The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1872-05-17

The proposition of the British government
to make supplemental treaty. or an addition
to the Treaty of Washington, in order to over
come the deadlock into which that government
and ours have fallen, was referred to the
Senate for its advice and not for executive
action. II is not too late, therefore, to prevent
the administration laundering further in this
deplorable business. If the Senate cannot
save the administration, and particularly Mr.
Fish, from the odium which entertaining this
humilating proposition even has brought upon
the government, it can save our great country
from dishonor and its own reputation. The
form OF the so-called supplemental treaty only
has been submitted for consideration, and the
Senate can and ought to scout it indig-
nantly As no official action beyond that
OF feeling the way for admitting this supple
mental treaty has been taken the Senate can
refuse to entertain it without compromising in
the least the honor of Che country. The
Johnson Clarendon Treaty was rejected
even after it had been signed; conse-
quently there would be no ground
of complaint if the Senate should
manifest its disapproval in advance of nego-
tiating and signing this proposed supple
mental treaty. Both the British government
and the administration at Washington, seem
to have been DESTROYS of avoiding decisive
action until the opinion Of the Senate would
be obtained, in order to save their credit and
prevent any irritation in the event of the prop
osition being rejected. They seemed 80 hare
been conscious, too, that the proposition was Of
such an extraordinary character that there was
danger Of it being rejected. Hence tho sug-.
gestion- Of Lord Granville that it should be,
submitted to the Senate in advance Of further
unusual step taken by the President in con-.
sulting that body.
1t is hardly necessary to recite the Words
which involve the sum and substance of, thes
proposed supplemental treaty. They have
been spread broadcast over the land through
,and from our publication Of them and the,
whole treaty correspondence. They must have
gone like poignard to every true American
heart, and will not soon be obliterated from
the memory. They are the last words of ALI
the voluminous correspondence submitted to the
Senate and published by U.s. The sting is in
them, But let us quote: THE President Of
the United STATES, by and with the advice and
consent of the Senate thereof, consents that
he will make no,claim on the part of the United
States in respect of indirect losses as aforesaid
before the Tribunal Of Arbitration at Geneva"
No one need be told that this is complete
surrender of the ground taken by our govern
nlent and stoutly maintained all through the
controversy. The correspondence shows that.
Every one knows it. What is the cause? Has
any new light been shed upon this matter
which has been discussed SO long and in every
point of view, which, if we may use such an
expression, has been almost discussed thread
! bare9 No; there has been no additional light
| thrown upon the subject. Lord Granville
/ failed to convince Mr.. Fish that his position
was untenable, and Mr. Fish argued strongly
up to the last that the American case, including
a claim for consequential damages ought to go
and must go before the Geneva Tribunal of
Arbitration. Even in this proposed supple
mental treaty it is said the president still ad-
heres to his Conviction that the said claim for
consequential damages was included in the
Treaty of Washington
The consideration formulated in the draft
of the supplemental treaty for this abandon
ment Of the American claim tor indirect losses
is, that in future no claim for indirect losses,
caused by privateers escaping under similar
circumstances to those under which the Ala
bama and her fellow corsairs escaped shall be
admitted by either of the two governments as
far as England and the United States are con-
cerned. In other words, it is to be rule OF
| international law between the two countries
that no indirect losses caused by privateers
escaping from the want Of due diligence on
the part of either when neutral and the other
is at war, shall be claimed or allowed. This
is precisely the ground England has taken all
along 1t was upon this principle she has per.
sistently refused to 90 to arbitration before
the Geneva Board What, then. has she con
coded? What consideration really has sh,
made for the abandonment of ou1
claim? None whatever. The bargain is Ike
the Irishmans reciprocity-all on one side
1t may be said that we shall escape hereafter
claim for consequential damages under this
rule should privateers escape from want o
due diligence on the part Of our government
from American ports when England may be Al
war. and this seems to be the inducement hel,
out or consideration offered for making tn
supplemental treaty and for abandoning on
claims. This is n miserable subterfuge o.
the part Of England to escape from dilemm
and on the part Of our administration to say
its credit by saving the treaty. The Britis
government says. virtually, 1--WE will give 20
chance for revenge in the future withou
making the liability overwhelming" and tn
American government accepts the proffere
condition. Such is the principle laid down b
which two great nations are to be governed