The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1872-09-16

cannot Justify Itself Tor It's failure In due
diligence on the plea ofthe insutilciency
Of legal means OF action.
1t passed four OF the arbitrators for the
reasons above assigned, and the fifth,
Lord Chief Justice Cockburn, Tor reasons
separately assigned by him, is Of the opin.
ion that Great Britain has, Ia this
case, failed by omission TO fulfill the
duties prescribed in tho 1st and 3D. rules
established by the Treaty at Washington;
and wheras, with respect 10 Florida Il re.
suits from all facts that English authorities
failed to take measures adequate to pre-
vent the violation OF neutrality; notwith-
standing the representations Of the agents
Of the United States, to the effect that her
Majesty's. Government failed to use due
diligence TO fulfil its duties OF neutrality.
II Is likewise proven from facts which
have been presented, relative To the stay
Of the OretO ut Nashaw, New Providence,
to her issue;thence, her enlistment OF men,
her supplies and her armament with the
cooperation Of tho British vessel, Prince
Alfred in Greenbay, that there was neg
ligence on the part of the British Colonial
authorities; whereas, Notwithstanding the
violation ofneutrality which Great Britain
committed in the case OF the Oreto, the
same vessel called Florida, was on several
occasions freely admitted 10 British ports;
and,whereas, judicial acquittal Of the Orito
at Nashua and New Providence cannot re.
lieve Great Britain from responsibility in.
Cured under the principles ot interna.
tiOnal law, nor can the fact OF the entry
Of the Florida into the Confederate port
Of Mobile and her stay there during q pc.
Rod OF four months extinguish tho re.
sponsibility previously incurred by Great
Britain. For these reasons the Tribunal,
by majority Of four voices to one, Is Of
the opinion that Great Britain has in this
case failed, by her omission to fulfill the
duties prescribed in the first, second and
third rules established in article @ OF the
Treaty OF Washington. p
Whereas, in the case Of the Shenandoah,
It results from facts placed before the
Court, that, in the departure from the
port of London OF the Sea King and her
subsequent transformation into cruiser
near Madoria, the English Government Is
not chargGable with any failure, down
TO that date, in due diligence
to fulfill the duties Of neutrality; but
whereas it results from the facts connect.
cd with the stay Of the Shenandoah at
Melbourne, and especially by the aug.
mentatiOn, which England admits to
have been clandestinely effected, in her
force of men by enlistments at that port,
that there was negligence on the part ol
the British authorities at that place, for
these reasons the Tribunal of Arbitration
is unanimously Of the opinion that Eng.
land has not failed by act of omission to
fulfill the duties presented by the thrOe
rules Of the Treaty Of Washington or in
the observance Of the principles OF inter.
national law, with respect 10 the She.
nandnah during the period Of time anteri.
or to her entry into the port Of Melbourne.
And by majority Of three to two votes,
the Tribunal decides that Great Britain
has failed in her duties as prescribed In
the ID and 3d rules OF tho treaty, in the
case Of the same vessel, the Shcnan.
dOah, from and alter her entry
into Hobson's Bay, and Is therefore
responsible for the acts Of that vessel
alter her departure from Melbourne
on the 18th day Of February, 1865. As re.
lates 10 the cases of Tuscaloosa, the
Clarance and 'laCOvy, tho aiders and
tenders Of the Alabama and Florida, the
court is OF the unanimous opinion that
these accessories must follow the lot OF
their principals, and submit to the same
decision. As far as relates to the case of
the privateer Retribution, the tribunal by
n majority OF 3 to3 voices is OF tho opin.
ion tnat England has not failed to fulfill
her duties under the three rules. As far
rs relates to the Georgia, Sumter, Nash
vile, Tallahassee and ChiCkamagua, the
court is unanimously OF tho opinion that
Great Britain has not failed 10 fulfill the
duties prescribed under the three rules Of
the Treary, or by the International law
The court is Of the opinion that the Sal
lie, jeff Davis, Music, Bison and Joy arc
excluded from its consideration Tor want
Of evidence; and whereas, so far as relates
to the particular form Of the indemnity
claimed by the United States for costs in.
Cured in pursuit Of cruisers. it is
not in the judgment Of the Tribunal
properly to distinguish from the general
expenses Of the war. Therefore, the Court
is Of the opinion, by majority Of three
to two, there is no ground for awarding
any sum by way of indemnity under this
head; aud, whereas, prospective injuries
cannot properly be made a subject for
compensation, inasmuch as they depend
on the nature OF future and uncertain con
tingencies, the Tribunal Is unanimously
Of The opinion that there is no ground for
an award under this head; and, whereas,
in order to arrive at an equitable com.
pensation for tho damages sustained,
it is necessary to set aside all
double claims for the same losses, and all
claims for gross freight, so far as it exceeds
net freight; and whereas, II Is just and
reasonable to allow interest at q reasona-
bic rate; whereas, in accordance with the
spirit and letter Of the treaty OF Washing
ton, it is preferable to adopt the form ol
adjudication Of sum in gross, rather
than refer the subject Of compensation for
further discussion and delberation to the
Board OF Assessors provided in article 1C
Of the Treaty Of Washington, the Tribunal
Of Arbitration usingAhe authority con.
ferred on its memberSby article 2 of the
treaty, by majority of four voices, award
to the Unlted States Of America the SUN
Of $l5, 1000 in gold as the indemnity to
, be paid by Great Britain to tho United
States of American government for the
satisfaction Of all claims referred for the
consideration Of tue arbirating tribunal
coniormably 10 the provisions contained
; In article z OF tho treaty, and in accord
anCe with the terms Of article II Of the
treaty, the Tribunal declares that all the
claims which have been referred to It for
adjudication are hereby fully, perfectly
and finally settled. fl'.' -
The court furthermore declares thai
each and every ono Of said claims, wheth
%. Lan ca M, M ~. nE tnn., mi hn No knnr