
the export OF arms from England to France; but
the LOrc Chancellor,
TAKING MS STAND ON INTERNATIONAL LAW
declared that he ready take the responsibility
OF defending our acts. But how could we now
MAINTAIN that position tine Germans were to press
for cUmpeis ltOn IN respect OF those shipments Of
cOntraDandp II we declared that they were NOT
trAry to the International law Count Bismarck could
wed reoln that we might admit the German view OF
the law on that point as we had done the United
States view OF international law In regard to the
Alabama claims 1t said tnat we acceded TO
these retrospective rules In order to strengthen the
bonds OF amity and alliance with the United States.
But had We no bonds OF alliance and amity with
Germany So lar was that from being the case that
there was no country In the world with which 1t was
friendship tnan with Germany. At all events, could
the Foreign Secretary decline to pay damages for the
@ nn arms 70 t on ne ,nat we
alliance with Germanyf The truth was that these
articles in regard to the Alabama claims showed mat
we meant to pay
TRIBUTE TO BUY PEACE,
course than which none could be more disastrous
to nation. The 0ne-slded character OF the treaty
was further shown by the fact that while 1t provided
tor compensation being paid fo- damage done by
CIVIL war, it made no such provision for similar
compensation In respect OF the injury inflicted upon
States. And the same thing was still further demon
strated by the circumstance tnat nothing was done
Reciprocity Treaty, which was equally advantageous
to England, 10 the British colonies IN America and
by the Government Of Washington during the irrta
ton against in the course Of the civil war; merely
because was aGvapageous 70 US a. We as 70 the
ever, showed that there had been nothing but asser
ti0n the part Of the United States Commissioners
and concession on the part Of ours
WITH REGARD CLAIMS
IN respect Of The damage done by the Alabama and
sminont American authority that no naIlon : was
called upon ~ prevent the departure OF any vessel
Biz that was e%poysa against endy Power
The same statement OF the law had been made by
Cmei Baron Pollock n charging she jury mt IN me case
certainly most extraordinary that we should assent
to rule declaratory OF International law which lett
to be employed against friendly Power. 1t was
impossible to say how far our liability might
he extended under such rule. Let him Illus
Tate TINS by another case. There was another
Confederate cruiser, the Sea King, which sailed
pectlng aught Of her real character. she sailed
nominaily for Bombay, but really Tor the Azores,
after she had left England both ne and the United
States Minister Mr. Adams, received Information
to be employed. Before that time, however, no one
had suspected her destination, and yet the govern
nv WHOM Ha this Country would be made liable for the
depredatiOns committed py her because subsequent
events have shown that she was meant 70 cruise s
would submit the question OF our liability to the de-
cision Of an arbitrator who should be bound TO
assess liability either by the rules OF continental
law or by our own Foreign Enlistment act, there
would no doubt have been perfectly fair traaiy
Ing q large sum by way OF damages for the depreda-
lions OF the Alabama. but 1t would have been
far from involving any dishonorable concession on
our part. What however, we had done was hing
for which Mr.. Adams never asked; we had allowed
Saa nsreea 70 s s%nd
then referred at some length to the facts connected
THE DEPARTURE OF THE ALABAMA.
c0ntendng that there was no negligence on the part
Of the angsn q tnst aay tnat me- as
ing hereafter he obtained sufficient evidence OF her real
character; and that he was Therefore not answera,
commerce. In support OF that contention he quoted
speech made by Sir Roundell Palmer. which Lord
Palmerston remarked had shown that we
had done an that could be expected from US;
and In connection with this point the noble earl
observed that he had always considered Lord
PalmersIon the greatest living authority on matters
OF foreign policy that ne had constantly deferred to
his despatcnes when Foreign Secretary, and that,
IN fact many Of the dispatches which he had signed
written en- py his noble fEend He then cited the au-
thority Of the Earl Of Derby OF the Earl Of Claren
tnat in our conduct with regard to the Alabama we
fulfilled all the obligations imposed upon US by In
SrouHns aaans ns conduct by NJ Fss IN
despatch the reply to which that gentleman refused
to lay before the Senate the noble Earl said that the
course winch we had taken would not tend To
strengthen or improve the law OF neutrality.
BY CONCESSIONS
which would make us liable for depredati0ns com.
mittcd by ships whose character We might have no
means Of ascertaning, and which WAS IN fact, M
suspected when they left our shores, We should
make no friends. The merchants Of New York
would respect this country in proportion to the
spirit which we showed. The la:e Mr.. Drummond
said that some centuries ago the world was ruled by
one wOrd-credO-and that IL was now ruled by
anether-credit. Nor did ne donbt that satisfaction
would DC expressed III some quarters at the conclu.
sion of the treaty, because the English funds and
the American bonds had since risen. But for his
own part he could not assent to that mode OF esti.
mating the character OF the treaty. lie thought It
the duly OF her Majcsty's government to maintain
the honor the character and the reputation Of the
country. and IL with view to these objects that
he moved the address which he now begged leave
TO lay before them.
GRANvILLE's REGRETs.
Earl Granville said that 1t was OF othe greatest I'm.