New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1872-06-28
THE INDIRECT CLAIMS OUT or COURT

| TIE INDIRECT CLAIMS OUT or COURT.
1t is not reasonable TO expect IN this coun-
try such interest and such satisfaction in the
result of the Indirect Claims question as was
manifested Yesterday in the Houses of Parlia-
ment and will be shown to-day throughout
the United Kingdom. The subject has never
taken hold of the public mind on this side OF
the ocean. If the public had been consulted
the claims would probably never have been
included in the Case. When they had once
been included, the only interest taken in the
matter was that the position thus assumed
should either be retained with dignity or
yielded with grace. Even this was not gen
orally insisted on. Most of our merchants and
stockholders desired that the matter should be
settled in any way without regard to appear
ances. The delay injured trade, and this was
a sufficient reason for putting an end to 1t.
In this green grocer spirit the question was
treated by the greater portion of the Admin
istratOn press. Instead OF Strengthening the
hands of the President his supporters seemed
instinctively TO know that they would serve
him best by preparing a way for his retreat.
Accordingly, there was nowhere any exhorta-
ton to a dignifed and consistent course, but
everywhere a flabby and watery series of
articles clarifying the Treaty and deprecating
any action which could endanger it. Addi-
tonal confusion in the public mind was Gre
ated from time to time by semi-Oilicial dis
patches from Washington saying that the
President had resolved to recede no further;
that the Treaty would probably fail on ac-
count of o hopeless divergence of views be-
tween the Cabinets of London and Washing
ton. In this way the impression was created
that the Government had some views of some
sort which were worth standing by.
This proves to have been altogether a mis-
take. 1t is not worth while to recall all the
blunders and follies which have been COM
mitted by our Government in the effort first
to Overreach the English, and afterward
to escape the consequences of their origi-
| nal fault. For the last three months
| THE TRIBUNE has been unable TO refer
to this subject without mentioning every
week some new and unexpected develop-
ment of incapacity. The interests of the
country in the matter were long ago lost sight
of. The only effort of late has been TO devise
some means of covering the retreat of the
! Government from position which had been
rendered untenable by its policy of alternate
has utterly failed Only yesterday morning
the State Department authorized the pubica-
ton of the following statement of its position,
which is false in every word:
"When the information received last week that the
Geneva Tribunal had decided that the claims for Indirect
Damages could before the Arbltators gentle
men occupying high official positions here considered
that this was in effect settlement Of the question: and
terminated the pending negotiations relative to
dtjopaI article to Treaty OF Washington. This view
however was based the supposton that the decision
TO be formally announced at a subsequent meeting will
be In accordance with the repeatedly declared position
OF this Government namely that these claims would
be Withdrawn. aud that they were presented not as
claims for which a specific demand made, but as
losses and injuries consequent upon the acts complained
Of and necessarily be taken into equitable consdera
ton I'm the settlement and adjudication OF all the differ
ences submitted TO the tribunal"
This awkwardly- patched garment of fig
leaves is rent from end to end by the decision
of the Geneva Tribunal, as reported yesterday
in the House of Lords by Earl Granville.
"The purport of their statement is that after
(" a careful perusal of everything said by the
representatives of the United States touch
"ing the Indirect Claims, the Arbtrators have
individually and collectively concluded that
"the said Indirect Claims do not consti-
"tute upon principles of international law
" good foundation for awards of damages be-
tween nations, and should be wholly excluded
from consideration, and would have been,
"eyen if no disagreement had arisen as to the
competency Of the Tribunal " decide therein"