The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1872-02-08
YHE WASHINGTON TREATY.
CONTINUED FROM SEVENTH PAGE.

sioners appointed under it. Furthermore the neu-
ualty laws OF the Cmted STATES were enacted at
the request OF Great Britain, and the priaciples In
volved IN the present CLAIMS have been recognized
heretofore in cases which have arisen between the
TWO governments, and the obligation TO make CON-
pensation for injuries has been adm,tted. In the
course OF the long discussions between the two gov.
ernments on the Alabama claims Great Britain has
attempfedto JUSTIFY It's course bF reference TO the
conduct OF the United States toward Portugal be-
tween 1916 and 1922. But the several replies OF Mr..
Adams amply defended that affair. From the re-
plies and from the Official documents referred to In
them 1t wonid appear that In the year 1850 the
United STATES had brought TO the point OF settlement
y iong-standng claim against Portugal Tor the de-
vtructlon OF the American armed brig General
Armstrong, In the harbor OF Faya in the year 1914.
They WERE at the same time pressing some other
claims against Portugal, and were conducting a
correspondence with the Portuguese Legation at
Washington krowing out OF the seizure OF POrtll-
guese SLAYER. The Portuguese government, as al
Offset to these claims oi the United states, revived
some
ExtLoDEo CLAIMS OF PORTUGAL AGAINST THE
UNITED STATES,
Tor alleged violation or neutrality, that rad SUM-
bered for nearly thirty years. lengthy
ence with Portugal, wnicn Is next summarized,
SHOWS the nature oI those claims, ana that they
were unlike those now pressed BY the United Stases
upon Great Britain. Nevertheless, the principles
Articie o. the treaty OF Washington lays down
the rules which should govern neutras, ailL article
case que diligence is not given oy the neutral to
prevent !.'.nsl ntHns ,s out armiag or equipplng
Is sY Tns rc@ s ssS'O SIR w
Jones and other writers on civil law, ancient
and modern, and also by LORD Granville and SIR
Of the reoelilon. But the United States
do not agree with the official definitions OF the lat
gence which IL called for by the rules OF the Treaty
or Washington Is a due diligence; That Is, a dit
gence propOrtoned TO the magnitude OF the subject
and TO the dignity ana strength OF the rover wncn
Ii to exercise ia diligence winch shall by the use
the power OF the neural, through ali stages OF the
transactlon prevent It's soil rom being vlolated-a
digence that snail IN ike manner deter designing
men from committing acts OF war upon the soil "
the neutral agains; It's Will, and thus possibly drag
ging II into war which II would avcid-a dill
gence which prompts The neutral TO the most ener-
getlc measures to discover any purpose OF doing the
acts lOrDidden By It's good fatn AZ neutral, and
imposes upon II the obligation when 1t receives the
knowledge OF an Intention tc commit such acts. to
use all the means in us power TO prevent II. No
mensurate with the emergency or with the magni-
tude OF the results OF negligence. Understanding
Identical with the measure OF duty which Great
Britain had previously admitted.
The United States, IN further prosecution OF their
case anayze the several clauses OF the Washington
Treaty and show that the neural was bound TO de-
tain any vessel fitted out In whole or in part,
IN ls ports TO prey upon the Comm cree Of the bel
Agerents. And the United States regard
THIS DUTY AS ONE THAT EXISTED BY THE LAW OF
prior to the Treaty of washington; but It s admit
ted In the treaty tna for the purpose OF the present
case this rule Is TO be taken as having the force OF
puplic law during the Southern rebellion. Great
Britain JAILED to enforce It, she also violated the
second rule OF inc treaty, which provides tnat
neutral government Is bound not 10 permit or suffer
either oellikerent TO make use OF It's pOrls waters
as the base or Naval operations against the other
Tor the purpose VI the renewal or augmentation OF
miiltaiy supplies or arms, the recruitment or men,
The various writer's on International law are quoted
Dy our government IN support o. It's proof that
England violated not only her own laws and pro-
carnations ON neutrality, but the law OF nations
these writer's gave taelr OPINIONS Introduced or
referred to Nv our COUNSEL And by the foregoing the
United States trust they have established 10 the sat
tsiaction OF the Tribunal OF Arbitration against
Great Britain the following pons:-
POINTS ESTABLISHED BY TIE UNITED STATES
AGAINST GREAT BRITAIN.
