New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1872-02-05
THE TREATY FURRY IN LONDON.

Gays discussing Wltn great eHcIEy thc HihOii-
can Case recently presented before the Board
of Arbitration at Geneva. The Times declared
on Saturday that if our case is as reported
the British Government may at once give
notice at Washington that all efforts at ar
bitration may as well cease. Other journals
join uuhesitatingly in the suggestion that the
Government shall demand an immediate ex-
PLANTATION of the intention of the American
Cabinet. The Observer of yesterday states that
the British Government has sent dispatch to
Washington. Withdrawing from its agreement
to submit the Alabama claims to arbitration II
the liability of England for indirect dam
ages remain an open question. Punch
rs usual, when the interests of the national
cash-bo are concerned, comes into the fight,
and represents the typical plantation Yankee
blowing up into gigantic size his india rubber
counterpart with bellows labeled Presi-
"dential Election" while honest John Bull
passes by with a mortal terror selling his soul
and his pocket.
The excited and passionate tone in which
the English journals treat this question is
wholly unjustifablc The tribunal which is to
pass upon the matter between the two nations
is now IN session. There has been no indica-
ton that any doubt of the entire impartiality
of this tribunal exists i'll England or
here. There is no reason for believing
that Great Britain will not be treated
with perfect justice. Both the British
and American ArbitratOrs are men of pre-
eminent ability and fairness; men who will
demand no more and accept no less than JUS
tce. The representation of the three friendly
Of inf
ment. Both sides have named some OF their
best and most sagacous lawyers TO carry on the
discussion 1t is natural that on either side
they shall make the strongest statement OF
which the nature of the case will admit 1t is
not to be expected that because we are ami
cably disposed, and because England has ex-
pressed her regret for the escape of the Rebel
cruisers from her ports, that we have
therefore waived our claims for the resti-
tuition of our property robbed or destroyed.
1t is a childish error to suppose that the
Washington Treaty settled the questions at
issue. 1t only provided for means of set
Ting them, and the amount of damages to be
awarded to us by the Board of Arbitration is
matter to be decided by that Board and not
by the respective Governments, and still less
by the New-York and London newspapers.
The pretense that the American claim for
indirect damages is an after-thOught, or a
treacherous reputation of the protocol, is
utterly without foundation. The nature Of
our demands was clearly stated at the very
opening of the conferences at Washington.
Our Commissioners spoke of the extensive di-
rect losses we had sustained Gin the capture
"and destruction of large number of vessels,
with their cargOes, and in the heavy national
expenditures in the pursuit of the cruisers,
"and indirect injury in the transfer of large
"part of the American commercial marine
to the British flag in the enhanced
payments of insurance, in the prolOngatiOn
of the war, and in the addition of large sum
" to the cost of the war and the suppression
"of the Rebellion" They stated that the
amount of the direct loans to individuals
which had up to that time been presented
amounted to about $14,OOO,OOO, without in
terest, an amount liable to be raised by the
presentation of additional claims. They ex-
pressly said that, Gin the hope of an
"amicable settlement, no estimate was
"made of the indirect losses, without
prejudice, however. to the right of indemni-
"fcatiOn on their account in the event of no
"such settlement being made.' No such set
Element was made. The Commissioners of
the high contracting parties could come to no
agreement as to the degree and extent of
responsibility incurred by Great Britain
through the conduct of the Anglo
rebel cruisers. All that the Commission could
accomplish was to frame an arrangement for
the submission of these questions to an i'm
partial Board of Arbitration. with certain
fixed and definite principles of action,
and it was this arrangement, accepted
and ratified by the two Govern
ments by which the present Board was Gre
ated. Both sides have presented their cases.
The American statement puts as strongly and
clearly as possible the entire claim of the
United States for direct and indirect damages
sustained by our Government and people by
the action of the Government and
people of Great Britain during the
war The British case naturally reduces
their responsibility to a minimum. We have
no reason to apprehend any Partially, GER
tainly none to hope for any favor from the
Court. The excitement and perturbation of
the English press would seem to indicate that
our case as presented ia stronger and more
dangerous than they had supposed. But this
is no fault of ours.
1t is not probable that this outburst of talk
is b do any special harm. Its reasons are
manifold. What is called in London "the
"silly season. is now upon the town in all
ITS force. 1t is the time of eccentric and ire
sponsble discussion in newspapers The jour
nails of the opposition find the supposed con-
cessions of the Treaty convenient weapon
of offense against Mr.. Gladstone, and it is
possible that even the Government organs
have received an intimation that a certain
amount of violent clamOr against the Ameri-