Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1872-02-28
EnqIand's Case.
An abstract Of the Case of Great Britain
as Presented to the Geneva
AFbItrators.

AFbItrators.
NEW YORK, February 27.-Thr
Tribune this morning publishes al
abstract of the British case submitted
for arbitration at Geneva. In thii
statement Her Majesty's government
complains that il has had to reply
to an argument not yet presented
when that shall have been presented
and the claims of the United States
shall be defined precisely Her Msjes'
ty's government will exercise the
right conferred on it by article fourth
of the treaty to submit to the tribunal
an additional statement Of facts as the
case may exact. Until a comparison
Of cases presented by both parties
shall determine the points really
in dispute between the two govern.
ments, it will refrain from all discus.
sion intended to maintain its
own position, aud will limit itself, at
present, to submitting to the judg-
ment OF the tribunal the following
conideyatiOns:
''As ships, whatever may be the
circumstances, were procured in
British ports for war purposes and
were employed as belligerent cruisers
against the United States, while
Great Britsin herself remained neu-
tral, and that these events have been
causes OF displeasure and regret to
the government OF Her Britannia
Majesty, and that this regret exists
despite the following facts, which it
must be conceded are important to
arrive at just appreciation Of the
question:
"Tbe vessels were procured by cunning
and clsndestine mesns, which b fti cd the
vigilance of the government ofticsrs. Hot
one had the least armament Some hsd
been constructed as ordinary merchant
vessels, having nothing which would
sdspt them specially for war. In number
they were very small, and finally the per-
sons who obtained possession and control
Of them, and employed them for belliger-
ent purposes, were Themselves Am sricsn
oitizsns, which the United States hss al
ways admitted"
Such facts should seriously affect the
mind OF every impartial man.
AS to the question relative to the re-
spOnsibility of q neutral government:
The United States government pro-
fesses to have right to pecuniary in
demnity for claims which il says re-
suited from the acts Of these vessels
that is to say, warlike operation were
carried on by means of these ships by
the persons who had them in their
possession. 1t is evident that the
pretensions of this nature are such
that Her Majesty's government, ami
mated as it is with The most amicable
sentiments towards the United States,
could not, by virtue of the respect il
owes to its rights and those of neutral
nations in general, consent to admit,
since it believes that it is not founded
on justice. 1t dev0lves on the United
States to establish the proposition it
has advanced, to state clearly the in
ternatiOnal duty or duties on which
they are based, and to demon
strate the violation Of which it COM
plains. A charge against q SOW
ereign government OF having eyineed
culpable negligence in the exercise OF
one OF the powers of sovereignty is |
an imputation which should be sus-
tan | by strong, solid reasons. A
natiU ought not 20 be held response
bic fOf delay or omission which may |
be due simply to accident and to want |
OF foresight or reasonable care. Fl. |
nally, il does not suffice to demon |
stTate that an act has been committed |
which the government should have i
iOreSeen. What must be advanced /
and proved is, that the govern
nent failed to exercise the same |
amount of care that it usually
employs in internal affairs and
which it may be reasonably re.
Iuired to use in matters affecting
interests and duties,
If the tribunal decides that Great
Britain has incurred any responsible
y whatever toward the United States,
he question will then arise as to what
will be the just measure and extent |
lf that responsibility. Her Msiesty's
government abstaius at present from
on this question, and re-
ierves it for more advanced period
# discussion all observations that |
{ shall determine to submit on this
point in the name Of Great Britain,
4 claims Of this kind were admitted
Without reserve q belligerent could
Isk to be indemnitied by neutral
or results which justly ought not to
)e laid to the act of the latter, but
hOuld te placed to his own lncapaci-
y and deficient initiative. Her
dsjesty's government is obliged
o point out that, in regard
o ships which form the object
4 the preceding statement, the
he United States government or its
ificers evineed extraordinary tardi
less in employing the naval forces at
IS command and that IL ordinary &C.
ivity were exercised to capture or in
ercept these vessels the losses of
which the United States complain
O-day, would have been in great
Measure partly averted.