New-York tribune., 1872-02-27
DEBATE IN TIE HOUSE OF LORDS.


diydua was the Prime Minister.
DEBATE IN THE HOUSE OF LORDS
THE QUESTION OF THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE
UNITED STATES FOR THE ACTS OF THE
soUTH-sPEECHEs BY LORD GRANVILLE AND
OTHERS.
In the British House Of Lords, on the 18th
inst Lord Redesdae asked the Secretary for Foreign
Affairs questions whether, II A and In partnership sue
in court Of law for Injury dono TO their firm by fraud
OF otherwise and pleads and proves that was acting
with him In oil the matters complained OF,
such plea would not be complete answer to
the suit, and render any recovery Of damages
impossblei Why plea which Is good In law,
and which common sense prOnounoes 10 be Just, has
not been considered by Her Maesty's Government ap-
pllcabe to ease in international law, and urged
against the Alabama claims made on Great Britain by
the United States OF America, In which the NOrtn anu
south are now partners nasmuch as all the acts for
which Great Britain is charged with being cupaby re-
sponsibe done by the South, and that partner
Joins IN the application to he paid for having done
themi Lord Redesdae said he had put a similar
question TO the noble earl on two occasions last year,
and the first OF those occasions the noble
| that he not aware whether the point nad been
previously raised, but certainly it had not been ar
gucd by the legal advisers Of either the present Govern
the late Lord Rcdcsdae said i appeared to
him that from the moment the North and tho o0uln con-
cluded their differences 1t was an error 10 admit lot
that the Uulted States could claim damages for
anything done by the Southern States or IN the interest
of the Southern States during the hOses by uniting
Southern States after they been recOgnleu
| as belhgerents the Northern States had con
| doned any oAense Of which the former might have
been gnilty He believed the only answer to this was
what must be called technical one it was that the
North and the South were not partners the Whoe OF inc
the case now, certainly it not the case while the
war was going on, and when the south was aoknowl-
which the American Government seemed TO wish TO
forget themselves and make others forget also Last
would have stood IL the result OF the had been
different, and the Southern States had seeded Under
such circumstances England would have had right 10
from the South any damages whlch mght nave
been paid to tine North He thought the question he hau
yentured TO raise well worthy OF consideration, be-
cause England had to deal with case which was entire
! y IN international law. Whatever the technical an
swer might be- he held that what had been the Northern
| States and the Southern were practically part
ners and that they could not Justly ask compensation
for acts by OF the partners in that parpers
behalf before e present partnership OF course he did
admit that uner any circumstances the Government
of the United States had cause OF complaint against
England but he though that the reasons he Dad adduccd
apreminary objection to any such demand US that
| which it had put forward.
Eah Granville replied: During the debate last week
! on the Address unanimous feeling seemed to DO
entertained on both sides OF the House that it would
be better not to discuss tho Alabama claims In the
present state OF the negotiations the subject. But
| I do MT think that unanimous feeling applies TO
the point brought under your L0rGships' notice by
the noble lord this evening IN repeating gnsstiEns IONS
noble lord WILL however IT, on the part Of Her
do not answer questions on EnGish law put IN IN Ia, a
| hypothetical case. IA langhl when the h9Dle
that that i1' in the ~ orisnsi case those who prepared
| 1t confined themselves TO statement or the facts
spsc % reSsrvjnS aTcnment, for another OCCASION In
with the promise made the noble lord last
under the consideration those whose duty Is to ad
vie on the arguments to be used on behalf OF Her
| me 10 go further on this OCCASION Hear, hear.l
Lord Oranmoro and Browne rose ask tho Secretary
OF state for Foreign ARrs whether he would object to
give earlier publicity to documents and correspondence
tomhing the Washington Treaty. 80 as to allow the Brit
ish public enjoy the advantages as are accorded
| TO the public OF the United States by their Gov
ernhIent, and also 10 call attention TO the present
| OraninOre did not SEQ why their lordships House
should be the only place in which the ne topic topic
House OF Parliament and IN the press There might be
@ why the SI tna M ro9i b
Treaty was inadYisabie and that recent events had
tested against it that House would have raised Itself in
public estimation and the Premier could not have said,
| against tho Treaty.
Earl Granville said: Tie noble lord has stated that
understand why there should have been unan'
imous agreement in this House not to discuss the sub
ject Of the Alabama claims and the Treaty Of Washing
ton at the present moment. I will not make the re-
ply to the noble lord which Lord PamerstOn
oLco made to member OF the otLer MSuse ;s,
| similar to that which tho noble lord has
addressed to lordshps because he might not think
1t courteous; but ] acknowledge with satisfaction tue
admission 1.-THE noboj that it might not be desira-
bic that the occupants Of the leading benches should en-
Dave the authority OF noble lord who does not OFTEN
agree with the Government that had better not answer
Ids remarks. II the noble lord wishes to move LOT tne
English Case II will be Immediately laid upon the table,
but regards the American Case very proper explain
alton has given In another place. The Case mas not
yet been presented by the American to Con-
ress, and though am not sure that In strlctness we
should not right to produce after has been so
extensively published and when believe " IA even sOd
not do anything which be regarded breach OF
etiquette and for that reason there Is an opectoh 70 It's
production at present. Hear, hear.l
The Earl OF Malmesbury said: Ny noble friend the
Foreign Secretary is right In saying that there
unanimous feeling that not much should be said on this
subject but the statement made the other night to that
effect must be taken ano sails because as my noble
| friend must know, o question which more than
feeling Of astonishment and anxiety through
| out the whole or the Empire must engage the
% pf
ter is, in fact, duty which we owe to the country
manifested by this House has not been shown In another
place. A different Line ne Of cG%daot has been
honorable members VINO generally support Her Majcs-
ty's Government Therefore, presume the Government
have not felt Obliged to observe the recence In that
other place which they consider themselves bound TO In
this House. However that may be, think It right to
sion OF the subject here advisable, who would
give them my support the question Of the inerpreta
tic there can be mistake the language OF the
| Treaty. There / not an Engshman who does notlln-
and Its meaning stated In the hearing OF many for
eign Ministers who were present during the discussion Of
last session am ready therefore, to give my support To
Her Majestys Government as far as that goes but
should bo sorry II 1t was supposed that our mouths
because there other points In connection with the
Treaty which must be discussed, and on which must
say should be OF the first attack her Maesy's
Government One OF those is the question OF having
embassy at all. Next, without saying any
| thing derogatory TO the natural talents and
natural abilities OF the Commissioners, L must
press my opinion that they were not sufficiently
experienced. Earl Granville-Sr T. Thornton y He