The Charleston daily news. [volume] (Charleston, S.C.) 1865-1873, 1872-02-14
WASHINGTON, February 13.

WASHINGTON, feOTuaTy Id.
On Tuesday last, at eleven o'clock, the State
Department received telegram, in cipher
from our Minister to England, General
Schenck, which included copy Of the Queens
communication to the United States Govern.
ment, mentioned in her speech In Parliament
relative to the ccim for consequential dam.
ages In our case before the Geneva Arbi.
traitors.
The Queens communication Is very brief
and expresses unbounded friendship, and men
tIons several unimportant errors or irregulari'
ties in connection with the arbitration, and
then, without seemingly attaching great Inn.
portance to the subject, calls attention TO the
fact that in the cuse our agent has made q
claim for indirect OF consequential damages.
The communication Is exceedingly diplomatic,
and in It's character cautious to degree. No
appeal is made for reformation OF the treaty or
OF the case. No appeal Is made for any remedy,
but the object Of the communication Is EVIL
dently simply to command q reply from the
United States Government.
This copy was telegraphed as matter OF
expediency by Minister Schenek. before mail
ing the written original communication from
the Queen, the latter being delivered to Min
lister Schenck few hours before the Queens
speech was read in Parliament. AS heretofore
stated, no action will be taken on this COM
municaton by the administration until the
original arrives by steamer.
The case made out on our side mas l oeeh
thoroughly discussed here, and the general
verdict Is that it Is lDarti6cially drawn, mex
cusebly redundant, and full two thirds OF IL
Irrelevant or uncalled for.
The document was prepared by Bancroft
Davis, as agent for the United States, and 0e-
fore its final adoption was by him submitted
to several prominent citizens and statesmen
for their criticism and suggestions. Among
those to whom 1t was thus submitted was the
Hon. Reverdy johnson, whose criticism to Mr..
Davis was that the tone oil the argument as 1t
then stood was TOO acrimonious; that there
was too much In 1t as argument and statement
of history that was merely cumulative, and
might be dispensed with without detriment.
and that as to the claim for consequential
damages, whilst 1t might do to insert IL, that it
might be finally passed upon, or In somewise
ancillary to the main points, the claim ior
these indirect or consequential damages could
not be sustained under the clause In The treaty
upon which Mr.. Davis rests his argument.
This opinion OF Mr.. Reverdy johnson Is con-
Cured In by all the statesmen here with
whom your correspondent has been able TO
converse upon the subject, and 1t is known
that the Administration does not propose to
emphasize this claim nor to take any special
steps to enforce 1t upon the arbltrators, but
will stand upon the treaty and our case pre-
sented by Mr.. Davis, and abide by the decl-
sion OF the arbitrators thereon.
Much surprise is expressed at the transpar-
ent dodge of Disraell and Gladstone. That
men holding the position and enjoying the
reputation they do as statesmen should have
indulged In the excitement about the points
made in this case presented for consideration
by the arbltrators, Is matter of wonder. They,
of all men, should have shown that the func:.
tions OF the arbitrators do not extend beyond
the rules and agreements Of the treaty Itself,
and that they must be governed by the strict
Interpretation of that treaty, and the peril
by either party.