The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1872-05-14


the Alabama Claims Dimouity-Is
There to BE Any Moro Diplomatic
Jugglings
The HERALD cable dispatches to-day bring
intelligence of the official explanation made
last night in the British Parliament of the
negotiations between the English and Ameri-
can governments in relation to the claims for
| indirect damages made by the latter in the
case presented to the Geneva Conference. Mr..
Gladstone was the spokesman for the admins
tration in the Commons, and Lord Granville
in the Lords. Their statements were, of
course, identical. They set forth that on the
18th January of the present year it first be-
structive claims had been advanced, and on
the Sd of February, sixteen days afterwards,
Her Majesty's government protested that they
We're not within the scope Of the Treaty of
Washington, nor within the intention of either
party thereto. To this protest Secretary Fish
replied in April that she thought the
Geneva Board ought to decide the en-
tire question" the tone of his despatch being
''most courteous" Meantime our Minister
at the Court of st. James suggested as course
that would be acceptable to both nations an
interchange of notes setting forth the views,
terms and conditions whereon each would be
willing to proceed to arbitration. This sug-
gestion was accepted by England, and cor
respondence was carried on between the two
governments through the instrumentality of
the cable. On the 9th Of the present month
the British Cabinet ascertained that PROPOSE
ton for a settlement of the difficulties based
on these negotiations, which had
been submitted by President Grant to
the United States Senate on tho preceding
day, was not in accordance with the English
understanding of the brief cable despatch on
which it was based, and so on Friday last, the
10th inst, draft Of letter fully covering
the views Of the British government was sub
nitted to Minister Schenck This letter. al
though lengthy was Immediately telegraphed
the following day, last Saturday, our Minister
informed Lord Granville-of course on the
authority of official dispatches from Wash
ington-that the President had accept
ed and the United States Senate
had entertained the English detailed PROPOSE
tons, which was regarded by the British
Cabinet as almost equivalent to ratification
and final settlement Of the matter in dispute.
All the information given of this last English
proposal, however, was that it Sustained the
position taken by the British government in
the Queens speech" at the beginning Of the
present session of Parliament In the Com
mons the Ministerial statement was well
received, and Disrael we are told,
thanked the Premier for his statement,
seek to embarrass the government in
its efforts to secure what oil parties desre--an
honorable and peaceful settlement of these
difficulties In the Lords the snappish and
unhappy Earl Russell, who could not resist
sneer at the United States, trusted that the
question was ''no longer one between the
honor of the Crown and the reelection of
President Grant, y while the Earl of Derby
and the Duke of Richmond, both in the oppo-
sition ranks, expressed the hope that the new
propositions Of the English Ministers We're
unambiguous as there had already been
enough misunderstanding between the two
parties to the controversy.
The cable report Of Mr.. Gladstone's speech is
probably meagre, and it may be that the
ministerial explanation was more full in detail
than appears from the dispatches. At present
there seems to have been singular slurring
over of the negotiations or correspondence be-
tween the two governments from the Sd Of
February to the 9th of the present month.
We can hardly believe that all the reply made
by Secretary Fish to the dilatory protest OF
/ England against our case was that he thought
the Geneva Board ought to decide the entire
question, nor can we quite understand
how Minister Schenck can have been officially
informed on last Saturday from Washington
that President Grant had accepted and the
United States Senate had entertained the new
English basis Of settlement Our surprise is
increased when we learn from Mr. Gladstone
that the English proposition fully sustained
the position taken by the British govern
ment in the Queens speech on the It'll
of February last, which declared that the
'large claims included in the American
case were mot within the province Of the
arbitrators'' To s'sustain" this position
fully the American claims for indirect
damages would have to be Internationally
Withdrawn, and this we are confident is q
settlement which no American administration
would propose, no American Senate would
confirm, and which the American people
would never endorse Indeed we fail to find
in the anxiously anticipated explanation Of
the British government any justification Of the
hope that the differences between the
two nations were happily adjusted and
the treaty saved, and the demonstration made
yesterday in the executive session of the
United States Senate when the correspondence