New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1872-02-16
COMMENTS OF THE LONDON PRESS.
HE POSITION ASSUMED IN THE CASE OF GREAT

From Tie Tines Jan
The Case presented by Her Majesty's Govern
ment to the Geneva Trbural OF Arbitration differs IN
essential respect from that presented by the Gov
coorless and temperate in its tone bat 1t i far more
limited In Us scope, proceeding as 1t does on the
by winch the conduct of Great Britain must be Judged
Accordingly, Part l. contains ,2Wye.ke - STATE
understood by the Government Of Ier britannia
MUesty. this statement it is toreiby pointed out
tors except claims growing out OF the acts "
Of the Alaeama ana other vessels OF me
are indicated as forming a. distinct class"
only vessels IN respect to which claims had been
made upon the British Government before the
oaa he d GeoTa and the shcnaadoah It il fur
ther assumed that no other vessels will he the sub
cate Coricay that in respect Of none Of them was
theic any failure the discharge Of international ohi
cations rendering Great Britain justly liable 10 make
PREPARATION to the United States" The principles upon
which the Of Great Britain IL founded are embodied
In series OF general propositions"
II is here maintained. effect that bona lde neutral
itv il impartial, and not One-.ided or benevolent"
that neutral duties are hot affected ny ccnsiiera-
tons arising from me rohhca IeIauon "hlch
tained 70 each other" and that commissions
ularly issued by belligeront Government must he
not recognized by the neutral. The cond9ns which
constitute anS te ' pTrces When attach 70 vcsses in
vested With that character. laid down with Inneh
sTs ayi8s the Distinction betv cen those acts
which render neutral ports base OF h9s. ae
pt, w their result ara acFnowledged by the law
and practice OF nations as e5mate PIeraSns o.
tons however. are these when pear on tie car
tba% 4 in every country where the Executive is
subject TIE laws, foreign States have a right to
expect ca that tie laws be such as in the exer
Csc of ordinary foresight might REASONABLE he deemed
adequate for the repression OF al acts Which the Gov
eruDent Is under al International ohEt0n To refcSsi
) far may be necessary for this prp0se the
exercised But foreign states nae no ilTht TO
require where such lawseXst thatthe EXecve hhOnid
9SGT harm t 10 re- states or their citizens nor that
in order prevent harm 10 foreign States Or their Cit
or property Of individuals unless upon evidence which
would justify it in so acting II the interests u be pro
gens" By parity OF reasoning 1t ia sub
mitted that no government can he expected 10
International Obligation than civilized governments are
wont TO employ on their own behalf and, moreover.
that In fact governments like individuals have usually
been socOIs about their own security than about
that of their neehors such are the mah points OF In
with the rules the British Government rests It's Vn
dicatiOn.
THE AGITATION IN ENGLAND DECLARED IN
THINKING AND PITTFUL.
tn, Telegraph Of Jan IL
A strange unthinkng, somewhat pltlful
alarm lately been raised about the indirect claims
which the American Government has put before the
Arbitration Tribunal chosen under the Treaty OF wash
iugtop. Some OF our cotemporanes, to whom we can
dipnSs into the ears OF the public that Americans
make demand to I've described only IN ngures ma, rep
sSen peryerse delight In showing that the Treaty leaves
no bnt ~ nav punitive war indemnity at equal
ing that imposed by triumphant Germany on prostate
ssIhmeca terror can have only of objects
resus-to dscredit settlement under wMch nere lsa
hare possily that we may have 70 pay something u
the United ates damages really and directly sus
tanned through fault or to nstgate the Engsn PEG
nile into tearing I'D the Treaty because lnordlnae ana
Wholly uncontempated claims are preferred under
strained and Onesded interpretation OF some 81 It's
Understood that word in the document was for
moment regarded e our sISn9e 70 the &c
claims Next .. as claims t0 S 3aT @ IN erVss
as atOnement for the vast injury which Sa THE the
cruisers caused In proongng the war Before the Irb
claims It must clear out Of the way several highly i'm
porant obstacles 10 It's ever considering them at all IL
the text OF Treaty and the general spirit Of the ne
gotiations between the two countries from the a%e
and to decide that the question OF indirect claims vas
pns y II must also consider the British
Case completed by its final relotnders 70 the AMER
car and mus, decide e9ercng Grsaeron in
liter on hch both sides stand Numerically opposed
THE BRITISH GOVERNMENT ACCUSED OF NEGLI-
GENcE A an .I ISC COMP IT ENC !,
Either the claims in question are altogether'
and without doubt IN the minds OF our Govtren it
IL they not, there is nothngsin the terms OF le
Treaty to help US We must allow AL the,e c ado Sd go
far the United states have suffered lose In 0isnb''
though indirect through failure OF any OF 'he un
acknowledged In the Treaty as incumbent on us All we
can do In that case Is to bring within Just units ue
growing out" claims In every particular and 10 contest
every extravagant strained demand ~ II comes up
The bill must be enormous AT the best, but We must
accept responsibility forced us by the Negligence
and incOmpetency OF our Government and pay the bil
But IT, the other hand. these claims are hosed IN
against and known intention OF the agreement
then the surest, most straightforward most dgniHed
is 10 refuse poDtblank to admit them rs adIns
sbe matter for arbitration now. What that comes 10,
OF course. only too obvious We see at glance how
much reason shall have 10 rejoice Ia the results OF
negotiation Which, above all thing. was to settle forever
/ "A dangerous quarrel, bring the two nations into
the embraces OF brotherly love- and teach the
world how my De avoided. Even
/ now all is settled. But Inust Ice
content the best 81 matter Which, however It
be REGARDED amt however IL may nd j. grave Isfor-
tune There is happy way out Of it-thluks to the