New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1872-04-19
WHOLE NUMBER l53g
preciated by both natives and foreigners

| atives of the Mikado.
Although the Japanese merchants aro
granted all the facilities ana license fbr
business, Van Reeds rice exchange uk
Yeddo is still debarred from some priviIieess
This action of the government toward 7o1-
! eigners creates much comment hero.
| For the tea season just over the exports
| were q million pounds less than for The
same time last year.
Two Japanese men-of.war leave heee
April l for Europe via the Suez canal ~
meet the embassy returning via New York
and San Francisco
Great fears are entertained at Yeddo Of
tne loss of the Japanese steamer Kinzios
Maru, formerly the American steamer T3s
hlang- which left YeddO for LaObe on the
nfth Of January and has not since been.
| LONDON, April ia World special says
Bismarck has sent an ultimatum to Pres
| dent liners that the French army be forth
with reduced to 225 900 men, He hints tbat.
IN case of refusal it will be necessary for
Germany to establish French government
which she can trust. e,E4
LONDON, April ls-The following il <
| synopsis of the counter case presented q
Geneva BY the agent in behalf of Crest
Britain: Part one begins by announcinR.
tcat to the American imputation OF hostile
motion and insincere neutrality. no reDlv
whatever will be offered. England die-
tinctly refuses to enter into discussion Of
those lnsinuatiOns, because it would be iu-
consistent to her seErespect and irrevelent
to the main issue, and tend toinfuence ccn--
troversy.
England's governing desire to fulfil even
exceeds her International duties, nor viii
any reference be made to claims for inGli-
rect damages, as correspondence with 70
gard TO them is pending between England
and the United States.
England assumes that the claims axo-
limited to the losses occasioned by the Ala
bama, Florida, Georgia and Shenandoah,.
but does not to the introduction of nine.
other rebel cruisers added to the list by the
American case. None of these vessels had
previously been mentioned.
No award is possible for the Boston and.
Sallie, which are in the list, but are not
mentioned elsewhere in the case Of the
United States, and were probably inad-.
vertently included. The board Of arbitrar
ton ls reminded that its conclusions must
be formed on proofs, not obligations, and
that the proofs must be sifted. The state
ments Of American cOnsuls are creditablo
when made with regard to facts within
their personal knowledge, but they are un-,;
reliable when dealing with rum0rs. The
consuls OF the American government were
Jealous to lndiscretion, and shared in
the irritabillty generated by the war, and
erroneous views throughout the struggle
cclored their reports. England rejects a.
evidence papers captured on the Richmond.
their authors being unknown.
Part second deals with the. Americas
argument. 1t disputes the proposition that
neutral power is bound, at the request Of
belligerent, to enforce its municipal lawsxs
and add to them if they are insufficient. 1t
admits reparation is due for appreciable in
jury resulting from clear violation of iut4r-
national law, but is unable to attach dis
tinct meaning to some of the twelve prop<
sitions of the American case, and demuz6
to the exceptionally rigorous application
made of these propositions to England.
1t urges that at the time of the confed.
crate war mere sale and delivery Of vea<
eel adapted for war purposes, to belli9eT%
ent, was not a violation of neutrality a
nevertheless, on this point it accepts tAox
rules of the treaty of Washington, not, hoVk
ever, with the strained constructions put;5
upon them by the United States, but tkeirs
obvious purpOrt. 1t regrets that the UnitedZ
States should see fit to strain interpretations
of these rules to the uttermost, instead Of
accepting them in fair and reasOnable
sense.
It argues that England was bound to re-
celve the Alabama as she would vessel Of 4
war of any foreign State, and concludes By
quoting from OrtOlan, the eminent French
authority on international law, to show that
the principles for which the United States
contend were never heretofore preyiously
asserted or recognized in Europe or America.
Part three treats of the precedents sd4s
duced in the American case, and replies
thereto with others, such as the flibuster-
ing attacks Of Lopez on Cuba, aud Walker
on Mexico and Central America, and FeniAnss
raids on Canada. History on this subject
Is the history of unlawful enterprises origin
atlng In America and with American citi-
zens.
American privateers have from time -
time harrassed England, Spain, Portugal,
Mexico, Central America, Cuba and Can
ada.
Part four considers the various complaints
made of the traffic in munitions of war with
the South, blockade running by British 4
ships, etc.
Part five gives the history of the cruisersp
Sumter and Nashville, and complains Of be-
ing required to meet demands in regard -
which there is some difficulty as to treatine
them as serious. -
Part sixth gives account of the Florida
and Alabama, with the details of their es-
cape. 1t seeks to show that the time which
had elapsed between Mr.. Adams' applica- s
ton and the Alabama's departure was too
short to justify the charge of negligence,
and claims that in this respect England can.
not be charged with any failure Of duty.
Part seven ia devoted to the history Of
Part eight relates to other vessels, and
repudiates the responsibility of Great
Britain for their depred atiOns.
Part nine treats Of the reception of rebel 4
cruisers in British ports, and seeks to de- Il
Tend the conduct of Great Britain By COM
pairing it with that of other nations.
fart ten, after recapitulati0n Of the
tacts and arguments of the preceding parts,
the claim for interest on the dam
ages from July l, 1863, untenable The 4
losses which the arbitrators may take into
account are, at the utmost, those directly
arising from capture, and the desta nc tiORa
Df ships and property.
After describing the situation, anxiety
and insecurity in which neutrals would be.
placed in time of war should the doctrines
presented in the American case as to their
duties prevail, the counter case concludes
with expression of the hope that frank
and open statement will effectually relieve
every Misunderstanding between nations
allied by innumerable ties.
The Times describes the British countAr :
case as conceived in brave and states-
nanlike spirit, while the American casa
,ead like an advocates speech to iury in.
l trial for assault and battery. England'ss
'eply is like the utterances of Judge.
The Daily Telegraph says: Americans
tudying with impartiality our counter
ase will find reason to fear not only for
heir indirect claims but for something
nore. Instance upon instance of over
tatement and inconsistency is brought
gainst them until their great fabric of
ion." go, --.g-
No other city journals have articles on
be subject.
MISCELLAN NEOIIR.