Perrysburg journal. (Perrysburg, Wood Co., O. [Ohio]) 186?-1965, 1872-05-03

| Arbitrators may be led in consequence Of the
use of Inaccurate OF careless language In the
| closing paragraph OF this statement Of the
British Case. IL Is, therefore, stated that
claims for the interference of Her Majesty's
| Government In the case OF these and other
vessels were based according TO the state
mcnt of Mr.. Adams in his letters to Earl Rus
sell, dated October o, 1862, on evidence con
sidered by him to apply directly to infringe
| ments of municipal laws, and not TO any
thing beyond. II Is quite possible perhaps
II Is not too much TO say IL Is possible that
the Arbitrators may derive from this state
ment the impression that all official repre-
sentatlons OF Mr.. Adams In respect to the
four vessels were expressly based on the
evidence offered by him in support of the
allegations of infringcments Of municipal
law. The United States call attention to
this, feeling confident that Her Majesty's
Government will be anxious to exclude a
construction of It's language which is so lit
tie In accordance with the facts.
In Section ., on Page 1871, of the case Of
Her Maiesty's Government, II is said: "If
the Tribunal should come to the conclusion
that Great Britain has incurred any liability
to the United states, the question will arise,
What should be deemed the least measure
and extent of that liability? Her Britannia
Majesty's Government abstain at present
from entering into the question, and will re-
serve such observations as may be fitly Of
fered In relation to II In later stage of the
proceedings. Here it is sufficient to remark,
that claim on the part of a belligerent, to
be indemnfed at the expense of a neutral
for losses inflicted or occasioned by any or
dinary operations of war, on the plea that
these operations were assisted or facilitated
by negligence on the part of neutral Gov
eminent, is one which involves grave consid
erations, and requires to be weighed with the
utmost care. Losses of which such negligence
is the direct and proXimate cause-and it is in
respect of such only that compensation could
justly be awarded-are commonly not easy
to separate from those springing from other
causes.n
The United States concur with Her Males
ty's Government in the opinion that a claim
on the part Of belligerent TO be indemniied
at the expense of n neutral for losses intlict-
ed or occasioned by any ordinary operations
of war, is one which involves grave consider
ations, and requires to be weighed with the
utmost care. Without the explanatory OBJ
seryations which Her Majesty's Government
reserves the right to make in a later stage of
the proceedings, they cannot say how far
they do or do not concur in the further state
ment that compensation can only justly be
awarded by the Tribunal in respect to losses
of which the negligence of neutral is the
direct and proximate cause. 1t appears to
them, however, that certain general consid-
erations may reasonably be assumed by the
Arbitrators:
|. Both parties contemplate that the United
States will endeavor to establish in these pro-
ccedngs some tangible connection of cause
and effect between the injuries for which
they ask compensation, and acts committed
by the several vessels which, the Treaty con
templates, are to be shown to be the fount
of those injuries.
2. The Tribunal of Arbitration, being ju-
dicial body, invested by the parties with the
functions necessary for the determining of
the issues between them, and being now ap-
prised of the substance of matter in dispute,
will hold itself bound by such reasonable
and established rules of law regarding the
relation, cause and effect as il may assume
that the parties had in view when they en-
tered into their engagement to make this
reference.
,. Neither party contemplates that the
Tribunal will establish or be governed by
rules in this respect, which will either on the
one hand tend to release neutrals from their
duty to observe a strict neutrality, or, on the
other hand, will make q course of honest
neutrality burdensome.
Leaving the new issues raised by the case
and counter cases of the two Governments to
the arguments of coutsels and to the deci.
sion of the Tribunal, the United States re
peat with strengthening conviction the Ian
guage with which they closed their case
:" 1t is the highest interest of the two great
/ Powers which appear ut this bar that the
/ causes of difference which have arisen be
/ tween them should be speedily and forever
/ set at rest. The United States entertain the
I confident expectation that Her Majesty.
/ Government will concur with them in thi.
l opiniCu.n