New-York tribune., 1872-02-14
THE ENGLISH PRESS ON THE ALABAMA
CLAIMS.

| THE ENGLISH PRESS ON THE ALABAMA
| CLAIMS.
THE LAW OF NATIONS PART OF THE COMMON
| LAW OF ENGLAND.
| From The London Morning Post ofJin a.
| Stated concisely, the gist of the argument
advanced on the part Of the United states is that the law
the made by the Royal Commission to
report the Neutrality laws were made with the view
the international obligations of England; " that
| the Foreign Enlistment act passed IN OF $50 8,
Phimore, in the case OF the INTERNATIONAL" TO have
been enable the conntry-that is to say
the Execuve-more easily 10 fulfill its international OBJ
legations the inference from all which being that as the
municipal law is simply decaratory Of the law of ma
ons the Tribunal may look and ought to look at an En-
gsh passed at the outbreak OF the recent war
Tna WeT e Sea
Great Britain during the American civil war OF 1s6l-66
eenfus and reflects no little credit those who
piled the American and it must also be admitted
apisoes ana or9 excusvey English Mansfield Hardwicke
| Holt, Talbot, Tenterden and Blackstone, are in
| is part Of the common law of England; and
dictum Of Lord stowell is cited to show
that while Act OF Parliament may affirm the law of
nations cannot contradict IL or dsadrm IL so as TO
F"Tean Ac Of n Was TO- enable
the British Government to discharge OBLIGATIONS already
mon law Of the realm that statute may be used far
goes for the purpose of defining the neutral duties
Great Britain, without prejudice. however. 10 still
further duties being shown to flow from the general
| canons OF international law.
II may be conceded that the law Of nations does form
part of the common law Of England-tat is TO say that
duties clearly defined by the former win be enforced
dctum cited from blackstone that the law of nations.
mpisGction ANY Is in England adopted in its fa extent
| 6y the common law OF the land" But in many
in such special enactment is necessary IN order TO
define particular Oenses and TO enable the Executive
in reference TO neutral Obligations International law,
composed il is of the established by the comfy
l,fn naftn lS.
tincepton imposes duties on the State In It's entirety
rather than on the individuals who compose II. Inter
national law affected to deal with the proceedings
of particular persons but simply required from state
family OF nations 1t should observe an Impartial attitude
between belgerents Beyond the jurisdiction of State
the conduct OF Its inhabitants was dealt with by inter
national law in the OF attempts TO run blockade
| This distinction should be wei Kept In mind in
lative enactments recitas of common law obiga
Commission on the Neutrality Laws, and the dictnm Of
! Sir r. Phnlmore in the case OF the "International,'
heIgerent States bound 10 be impartial and that
notifications of the previous Foreign Enlistment
| the Executive the better TO observe that Impair
tiaty. But It must not therefore, be presumed mat
ent With mpartiaity would amount to violation of in
w NSng t Whe san the be
neutrality than for the Sgsa5, citizens OF r non9egeT
of war, arms, ,eunpOwder, saltpeter, coal, &c but
would not be contended by the agents OF the the
perfectly legitimate for English citizens TO have sold any
articles 10 the Government OF the Southern Con
| federacy. II, however, the English Government
representing Great Britain, had acted similarly IN its po
tcal capacity the wOnd have been very different.
This test is conclusive, as showing that neutrality as
imposed by international law implies the neutrality of
Of the latter controlled by the then existing mun
cIai law.
WHY is NOT TIE BRITISH CASE PUBLISHED 7
from Tv Pdu MAI Gazette of Jaa. n.
The American Government has published its
case III tie Alabama dispute. That exceedingly clear,
simple wtargued document is in The hands not only Of
the more important English journals, for instance. Ac
eS and SoW we they he are ppoed But public
nothing OF the British We gather from the columns
Of The Times indeed that the editor Of that journal has
seen it, but he tells very little about It's contents
cept that case not simple or clear Is there any
ment alsoi OF course, If proprety or etiquette forbds
hardly suppose that any such difficulty now stands IN
the way Of our knowing what the Government Is doing
sa.e % se 1V why the case
should not be witbhei4 from public knowledge.
TIE ALABAMA CLAIMS SAID TO BE ORGANIZED
JOBBERY
From TIE rGn AGn 6.xep Of jan 26.
The American claims against England excite
more and more attention every day and We may safely
in dealing with those claims direct Will he taken
with the Government. Popular opinion is capable OF
drift it's full volume, is manifest already. To-day
however have intention Of discussing the
sion but there is one circumstance herewith con-
,ected which deserves SPECIAL notice We know
prone tO audacious organized iobbeTy too many
American Legislators and officers OF Stae-even among
the higher and more influential grades. Now il is
matter OF common rumOT that men OF this kind have
bought up the "AmercaD claims genercally known
Alabama CLAIMS, right aud left, FROM all that know
OF political life In the United States there nothing at
all Improbable In these repOrtsOD the contrary the
probability that they true But IL So theu may
lDier mat The American case s regarded as pretty
strong one the other side Of the Atlantic and that il
Lac become the interest OF certain number Of public
men TO support 1t TO the utmost.
ARBITRATION ON TRIAL-BAD FAITH ASCRIBED |
TO THE UNITED STATES.
, Jf'" The bonoh,shr Guardian Of Jan. "a
Az the present moment international aIbi- |
trat0n Is receiving at Geneva its first important trial
Tie issne Of tins tra ID assumed by Mr. Richard NJ p
aud hlS folOwels 10 be in no way doubtful with the
beautiful faith which all along supported them and
which cannot fail 10 command the admiration of |
al but the most cynical, they at once assume that
tie facts must obDgbRly tally with their own wishes
The suMcicncy OF the principle of international |
afbtratlOD, they inform has noby Illustrated
by the treaty Of WashDgtoD II would be acreeac IN
share tins prophetic assurance but the whole IL NAV
bacbed. II is useless 10 disguise the fact that the mon
sirous claims advanced by the United States have in
tome degree endangered the the enjng ne
poatiYDf Even should they, as cannot but believe
prove but windags which IL Will be the first care Of the
hrhifaoIs ~ PRICK, they yet furnish example Of m
fairness and attempted OvercacLng II not of aciual
bad 'Gltb 80 naRiaIt 10 constitute eyI
fO Tie Present negotiations and for the principle ON
which they rest Tbtse negotiations all Europe watch
with The utmost interest ana sbould They prove sue
cessiGl snoh an example Will assuredly not be wasted