New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1872-03-01
COMMENTS OF THE LONDON PRESS.

COMMENTS OF THE LONDON PRESS,
POINTS OF DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE AMERI-
CAN AND ENGLISH VIEWS OF THE TREATY
From The Times Of Feb. is.
We are indebted to Mr.. Smalley for second
letter explaining the American view OF the Treaty OF
one who desires to learn how the unhappy misundeT
standing on the construction OF that Convention
could have originated What can be more Dis
heartening-thsu the fact that two nations speak
resentaves to meet together and effect settlement OF
differences between them, and that should be dlscOV
duly signed as EXPRESSING common understanding be-
tween them that their representatives had throughout
ployedi The result Is slur on the English language
a condemnation Of the diplomatists employed,
Yet the o fact tHf Is ndsPStSbe Mr. smaey accu
mulaes his evidence show that the statesmen of the
bodied in the American Case Mr.. smalley does not
question, what side unanimous in deelar-
the Commission under the fixed understanding and be;
lief that all claims for Indirect t, Damages had had
thought was brdged over yawns as wide
Covered in the words Of Mr. smaley, insisting steadily
claims which Engishmen have loudly declared they
seems as he says further apart than ever
but he believes 1.-THE difficulty to be more apparent than
part, we cannot entertain it, because we cannot
discern any ground upon which II may be based.
Nothing can be certain than that we shall never
the indirect consequences OF the supposed
breaches of neutrality involved in the escape Of the Ala
bama and her sister vessels and the more thoroughly
Mr. Smaley demonstrates that these indirect claims have
never been abandoned, in thought by the states
of the Federaton-the more clearly he shows that
they were not inserted In the Geneva case merely III e
spirit which inspired the special pleader OF anoter e
to stuff out their declarations with demands they
knew to be unsubstantal.the more painfully does he
convince that the difficulty which has arisen as real
rs il is apparent If the American Case embodes the
smalley's argument- is serious; ourselves seri
GUS; and, as any hope of successful issue from the
| -
that there large "bogus" element in the one or
There are two comments on our relations with the
United States which may be adyantageousiy made
ing 6eforeiahd that the Federal Government has not
propOunded case without being able to Justify i to
make il in perfect frankness; in order that it
we never dreamed that these indirect claims were still
preferred until the publication Of the American Case
they abandoned The discussion in the House OF
Lords on Lord ss SS9 s J3s was mot hf ha
debate reported the morning after 1t occurred,
directed to the statement OF the Foreign Minister
that the Indirect Claims were abandoned under the
us of our error Mr. smalley tells that when lie
to the United states last summer lie naturally carried
things that although EEglshmcn considered they had
made great cornerstone they found compensation for
count of the hasy recognition OF Rebel beigerencyp
that MI smaley mistaken. The states had aban
doned nothing I'VE have fun right under the Treaty to
claim all l have ever claimed" We do not blame Mr.
smaley for not having come back TO tell us
OF this extraordinary discovery; we refrain
iF SVernm nnaG fSr Their retcenee but we are
justified in citing Mr. smalley himself as witness that
interpreted publicly in way entirely at variance
teians of the United states we discover
not publicly but privately. Our second remark may
We apprehend the truth to be that there is larger
pubic among ourselves possessing intelligent appre-
| oiatinn rs
external relations of the Republic lett to the manage
OF professional politicians far more than with us
An illustration may be found in the fact that treaties OF
by the Senate in secret session, while we can,
not tolerate secret sitting oven Of SELECT yet
Committee of the House OF Commons: We
of what is otherwise difficult of understanding The
people Of the United states really knew nothing about
International difficulties had been agreed upon, and
months spent n the States he never heard suggestion
| that Indirect Damages could be claimed under the
cited BY Mr. smaey were willing to keep silence, and
permit gish Ministers to remain with their misunder
standing uncOrrcCted The result has, OF course shown
the futilty of the line Of conduct they pursued The
American Case was published and Its claims were i'm,
the hypothesis that they were withdlawn-an hypo-
thesis which the language OF the Treaty ana Protocols
that a different understanding held on the other
Treaty set up was not the Treaty we had sanctioned
and that we could not go on with the reference
when consented to 1t.
MR.. GLADSTONE JUSTIFIED IN SPEAKING
STRONGLY.
From The Echo Of Feb IS
If the spirit which animates this able rep
resentatve Of THE TRIBUNE in London peryade the
mind OF Mr.. Fish, have yet room to hope that the
hG IL opinion S nos
to be pressed in an unfrendly way, or that anybody
dreamed they would embarrass the arbitration: He
Sdd aea dO6 of money C ese ect
ut well enough understood that the United states
hava mi
rous narett-wOnderfu indeed ina cute American jour
nast-Mr. smalley asks "HOw happens 1t that 1t has
far as / know, to any English Journalist, 70
read the American Case in the light of
cause It does not ADMIT of this reading The liability Is
indefinite and to the votes OF any three OF the Arbitia
tors referred by the American Case the possible ab
ity of England not to sum OF six millions, but posi-
by which has been estimated at " times SIX millions
he logical Of MI smae letter would be
the pPosentation OF all claims they dsclaimed ali a
blity on the part of the British Government for any
gible on any other basis. Or Mr.. smaey would be
logical If lie urged that his Government should aix de-
claraOn their Case to the effect that these indirect
claims were only made 10 strengthen the claims gen
orally known as the Alabama Claims" which claims
could be IN few words more strictly defined than they
are in the Treaty.
THE MEANING OF THE TREATY.
From The PaH Mou Gasette Of FEB. Is
Mr.. George Smalley, in a second letter to The
Times to-day sets himself to prove that the American
Government and people always intended TO include the
Treaty of Washington 30 far as the Government was
concerned it had really no choice The notion enter
speech was an exaggeraton of American opinion aud
had been repudiated by the majority Of his coanymep
%sn %Sl'P tie wrongs We 5 aaSaSd' at state
popular view being fixed upon that basis and remaining
nnaltered down to the Conference Of last year, Mr.
Government should disregard it, whatever their own