The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1872-02-14

| bamn Cioims-A Suggested compromise
ON Thirty Millions in Gold.
We submit to our readers this morning
very interesting despatch from special cor
respondent in London on the latest phase in
that quarter of our new difficulty with Eng
land on those exceedingly troublesome Ala
bama claims. Thus 1t appears that no Eng
lish government, in adhering to the Washing
ton Treaty as it now stands g. e., in ref
erence to the American case as submitted to
the Geneva Tribunal Of Arbitration) could
hold office for twenty-four hours that this is
absolutely certain, and cannot be too en-
phatically stated that should the psesent
government of Gladstone go out upon this
issue its successors, from the very nature of
the case, would be equally debarred from
recognition of our claims and that the oppor-
tunty for an accommodation may be lost IN
less some mutual understanding, modifying
the point of Indirect damages, shall be agreed
upon. furthermore, we are informed that
England, having heretofore definitely refused
the proposition for settlement in a Jumping
of our damages, she cannot very well advance
it now; but that the United States might re-
new if, according to the protocol of the Joint
High Commission of the Sih March last and that
settlement on this basis might be arranged.
Finally, we are assured that to settle this
business England will pay the highest sum in
gross suggested by the United States-viz.,
thirty millions Of dollars in gold.
Now, if the treaty were still an open ques-
ton this proposition Of thirty millions in gold
would doubtless be accepted by our govern
ment, in view of the great advantages to us,
to England and to all the world of complete
adjustment of all outstanding disputes be-
tween England apa. the United States, and the
establishment of relations of perfect friendship
between the two countries. But the treaty
has been ratified, signed, sealed and delivered,
and the United States, as in duty bound, has
undertaken to carry out its provisions in refer
ence to the fisheries, the navigation of the st.
Lawrence, the San Juan Island boundary dis
pute, certain British claims and these Ala
bama claims Our case on these claims, in
pursuance of the treaty, is submitted to the
arbrators provided, and the case of England
is also laid bfore this tribunal, and neither
party, with proper respect for the other side
or for ITSELF or for the chosen tribunal or for
the solemn obligations entered into, can ask
for the modification of the contestants case as
condition of submitting to the arbitration.
Upon what ground, then, is it that Her
Majesty's government advances this condition,
this utimatum, as it now appears to be,
against our case? Upon the ground that our
demands for consequential damages are unau-
thorized, extravagant, offensive, preposterous
and intolerable. But this is q judgment upon
them, and judgment belongs not to the plain
tiff or the defendant, but to the Court. But
are there not certain limitations laid down in
the treaty for the government of each party in
the submission of its case to the arbitrator?
No. The treaty provides for the settlement of
all existing differences between the two
countries, and for the submission on
our part, to the chosen arbitrators of
''all claims" direct and indirect, for losses
resulting from the depredations on our CON-
merce of the Alabama and other Anglo-rebel
confederate cruisers.
There is, in reality, no justification for this
demand from England for the modification of
our case. We suspect that the offence
involved does not lie in the claims submitted
for indirect and consequential damages, but
that it lies in the acts, the facts, the indict-
ment, specifications and testimony, and in the
scorchng and merciless argument establish
ing the perfidous character of Englands nell
trality and belligerent rights throughout the
war of our great rebellion. 1t is fearful
indictment from one great nation against
another in the processes of peace making. 1t
is case which reduces to milk and water the
case Of Bismarck against France, and to soft
complainings the heavy accusations and
COMBINATIONS of the Pope against the
sub-Alpne government" of Victor
Emmanuel It is case which ar
raigas the British government before
the bar of the civilized world, as guilty Of
systematic course of double-dealing, treachery
and false pretences, to an extent which digni-
fies the proclaimed pratical system of old
Algiers and the uncertain diplomacy of the
Chinese The British government, we there
fore suspect, has put on this face of injured
innocence and honest indignation in order to
neutralize, as far as possible, before the world,
the terrible indictment of the American case.
Well, the diplomatic propriety of making
up case for war in carrying out treaty OF
peace may be questioned bat we find no
interdict against this course in the treaty. The
American case is the work Of Mr.. j. G. Ban
croft Davis, Mr.. Fish's able Assistant Secre-
tary Of State and one Of the two secretaries
of the Joint High Commission, Lord Tender
den being the other. But this case is before
the Geneva Arbitrators as the case of Presi-