New-York tribune., 1872-02-15

|
Dama question would be peacefully and finally settled
! by the Geneva Tribunal OF Arbitration.
| WASHINGTON, Feb 1i-Sr Edward Thornton. In con
yer'aiion with gentleman Of prominence yesterday
said he apnrehended no serious difcuty between tht
United states and Great Britain respecting the nterprs
tatOn Of the Treaty of Washington and lac believes that
the misunderstanding will be satisfactorily adjusted.
| EX-PRE5IDENT wOOLsEY on TIE AMERICAN
CASE.
- From The inGperdsnt
| The speech of the Queen of Great Britain,
de3 yered the 9Th mat contains the following words:
Cases were laid before tho arbtirator5 lat Geneva on
mtted by the United States large claims are included,
wnGn are on my p, on % S Set PG bsHe
caused friendly ecmnnicaton to be mado to the Gov
The point at issue is simple It ia nothing
than this What submitted by the two Governmen
to thearhltratOrs contemplated In tire Treaty. Was it
certain acts only OF certain vessels which had been
allowed to go forth from British ports. had escaped
specifically defined in the Treaty, the indirect
suits also OF such act5l The Governments have right
TO withdraw from the Treaty refuse to abide by tho
decisions OF the artrat0rs If that decision shall De con-
fined TO points which had been submitted to them But
each OF the Governments has right TO that the
submission OF certain points never thought Of by it,
and In an extreme case II the arbitrators still went
after protest To decision, to refuse 10 abide by
that decision. In such an event. tho other country
allowed. eases where treaties alleged TO be
| violated even to The extreme one.
Or 10 come to the especial difference or opinion he
| tween the two Governments, might NOT the United
states say we consent to the English understanding
and Interpretation let rule regard TO the province
Of the Tribunal at Geneva. But, in consistency With
that opinion shall regard the results Of the proceed
ngs OF that Board as fnl perfect and hnal settlement
0f The claims article XI OF tho Treaty. that relate to
direct injuries But the claims have made. It
specs indirect nures are not thereby settled and we
shG' them for n convenient season" The
British Government. then ought 10 contemplate. II its
Interpretation Is TO prevail tho poSs sDty OF Datch OF
claims which were beyond the province a. main
talns. Of tho existing Court Of Arbitration.
But what did the High Commission suppose the Treaty
TO and what, by fair Interpretation it's actual
10 contract differ in their explanations OF it, the words
of the instrument itself can be made to t both the
meanings which imputed 10 il equally well.
First what did the High Commission suppose the
Treaty 10 meant We hnd little as yet that Is definite TO
guide I'm regard to the impressions Of the British
bers of that body They honorable men, aud without
doubt have given their impressions to their Government
But. since beyond this assert nothing that be
fully sustained may over the matter in silence.
hold the nstr OF The Claims which the arbItrators
have brought before themi Here we have tho
Protocol 10 guide us. ana especially number 30 on page
lso of the papers ACCOMPANYING tho message Of May
lsl II should be said by way OK oxPanat,on that the
High Commission had power to bring those dnerenccs 10
settlement directly which are now In the hands Of the
st"J The American Commissioners stated the injuries
and losses that grown OF the and conduct
losses in the capture and destruction OF vessels,
gh Their na@rrod naa in the puFsan s
cruisers OF Of e dsa%a Of %%eronn an
commerce to the Brti.n Gag enhanced payment, of in
suTanGe :> sa1n G. the war tho addition of
Of the Rebellion The direct losses to private persons.
up to that presented amounted to about sl4oCOOo
aimed Then il ia added that in the hope OF an
amcebie settlement no estimate wq mad? z; ;i.0 iH
rect osse5 Miti6Gt prejudice however 70 the right Of
ndemndcation the;r s9cQpn in the event OF no such
etemeR esns aaca5s %ade .eepeni @nfii The esse
prepared by our Government gives sn expiana
iog on PAGE 49, S. IGe brsfh bcS Ts
proposed the part OF the United states Inc JONI
High Commission then entered INTO nfgoa3ns %he9 "a
resulted in agreement" constituting trounai Oh
arbitration. That is to say that while by no means
waving the claim for indirect losses our commissioners
a sum in mass-a settlement n dmG6le-shouid super
description of injuries. But the High Commission TOOK
another road toward settlement and thus there was no
obligation honor thus far laid on our Government TO
> Secondiv: We come to the words Of the Treaty
itself Did our Government here commit itself 10
silence in regard TO injuries OF that uoSoIipiIon,
Ii may lie said that, having on the 5th or April
received from the British Government the immense
CONCESSION OF the three rules touching neutral du-
tes, which were TO be retr9aSdve also In the ques
sells our CommssiC were now the more willing lay
aside the subject OF indirect Injuries when ~ any case
Let look Mt the words 0f the Treaty which bear ON the
point These few III number and are to be found III
In Article l.. clause ist differences spoken Of az
growing ont Of the acts committed by several vessels,
which have given rise to the claims genercally known
as the Alabama claims" In the 2d clause the Queen
Sama and othef vessels from British ports and for the
depredaOns committed by them In the Sd clause the
committed by the aforesaid vessels" shall be sub
mitted to arbitration. II might be said here that mas.
much the claims grow out OF acts oply the acts and
nothing consequential upon them, are TO be
But why might not the claims grow out OF eertlln acs
ia this expression to narrow down the claims to injuries
caused BY the acts themseiyes had in fact
certain technical meaning ihey WIZ dsd certoin
indirect results o the escape of these 'eSSel' io ~
Il Article VII the Tribunal at Geneva had for It's Of
ce to determne as to each vessel 70 u
Great gan had ny 9fh s9 aGi in the three rules II
was found to be the case, the Tribunal mignt ~
thought sw@Td TS fsGii FAR s %0aG be difficult
tho Court OF Arbitration 10 PToeeea, as ,,cs ,n 0''
But II the said Court should not think proper to
such gross sum. Board OF ASSESSOR wa husiness IL
Should be TO ascertain and determine What 4ias h
valid, and what amount or amounts on rco~nt of the
Great Britain TO the United states, on ha dutis
liability arising from her failure to rum 9er
to each vessel according TO the Snn snc
Board is to proceed rie investigation OF the cls
sened them by the United states 10 efaianT by
eide upon them evidence or information Iui @
behalf of the two Governments, p " conn .el Or
| one person on behalf Of each Government 10
This article conempates board whose sole us eis
Ii il inquire what amount OF danaecs ousht " "
for each vessel that had been found guilty 80 10
by the Board OF Arbitrator Can we peho ,d % ,yas =
conceived OF as possible thing that TINS Doaru VIZ ~ % ar
pected 10 dide up the Indirect damages among four OF
hive or more yesseisl There mentioned III the 1d
from the tenders OF the Alabama and the fIoriaad ed
What part In the prOlongaon of the Wal Eau
marine 10 the British flag or in the enhanced
Of insurancet Woud II not need something Oey onu any
cuesses of lawyers beyond any dherentlal CALCULUS '"
deterrnlne this -. - aha pritish
This then the only point OF strength on tnV ne no. ~
side on side every thing is strong ul u, mi inr,
As have said, If indirect ana eOhse then the
were not to be submitted to the arpltIa.Vis' 20 then
United did not, by making no men.i an this ac
count This them the dilemma Iney woLv ,,ny ~ ~,
not included the submisson Ii tDey VIZ, % ron
be considered and Great Britain canhu. 10,
the arbitration or refuse abide by IT, II ney were
why can they not after longer shorter sleep wake
lup aeani But Tor our part hope that an end Is !.