The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1872-02-22

which, having in the words OF one OF their own
and navIes that cannot swim, has now tried its
hand with treaties which will not stand.
MIR. GIadsiexe's speech.
Mr.. GLADSTONE in reply, said, I would now, SIR
refer to the rather numerous points raised by the
various gentlemen wno have addressed the House
with respect 70 as gsS iren WIN
for Denblghshlre, l cannot but think he was
somewhat rapid In the dennite conclusion he
pronounced. l know not what amount Of study
be has bestowed upon the whole OF the documents
connected with tins case. His critlscsm IL confined
say that. In his opinion, the British Commissioners
which, IN my view means simply the British gov
very worst fault short OF positive bad laith they
could have committeu-namely, crGssa negltgentiG;
resource but as It were, to 90 down on your knees
and plead your good intentions, but nothing else,
party to relieve you from Inc consequences OF tine
gross error which. without excuse, you have COM
m mi wish my honorable friend mad reserved
MS Judgment little until he had heard the argu-
ments IN the case, because. you will observe.
THE ARGUMENT OF HER MAJEsrY's GOVERNMENT
has not been heard. dad not attempt 10 enter into
1t last night. SIMPLY stated the propositions that
we should endeavor 20 prove and winch It would
enter on. The honorable member Tor Wnliehaven
has put TO me several points To which viii give
him TO remark that the American government has
claimed interest at q mnImum rate OF seven per
losses and that TINS interest," at per cent Is to
be computed from the LIST OF July, 1868; and he asks
how comes 1t that there is no stipulation to allow
claims for interest but. on the contrary, an eXclu-
respect to British claims and all claims that are
now being tried a. washington. The honorable
ton OF the treaty as to point which nave nad no
opportunity OF considering with the best authority,
anu therefore the answer give must be taken Tor
AS READ THE ARTICLE OF THE TREATY
II Is that no interest snail oe paid from the tune OF
presenting the claims. but That 1t does not at all
touch the question OF the discretion oil the parties 70
include interest IN the claims they make, or that Of
The discretion Of the Commissioners 10 allow 1t II
they THINK right. Ii that be so II is mere execu-
tory provision, and one that does not now require
member expressed his regret that there s0as no
,eserratton or TIE right o. ne House Of Commons
or mat ,could De hiatt he obligations or he neaiv
that remark am bound to say, first OF ali, that
tnlnk the issue would pc pretty much the same
ever it might be- it would be very much the same
whether the reservation had been made IN the
should be Withheld 1ader The treaty as it now is
THE AMERICAN GOVERNMENT ARE PERFECTLY
that we depend upon the discretion OF this House In
respect TO the payment OF The money; they nave
shown disposition to trust TO that discretion and
IN that beeve they are perfectly right. Although
the honorable msmDer was quite correct In saying
that the House OF Commons Is the body which really
has the power Of giving ultimate ehectto this treaty
In case the decision OF the arDitratOrs should DE-
what hope 1t may not be-to mud US Liable to any
be borne In mind that have proceeded Oh the lull
and perfect knowledge That This question VI arbi-
had This advantage. that apart from the SUBJECT OF
the wording OF the treaty-which Is one OF vast I'm
OF the treaty, as 10 the principle OF reference Of
these claims to aroltratl0n we assumed and mad
SION OF tn judgment OF Paramsn because this
was mol an unadvsed act or the sole act or the
been concluded by this country very SUBJECT
and on the very same basis; ana the DISCUSSIONS IN
to know III that the couniry approveI Inc general
principle OF reference OF these unfortunate dlf1cr
ences 10 Impartial arDltratlon The honorable gen.
THE HOUSE OF COMMONS WAS KEPT IN THE DARK,
and that ne understood the whole OF the labors OF
Inc prol0cOst5 had been given by the American |
dipomatists to the American Legislature. believe
they nave been given to the American Legislature
and also to the British Parliament, ana am at q |
loss TO know how. up to the present. moment, the |
American Legislature can have been in possession |
OF luller Information than the Legislature OF this
country. 1 am afraid, from the honorable MEMBERS
next ooservauon that he has not earned what is
the having MADE tie best possible use OF
what information ne has had; for DOUBT from his
statement whether IN perfect possession OF the
meaning or the protocols which he has In his hands,
lie said ne had hedrd Nth great astontshnseat my
statement last NIGHT that had undertaken to refer
to arbitration the question Diether should
held liable Tor the cost OF that portion OF The United
States Many ,chtch toas employed In chasing these
cruisers. / dare say many gentlemen heard rnat
statement with astOnishment, and l am very de-
srous or bringing It home to their minds; but that
engagement was the lace OF the treaty and placed
WITHIN the knowledge OF Parliament during the last
session. II the honorable gentleman Will refer TO
the eighth page OF the papers marked o. 348, and
containing the protocols OF the negotiators Of the
Treaty Of Washington, ne Will nnd that statement
was submitted BY the American Commissioners to
the effect that they mad sustained
CERTAIN DIRECT AND ALSO CERTAIN INDIRECT
He will find in these direct losses they include,
first, the capture and destruction OF q large num-
national ex penditure Incurred In pursuit OF these
cruserA He will then ind that they recired the
losses In the hope Of an amicable settlements. But
with regard to direct losses there was no waiver
whatever. There mad been no protest made on our
part and. therefore, whether we think It convenient
or observation-disclosures, OF course, ON this sub
sna a be axle as an a wno as
case-yet tins, think, Is fair part OF the matter
70 refer, and one which take II by the treaty and
the protocols together we are bound to allow to be
referred.
THE BUNGLINa BUSINESS.
Regarding what tho member for waterford re.
Marked he sald:-Thls treaty has been bungllng
business and thought he added-thOugh I hope /
mentn
Mr.. BERNAL OsBoRNs-I said 1t was bungling
business c'hear hear ana laugh.) PROBABLY
The garden OF my honorable friends mind Is far
richer IN flowers than mine but ne says there Is
biymty and more than ambiguity in TINS treaty, and
mat the American COMMISSIONERS on the SIN oil March
these indirect claims would he put In. Now, wish
TO keep dstinct IN our discussions here two different
guestlons-tne one OF them OF vast and overwnelm-
or great importance, but OF importance as between
Parliament and the existing administration neither
there be ambiguity IN TINS document or not Is q
question worthy OF the most careful attention, with
view to consider che conduct of the government;
but must take objection to q statement or my
honorable TREAD (Mr. OsDOrne) that It injurious
to the interests OF this country. Wheg IS stated
IN tbs House s'taH certainty not 90 sotth0ut
trddtctfon that on the 6h or March the american
Commissioners Informed The British Commission.
and government mat these indirect CLAIMS fDOuld
be put ia. 1 say they informed them OF the direct
contrary. They informed them that the American
government mad incurred
HEAVY INDIRECT INJURY
equivalent, 1t may. ne, to Indirect losses to them;
and IN the hope OF an amicable settlement no est
mate was maze OF those indirect losses; without
preJudlce however, to the right TO decentralization
on Their account III the event Of no SUCH settlement
being made. Now there was here distinct reser-
walton OF right There Is another clause. That Is