New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1871-10-06
3etr 0Fisat1s &ep,bit1au.
OFFICIAL JOURNAL OF the UNITED STATES
OFFICIAL JOURNAL OF new ORLEANS


0fFlC!Al JOURNAL Of NEW ORleAN
Condemns Cesess Leass.
ICousspsadsnce New York woriA.l
LONDON, September l6.-I have fror
time to time mentioned the fact that tn
holders of the cotton bonds. since the ratif
cation of tho treaty of Washington, hav
would be recognized by the arbitration
commission which il to meet in Washing
tom An influential committee has beef
formed here to watch over these claima
md . vOlumin0us correspondence ha
passed between this committee and tn
foreign Office. The amount Of these cott0
claims IL about five million Of pounds, o
twenty-five million of dOllars-double tn
sum, suppose, Of the Alabama claims
Granville refuses to put any Interpretation
on the articles Of the treaty of Washington
by which the bonjholders are governed
and writing on the subject q few days ag'
Mr.. Od0 Russell informed the committed
that II an directed by Earl Granville t.
state to You that his lOrdship can not Offel
any opinion or give any instructions re
.specting any particular class OF BRITISH
elaine; but that oil statements OF elaine
agent for claims at Washington, in accord
ance with the terms of the notifications Of
The tventv-seventh and thirtieth of June
win be submitted by him to the commits
sion."
Tho case of the bondholders 10 this: The
bondholders, after obtaining from Lord
Cairns and Mr.. Cotton, queens counsel
their opinions - to the Legality Of the loan
advanced their money at ninety per cent fol-
bonds for cotton 1T the rate of six pence per
pound six months after the expiration Of
tho war between the two belligerents, and
many bonds were 60 exchanged by those
who ran the blockade. The price 1t which
the b0ndholders advanced their money
viz, ninety per cent-is. 1t 10 oaid, . clear
proof that It was mercantile Transaction
based ON cotton, for the federal bonds were
mot shove sixty 1t the time During the
fulfilled their contract with the British
bondhelders, and consequently they had no
wrong to complain of. Between 1863, and
even up to March, 1865, the dividend was
paid on tho bonds. But six months after
the expiration of the war, when the time
.came 70 exchange them for cotton, the
Northern States seized on all tho public As
sets OF the Confederate States, especially
cotton, and compelled them to rspudiate
the debt contracted with British subjects.
The United States, neither Ut the time the
w. ~.S
ever gave notice that II victorious they
would rePudiate the debt. 1t u urged that
if either OF the beligerents had made known
that reputation OF debt was to be the
issue, neither would have been able to raise
money in Europe. Tho United States, after
the waE, seised tho assets OF the Southern
States, and also commenced actions for the
recovery Of property in this country, but
the English courts OF law have invariably
M that fhAV Obtain ho
assets subject to the Liabilities. The Con-
federate States assets In England we're
computed BY Mr.. Seward at twenty million
dollars, and the cotton seized and sold in
the United States and paid into the treasury
realised upward OF fifteen million dollars,
exclusive q what was burnt and destroyed.
In 1857 the cotton loan bondh0lders memo
rallied Lord Stanley ana stated their
wrongs, aod prayed that If any tribunal
claims between the Two countries theirs
should beimpartialy heard and adjudicated
on. Lord Stanley, Is minister for foreign
sftalFs, promieed that II any JOINT commits
sion were established It should be open to
the 6ondholders to submit their claims to
1t. Lord Clarendon promised the bond
holders the same thing, and the bondholders
believe that their claims were covered by
tho keverdy johnson treaty.
81 oAA 0SOAAsES SAe' Se.A4nSA 80SO 40 OuC
'of tho reasons f0r reJectng the treaty, that
the bonds were included in it. Lord Gran
vile promised the same - bis predecessors.
with respect 10 the washington treaty it
may be stated that the bondholders 80 re-
lied on tho promises OF the three secretaries
Of State that when her majesty's speech an
n0uncod that commission was TO be ap-
pointed for the settlement Of all claims, the
bonds rose from tive to ten and twelve.
The treaty Of Warrington was negotiated,
ally fell to five, when it was confidently
stated that claims of the bondholders were
excluded from the treaty. The committee
wrete to Lord Granville stating the ru-
mors, and requested to know how the bond
holders stood under the treaty. They were
referred to article twelve Ut treaty, which
1nits this claim to cases arising between
April, 1861, and April, 1865. The loan was
made IN 1865, and the assets were seized
and the loan repudiated after the ninth Of
vided that the commissioners shall then |
proceed to the investigation Of the claims
which shall be presented to them, but |
upon such evidence only a. shall be fur |
nished BY or on behalf Of their respective |
Bovornments." !
Such = the position of affairs in which |
he bondholders are placed, and they have |
aotefmneQ 70 nave their claims repre- |
.ented before the commission by the highest |
English or American counsel, but most |
probably tho latter.
But there is . certain provision in the |
'reaty which gives the bondholders much
l1xiety, and on which there exists con-
!ict OF opinion. Article twelve of the treaty
Units the claims to those arising out of acts
committed between thirteenth of April,
lSSl, and the ninth of April, 1865" Now,
ne most OF the wrongs complained of by