The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1872-06-26
other Change I'm the DissOlving Views
OF Settlement.

The Geneva Conference I'm SessfOn-An-
other Change In the Dissolving Views
OF Settlement.
sea; the clouds gather over the diplomatic sky,
tempestuous wind sweeps across the Atlantic
and storm and wreck threaten the unfortunate
Treaty of Washington The HERALD special
cable despatch from Geneva brings us intelli-
gence of the reassembling Of the Court of Ar
bitration at four o'clock yesterday afternoon,
the occasion of the curtailment Of its adjourn
ment having been the receipt Of important
dispatches by the American agent The hour
of the meeting had been fixed for two o'clock,
but the non-arrival of the English arbitrator,
Sir Alexander Cockburn, caused two hours
delay. The new papers in the American case
were formally presented and it was agreed
that the points they raise should be fully dis
cussed on Thursday, to which day we presume
the Court adjourned. Our special despatch
informs us that another misunderstand-
ing has arisen, this time between the
American government and its agent at Geneva
and that the rose-colored view taken of the
future of the treaty and the removal of the
difficulties in the way of the conference are not
warranted by the facts in the case. The fault
is laid at the door of the cable, and badly
translated ciphers are blamed for having con-
veyed to Geneva mistaken views of the inten-
tons of our government at Washington. 1t is
now certainly known that we have not with
drawn our claims for indirect damages, either
directly or indirectly, and that we still hold
that they are fairly before the tribunal, and
must be adjudicated upon. In fact, we appear
suddenly to have received o wonderful Access
sion of backbone and our people will be
pleased to learn that we have at last come to
the conclusion to act for ourselves, and not to
be blown about by the whims and vagaries of
others. We are also told that while England
will insist upon q long adjournment and
postponement of the time limited for
the presentation Of the arguments o positive
majority of the arbitrators will decide against
the demand We have already shown, from
the language of the treaty, that the Court can
have no power to remove the limitations it
places upon the different acts required of the
contracting Powers, and it is difficult to under
stand how the English representatives could
have expected any other decision on their sin
gular application.
It will be remembered that report reached
us from Geneva and Washington simultane-
ously few days ago to the effect that the
Court of Arbitration had made decision on
the subject of the indirect claims embraced in
the American case, declaring such claims not
to be admissible as growing out of the acts OF
the Anglo-rebel privateers. This was accepted
have contended all along for o decision
on the subject of indirect claims that
would afford a settlement of the principle
for the future, and have not especially desired
money award. A special Washington
despatch to the HERALD on Monday stated
that this was not altogether the correct posi-
ton of affairs that the end had not yet been
reached, and that the issue heretofore fought
between Lord Granville and Secretary Fish
had only been transferred to the Court of
Arbitration. According to this version of the
situation difference in regard to the question
before the Conference had arisen between the
American and English arbitrators, Charles
Francis Adams and Sir Alexander Cockburn.
The former, it is said, insists that the con-
troverted claims are within the treaty and
properly before the Court; that money award
not being pressed on such claims by the
American government it is competent for the
Court to decide that they cannot be con-
sidered under the seventh article of the
treaty, but that nevertheless, the decision
must reach the whole subject Of indirect
claims as a principle and finally settle that
issue between England and America for the
future. The latter contends that the claims
for indirect damages are not in the treaty or
legally before the tribunal that the motion
of the English agent simply asks the Court to
reject and expunge such matter as the Ameri-
can government admits is not properly before
the arbitrators under the seventh article of the
take cognizance of such claims in any form
or make any decision of principle in regard to
them, but must simply order their withdrawal
as matter foreign to the arbitration. We are
inclined to believe that this gives nearly the
true condition of the case, and our government
has, no doubt, understood the singular position
in which we are placed Should the Court, by
its Judgment, recognize that the indirect
claims are properly in the American case, but
that such claims are not subjects for money
award, England has her reserved rights TO
fall back upon, and may insist upon her
assumed privilege of retiring from the arbitra-
ton. Should the judgment of the tribunal
uphold the position Of Sir Alexander Cock
burn, it is evident that we lose everything
for which we have been contending, and
remain bound by stringent neutral obligations
exceedingly difficult of strict fulflment by a
| country with an insufficient police and an