Frst-That II Is the duty VI a neutral to preserve
slIict and impartial neutrality as to both benge-
Secorsd-1nat thls obligation is independent OF
municipal law.
Thsrd-Tnat neutral Is bound to enforce its mum.
cpal laws ami Its executive proclamation, and mat
belllgerent has the right 10 ask II TO 40 80, and
also the rignt to ask to have the powers conferred
upon the neutral by law Increased, iOund Insurn-
Gent.
FOuvth-rhat neutral Is bound to use d1e di!i.
gence TO prevent the hitting out armlDg or equip
ping, within It's jurisdiction, any vessel which t
has reasonable ground 10 believe Is intended 10
cruise or 10 carry on war against Power with
which II Is at peace.
FUth-Ihat neutral is bound to use like dill.
u vessel.
S,Lh-Inat neutral Is oouno 10 use ike din
gence 10 prevent the departure from its jurisdiction
OF any vessel intended to cruise or carry on war
against any Power with whicn IL Is at peace; such
vessel having been specially adapted. In whole or
IN part, within Its jurisdiction, 10 warlike use.
Sete,tih-Tnat neutral NAV not permit suffer
either beliigerent to make use vi It's ports waters
~ the base ol naval operations against the other.
ElQitth--Thal q neutral ID pound " use due dili-
gence In us pOrts or waters to prevent either bei-
gerent from obtaining there renewal or augmen-
tat10n OF military supplies or arms Tor Delligerent
N'anh-Ihat wnen neutral fails to use all the
means IN It's power 10 prevent breach ol TIE neu-
traiity oil It's SOIL or waters IN any or The foregoing
respects, the neutral should make compensation Tor
injury resulting therefrOm.
Tehit-Ihat Tins obligation 10 not discharged or
arrested by the change or the 0hendng vessel into
u public man.0i-war
E,e,enfh--lh hat TINS obligation not discharged
by fraudulent attenpt o, the Offending vessel TO
evade the PROVISIONS Of u local municipal law.
TUeiHi- That Inc offence VIII not be deposited so
as To lease the iaDty OF the neutral even Nv the
entry Of the Offending vessel III port OF the bel.
hgerent, and tnere becoming man.owar. II any
part OF the original fraud continues TO hang about
The vessei.
Alter presenting the foregoing points OF law anu
fact established by documentary evidence, a
synopsis OF wuicn only we give, our govern.
ment next proceeds 10 snow from the
ADMISSIONS OF BRITISH STATESMEN AND CABINET
MINISTER'S
and from the lips OF Britalns High Commissioner
~ recorded In article 4 Oi the Treaty OF Washing.
ton, the failure OF that government 10 per orm the
dultes as a neutral when II well knew rested AZ
NATIONAL and International obligations upon her.
Documentary evidence also adduced TO show
That treat Britain carried ON regular
though IIIct trade with Tie South during me
existence OF our c,vll war. The character OF our
Southern coast and the proximity of Nassau and
Bermuda thereto are Afro presented to the attention
OF the ltrailOn Tribunal. anu the gno1us one
randi OF this Illicit tranic Is plainly and IDLY
set forth, ana II Is SHOWN that while the rebel
cruisers were allowed TO recruit Their supplies OF
every KIM in these island ports the United states
vessels were denied permission To deposit coal at
Nassau. Complaint was theredp0n made TO Earl
Russell and all the iac;s were known 10 The British
government; nevertheless II Jailed In that educ
dlgece W discover the vi0ators Of It's neutrality.
Earl RUSSELL however thereafter Issued INSTRUCTIONS
~ follows
Fnsi-No ship-oi-war or prlvateer OF either bel
hgerent was to be permitted 10 enter any port,
rOadstead or WAFER In the Bananas except Dy
special leave OF the Lieutenant Governor or In case
OF stress OF weather; ana, In case PERMISSION
snOuiu pe gwen. the vessel was nevertheless TO be
[, required W 20 10 sea AZ soon possible, and
with no supplies except such as might be necessary