New-York tribune., 1872-06-05

LONDON, Tuesday, June 4, lbi2
7, tbe House of Lords this evening there was
full attendance of peers and the galleries were
crowded Earl Russell moved his lcng-impendlhg
address to the Queen praying Her Majesty TO cause
distractions to be given to her representatives TO
retire from the Board Of Arbitration at Geneva II
the claims for indirect damages are not WIN
drawn by the Government Of the United States
Earl Russell spoke at great length In
support OF his motion. He reviewed the events Oh
the war in, the United State and the cTcum-
stances of the escape of the Alabama ana dlscusseu
the subsequent negotiations. The Government, nc
said. should remember that England never admtVeu
tbe Justice of the indirect claims. What was the
meaning Of this delay, this mystery, tins heStatloh
The nation was in the state Of uncertainty as
when the Treaty was ratified. The honor OF the
Government required that it should speak plainly
IL should say to the United States Withdraw the
indirect claims or no arbitration" There was no
form of extravaganza which was not to be found In
tbe American case. He held the English nego-
tiators responsible. He contrasted the con-
duct of tho British Government in relnqulsn-
ing the Fenian claims with that OF the
American Government In advancing lVs nuho0V
claims This country must feel Illuminated py the
manner in which the negotiators had mismanaged
the business. He complimented the Canadians on
the loyal spirit in which they had acted On the
Treaty. and concluded as follows: 1.-The nation must
show. as it has before, that it is jealous OF the
honor of the British Crown. 1t must treat the
United States as it treated them in the Trent case
ICheers
Earl Granville followed. He defended the right Of
the American Government to place its own construc-
ton on the Treaty of Washington claims. Theonly
way 70 escape from the consequences OF the oppo-
site interpretations put upon the Treaty by the TWO
Governments was through supplemental arhcleand
~ hoA oil aH ifcplf
fore Earl Russell's proposition did not touch the
point at issue. He defended the Commissioners who
negotiated the Treaty, those who acted for the
United States as well those who acted for Great
Britain. 1t was all very well TO pick holes IN
Treaty which, when first published, was generally
approved. The British Commissioners believed the
indirect claims would be withdrawn, and they be-
leyed that the American Commissioners had so ad-
mitted. The asperions on the Government and the
Commissioners were unfounded and unjust, lie re-
buked Earl Russell for his auslon tothe Trent Affair."
declaring that il would be the cause of incalcuable
ill-feeliug Should the Treaty of Washington fail,
an event by no means certain, England would stand
the better for having exhausted the means of remov
ing the misunderstanding. The Government had
been legally advised that the supplemental article
was amply sufficient. If their lordships arrogated
to themselves the treaty ty-making power, they would
have an enormous responsibility If they required
the President Of the United States to do that which
Mr. Disraeh said in his Manchester speech was i'm
possible forhim to do they would destroy all chances
of a settlement. He warned their lordships that
there was no good, but much harm in irritating ex-
pressiOns and resolutions.
Earl Grey remarked that, If the negotiations pro-
ceeded as at present the country would be commit
ted TO any mistake the Government made.
Lord Denman thought they were needlessly
alarmed. Even If the indirect claims were passed.
he doubted if the Commons would pay the bill.
The Earl of Derby disclaimed party feeling on
this question. He had been told that he should be
careful not to offend the Americans. He could con-
ceiye of no poorer compliment to the Americans
than the apprehension that frank plain statement
might be a cause of otfense lCheersl he did not
want to quarrel OF break off negotiations. He
wanted TO know where they stood. The negotiatOrs
were either unable to see what was plain to every
body OF had determined to make treaty with their
eyes shut. If the understanding is clear that the
indirect claims are excluded, why are they not ex-
cluded in plain ternsf ICheers.l
The Earl of Kimberley regretted that Lord Gran
Vile had constituted himself an American advocate.
He seemed to be under the impression that the
House had determined that the Treaty should fail
and the real object and spirit of his speech its
defense. lie must know that words whereby the
indirect claims would be directly withdrawn could
be inserted III the Treaty Win the consent OF Inc
American Government.
The Marquis Of Salisbury regretted that Earl
Granville should throw the responsibility on the
Joint High Commissioners. BE particularly alluded
to the selection the Government had made Of Com
missioners for Great Britain, and limited
that they had been .overmatched by the
astute Yankees. He confesses he had
no very active regard for the Treaty,
and declared his unmitgated hostility to the ind-
rect claims. He ridiculed the idea that the Amer-
cans if they felt they ought to withdraw the indi
rect claims, would not plainly do so.
The debate was continued 10y the Earl of Malmes-
bury in favor of the motion, and the Marquis of
Ripon against IT,
Lord Westbury announced that he would vote
with the Government, because, if the motion Of Earl
Russell prevailed, it would Kill the supplemental
article and destroy all that had already been done
The Earl Of ROsebery said he should fol-
low the example of Lord Westbury, be-
leyng that the motion would crush
any tendency on the part of the United States to
give way. Lord Cairns supported the motion. He
did not think it would endanger cordial relations
with America lie assailed with bitterness the
Treaty, the negotiations, and the Government. He
was repeatedly interrupted by Lords Granville and
Argyll The debate became quite exciting, and
there were some lively scenes.
The Lord Chancellor moved an adjournment; and
Earl Granville, supporting the motion, character
lied the speech of Lord Cairns as the speech of an
Advocate. After some confusion the motion to adj
ourn was negatiyed bya vote of IS to 125. An adj
journment was again moved, this time until Thurs
day; which was agreed TO, and the sitting closed
Mt o'clock a.