The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1872-07-28

adverse to such recognition. II would be held, a
| hear from every reliable source, to be an aban
donment OF the rights and disregard OF the honor
never learned that Mr.. Summers views were en-
dorsed by the government OF the United States
Mr.. Fish next mentions his instructions to Mr. Mot
| ley of the 25th OF September. These instructions
however, were not communicated to Her Majesty'i
government, and when MI: Motley told Lord Claren
don on the 10th Of June, $780, that the Convention
was objected to because it embraced only the
claims OF individually and had reference to those
that II settled no question and land down princi
pie. he proceeded to speak OF the
"RISK AND RESPONSIBILITY
incurred by government which conferred belliger
ent rights and thus his representations naturally
connected themselves with Mr.. Johnsons pro
in his despatch OF the 25th OF September
direct or indirect injuries" These indirect n
ISries could not, therefore, have received
ns tnaf indeed
tracts which he gives from 1t with their context, II
is apparent that the 'vast national injuries" which
ne states that he presented In IL are ascribed to
other causes than the acts committed by the Con-
federate cruisers.
ANALYSIS OF THE STATE PAPER.
The first extract, beginning 1.-THE number OF our
ships thus directly destroyed" &C., follows para
graph complaining OF the proclamation of neutral
terprises in the ports OF Great Britain, which would
otherwise have been piratical, were rendered law
lul, anu JuuS GIedJ BIICdIn became ana 10 Cn6 emu
continued to be the arsenal the navy yard and the
treasury OF the Confederacy "A spectacle was
thus presented without precedent or parallel in the
history OF civilized natiOns.o
The second extract runs thus 1--WE complain
that the insurrectlon in the Southern States II 1t
did not exist was continued and attained It's en-
during vitality by means of the resources 1t drew
from Great Britain. We complain that by reason OF
the discharge OF It's neutral duties on the
came the military, naval and financial basis OF
insurgent warfare against the United States. We
waty, Of alto or
marine by British ships, manned by British seamen
armed with British guns, despatched from British
dock yards, sheltered and harbored in British
ports We complain that by reason OF the policy
and acts OF the Queens Ministers injury ncalcuable
was inflicted on the United States"
The third extract respecting the vast national
injuries Is followed in the despatch by passage
explaining the various causes of injury which Mr..
Fish has omitted to notice Nor does he attempt
now to measure the relative effect of the various
causes OF injury as whether by untimely recogni-
ton of begerency by suffering the fitting Of rebel
0p o e
whatsoever manner."s
Lord Clarendon's memorandum OF observations
on Mr.. Fish's despatch like the despatch itself,
touched on various topics besides that OF the Con-
federate cruisers, and Her Majesty's government
cannot admit that. because Mr.. Motley read des-
patch to Lord Clarendon on the 18th Of January,
1870, stating that Mr.. Fish had not included 1t
''among, the papers, respecting the Alabama
claims,n therefore all the subjects mentioned
in IL were Alabama CLAIMS
Stillless can they admit that because Mr.. Ber-
nara In the IOurucenpn cnHptef or his WORK gave
certain extracts from Mr.. Flsh's despatch, under
the head OF alabama Claims" that despatch be-
came the standard by which the claims known as
the alabama clamS'' were to be measured. 1t
happens moreover, that in the extracts given by
Mr.. Bernard given in the chapter to which Mr.
Fish refers, the three passages cited by Mr. Fish in
his present despatch as relating to indirect ill.,
jures and national losses, are omitted.
THE PRESIDENTS MESSAGE IN DECEMBER; 1869.
IL only remains to notice the Presidents Message
of December, 1869. This Message does not mention
the alabama claims, but speaks of the ''niuries
resulting to the United States by reason OF the
course adopted by Great Britain during our late
civil war;"
have thus been able :, to show upon
the American Minister, corroborated on ex-
animation by the extracts cited by Mr.. Fish,
that for the first seven years OF the discussion, up
to 1862 none nut direct claims were "knOwn as
Alabama Claims" and that in the only authorita-
tive document in which national direct injuries
Claims" or as claims Of any description.
Mr.. Fish states that continental jurists and pub
licists discussed the national claims on account OF
the prolongation OF the war under the head OF
determinations having gum rapport indirect et
n,ai'nert un rapport direct, auec les depr6do:
q pamphlet by. Doctor Blurtschli, entitled
| "Opinion Impartiae sur Ia Question de rAa.
bama, ct sur Ia Manere de Ia Resoudre." In this
pamphlet DR.. Blurtschli reviews the various points
tSs senate Mr. on tne 18th of ms
1869, including the recognition OF the bel
ligerency. In the sixth section he discusses
| the effects attributed by Mr.. Sumner to the
acts of the Alabama and other vessels and states
that all the effects are attributable in the first
place, to the cruisers themselves and not to the
British gOvernment:-"SG fIute ne cOnsfSte pas u
dcoir eQufpe ct dppareiHB les c0rsoiyes, rnais a
napofr pas enpeche leur oynae'nent "a le,r sortie
de son te,TitOire neatre; m0iS cette .faute ma
Qu'un rapport Indirect ct ,uueaent, nn rapport
direct dvec les deprddations ree!tenle,nent
remark did not, therefore, relate to claims
for indirect losses, nor does the word ''ReciGnld-
in the whole section from which the quotation is
taken All that he says is that the default on the
part OF Great Britain by which the cruisers escaped
has but Indirect and in no way direct connec'
ton with the depredatons actually commit
ted by them. The italics DIR. Blurtschli's
Mr.. Fish gives reason for no claims Tor
national losses having been defined or formulated
that Lord Russell objected, in July, 1858. TO any
claims being put forward, as Mr. Adams inns
August, september. and October Of that
since been presented. Her Majestys government
are unable to see the force of this argument
Whatever may have been the reason the
the arrival of the British High Com
missioners at Washington the term Alabama
claims had recognized and well known meaning
as direct claims and that no other claims had been
presented to the British Government nor indeed
were these other claims even then presented. The
| American High Commissioners, as appears by the
9th protocol stated that the history of the Alabama
and other cruisers showed extensive direct losses
anu injury, tIldb iiittt NC
come Justly liable for the acts OF those cruisers and
their tenders that the claims for the loss ana de.
structon OF private property which had thus fll
been presented amounted to about fourteen million
dollars, and that in the nope OF an amicabe settle
ment no estimate was made OF the indirect losses
| without prejudice, however to the right to indem
nifcaton on their account In the event of no such
settlement being made.
The indirect losses were thus mentioned not as
claims, but as grievances, and were mentioned
! only TO be withdrawn from discussion.
INDIRECT AND DIRECT.
| Mr.. Fish says that 1t is unfortunate that the
| British High Commissioners did not remonstratc
against the presentation of these claims, and nom
| the first to the last took no exception and re
! corded no objection to the presentation made Ivy
| the American Commissioners of the claims gener
| ally known as the alabama claims which stand on
| the protocol rs genus or class OF claims, cOnpre
! bending several species, and among them enumer
| ating specifically the claims for Indirect losses and
| Injuries.
Tho answer TO this is that no mention Ia made II,