New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1872-02-09
DOES TIE TREATY RECOGNIZE INDIRECT
DAMAGESf
WHAT THE ADMINISTRATION ASKS, AND WHAT
IT THINKS IT WILL GEr-A POLITICAL
BLUNDER.

WHAT THE ADMINISTRATION ASKS, AND WHAT
IT THINKS IT WILL GEr-A POLITICAL
BIUNDER.
HRON sPBGAL CORRESPONDENT oP THE TRIBUSE.l
WASHINGTON. Thursday, Feb s. ls72
There has been no excitement In Washington
shout the Geneva difficulty. No anxious conferences
have taken place except in the offices of two OF three
sensational newspapers. No serious discussion has
been opened in Congress The resolution offered by
NJ. Edmunds ON Tuesday in the Senate was debated
only short time in Executive session to-day, and
the House has shown interest IN the chances OF
/, new distribution of seats than the question
whether the great diplomatic achievement which
wss to remove all serious of dispute between
the two great nations Of the AneO-Saxon race shall
b. undOne before il is year old. Congress no doubt
pEeeves that it win be impossible for the Admins
tatiOn TO take any action until the text OF the note
70 which the Queens speech refers has been received
The note is now on the way. 1t is known. however,
that the speech from the throne correctly indicated Its
character There is no menace, no untuendhness OF
toDenothing but simple formal representation that
the British Government does not understand claims
toi indirect damages TO be embraced in the class OF
questions referred by the Treaty TO the tribunal of
arbitration at Geneva. Surely there is nothing in
THE to justify the extraordinary ferOcity with which
most Of the London journalists, and some OK the
newspapers in America have fallen upon this unfOr
tnate difference of opinion 1t is by no means GER
tain that on comparison of notes the two Govern
nents may not agree, and the arbitration quietly
aud prosperously go on.
Ii will strike most people however. as q somewhat
remarkable circumstance that disagreement should
arise al the start upon point so important and
much discussed as that Of consequential damages;
for II Is no new claim Of II was the burden Of
hr. Summers famous speech which stirred the Brit
lsh hon TO such awful rage Ii was debated wears
ago In Parliament 1t was weighed at the
time OF the JOhnson-Stanley Treaty. 1t was
proposed IN the first meetings Of the Joint
High Commission at Washington. H. after all
thls, there is now dispute as to the right of
our Government to incorporate il with the American
case presented at Geneva, we can hardly resist the
conclusion either that the Treaty was hastily and
inpeIfectly drawn, or that the Administration has
made serious blunder in the management Of our
cause before the international tribunal Let us look
u Tue history Of the discussion:
lie JOINT High Commission was first proposed by
Treat Britain for the purpose of settling the fisheries
question. The United States assented on condition
thati should also consider the differences which
arose during the Rebellion and which have existed
onee then. growing out Of the acts committed by
1e several vessels which have given rise 10 the
ealns generally known ss the Alabama claims
ohdef TINS comprehensive definition the American
commissioners at one of the first conferences pro-
sea'ed demand of indemnity for two classes Of
enthusiastically for extensive direct losses in the
~p'ufe and destruction Of a large number Of ves-
ss' with their cargoes. and in the heavy national
Ipeoditures in the pursuit Of the cruisers," and
" indirect injury 10 the transfer Of large part
'He American commercial marine TO the British
nag IN the enhanced payments OF insurance, il the
NV'oneation Of the war. and IN the addition Of
ge sum to the cost Of the war and the
spsHeeslon Of the Rebellion" The direct loss, so
Then sscertained amounted to about ga 800 900
A. vessels and eargoos destroyed and S7.0O0 900 for
Vs. cost OF pursuit. The Commissioners added: I'm
~pe o. an amicable settlement, no estimate was
- The indirect losses without prejudice how
e. u the night to decentralization on their account
!, Sa event Of no such settlement being made y
n. nOt appear from the official protocols of
a.. conferences that the British Commission
- made any other answer to these de-
nsn general denial LOT 4eLtlts