New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1872-10-05

granted to that vessel; and tho ultimate step by which
the offence completed cannot vs. nop cs me
contamination OF his fraud become the means OF esaD-
fishing his innocence
This certainly was not evolved from the three rules
but from general view OF international law No theory
has been surdy maintained by England than that
which gives escaped cruiser as success gave to the
Spartan thief lawful character On the face OF IL the
theory is absurd. The opposite doctrine implies tnat
Great Britain should have arrested the prVateers on
mid ocean, or at best should have prevented them from
entering British ports and this was the subject OF Mr.
Eyartss able argument before the Board The British
case contended that II be granted as postuae
that the origin Of the cruisers unlawful, the com
mission of the begerent that they served gave them
lawful character Mr.. Vernon Harcourt opposed TINS
view and the Tribunal has eectualy demolished IT,
The next proposition Ia but little less s"eepihg IL
brushes away the nmsy fdacy OF "exterrltorlalty'
and afrms that It is privilege which may DC sometimes
accorded but 10 shield violations OF neutray' Inc
remaining propositions Of law little vague, and
serve chiefly as explanations OF subsequent Judgments
on the subject OF supplies in neutral port especially
coal yscount dItajuba dssented from his colleagues
He formed the second no." Sir Alexander Cock6urn
being the other against the decision In the case OF tne
eacb vessel was condemned have already
written you. The decision fully bears out my
Of the Shenandoah and the Florida. It is worthy OF
remark the arbitrators were unanimous IN resPeGt
burn has some special reasons 10 present IL may 90
said at this point that great number or special Opinions
have Deen submitted by the several arDratOls ana lua
they will appear in the protocols when published
Tie subject OF the indemnity to be awarded involved
the settlement OF a variety OF miscellaneous clalus
ar classes of claims. The refusal TO award
any indemnity for the cost OF pursuit, though
snch claim was expressly conceded Dy
Great Britan 10 be 'dIreet" exctes surprise. lC
was the chief defeat suffered by the American counsel
The two affirmative votes understand TO be Mr. Adams
and Mr. stamp1. The claim for prospective earnings
is doubtless to most OF your readers IL Inquired Tor
the frat time ia the formal list OF claims presented 10
the Tribunal and more than that te owners OF
the capured vessels held that they ought 20 be lndemn
fed not only for the actual value OF those vessels Dut
for the probable profits from their voyages II the same
had NOT been interrupted. The claim is rather " 1ndl
rect" but there certain Justice IN IT, The dncuiy
The claim for Interest allowed formally but the figures
are swallowed up in tho general award. we get inc
Drincple adopted, but its application 49, Tor obvious
reasons left vague The drafting OF the decision was
NOT Entrusted to any particular member The form and
LANGUAGE were agreed from time to time by the Irou
nal itself and the original draft was In French MT
Adams and Sir Alexander COckburn translated II into
official AnglosaXOn. The manner IN whlch the leE.ls
doctrines laid down will strike neutral Powers Is one or
the problems informally discussed to-day The oplnlh
seems 10 be- generally held that they will be universally
accented as rules OF international law. Three neut
nations are represented at the tribunal unOinciay -
trne INT there seems be LITTLE doubt that Italy, Brazil
and Switzerland will be governed by the new statement
of neutral obligations The other great Powers are Tess
Interested in the privilege Of neutrals than Great bta
and IL should that they must give ther asselt;
Tins the general adoption OF their CONCLUSIONS WOuu
fitly crown the work Of the five famous arDtratOrs