The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1872-04-24

surface, was most hazardous step, but proba-
be lodged before the 10th OF April, before
there wac possibility of receiving the
American reply to Earl Granville's last note. That
STEP OF first sight, might appear to recognize the
justice OF the indirect claims; and the government
ought not to have taken this hazardous but still
perfectly justinable STEP In order to prevent the
treaty from lapsing, without also sending In
some document stating their reasons for doing
be laid on the table in order that Parliament and
the country might know what the government had
done.
Mr.. GLADSTONE had intended to convey that
the note or statement, which he had explained
had been sent In with the counter case, would be
laid on the table at the same time with the counter
case
The subject then dropped.
The British Counter Case-Thc Duty OF
the Government.
From the London Times April I2l
We are now on the eve OF the last day
for delivering the counter case. 1t must be pre-
sented to the Arbitrators Monday, II 1t is to be
that it win be presented, We must ask that the
Significance ST this step may be well
ghsa forms. ana &c, Soas ss. t.s Ss Ss
since the character OF the American case has be-
come known to us; and, In consenting as we do, to
not only that we know our own meaning, but that
the arbitrators shall know our meaning, and the
putting it IN. We take this step, because If we did
not the arbitration would at once lapse, and be-
cause there remains another interval during which
the American Cabinet may repair the error
involved In the construction Of their case. II it
not for this second consideration the first OF
ITSELF powerful as 1t must be- would not induce us
to send In reply. Two months after the delivery
of the counter case the agent OF each government
must deliver to each of the arbitrators written or
printed arguments showing the points and evidence
on which his government relies, and thereupon the
more active duty OF the parties to the arbitration
stage therefore, zoe may and mast retire II the
american goce'n'nent DO not beforehand renounce
oodsed IN their case. We do not retire now, be.
cause there remains this further opportunity for
doing so without having compromised our indie.
pendence. But, as we ourselves understand that
na2 feel rstre on the 10Th Of e june i
are not by that time reduced to the limits Of
the arbitration to which we agreed, we
ceaest possible notice OF our ana to
notify to the arbtrators that the step take now
Ia without prejudice to our argument that their
authority does not extend to the consideration OF
@s & fSnS E our soos "e o 1eeSa rs
ss s sav aa ae s &c os aa N %
carattons made in Parliament under Ministerial
There should be no appearance of uncertainty
about our intention. The mischief to be most
carefully guarded against s that the American
should daily with the am difficulty n, which
we may give way. There ought to be no pos
sbilIty Of their entertaining this error. The
Field, which has been published in the United
States, This country will not go into court to
ask for an award ao dan st. # win ~
rect damages will never be paid, and therefore the
only honest course is to object now, before going
unanmity and sincerity Of eur determination; but
there is too strong evidence that such Illusions
ing Of the last kilograms which have been re-
We are told that the Cabinet Of Washington has
dnn mt wi IN ord nron i1losC
note:-"An action is postponed until after infor-
nation has been received Of the proceedings at
ment that the American government Is waiting
to see how far we shall commit ourselves in
are willing to trust to the chapter of acci-
dents and the pressure Of time upon our reso-
luton. We cannot Of course, prevent their doing
this, but we may let them understand that If they
expose the arbitration to the chances Of the future
they do so at their own risk. We at least are not
trusting to accidents for plan of action is per-
fectly shaped beforehand and we have no hesitation
in explaining what 1t will be under any contin-
gency. We cannot attach the same Significance to
the proceedings of the House of Representatives;
but far 1t goes this branch of Congress copies
the policy Of the Cabinet in waiting upon the future.
1t must indeed, be remembered that the House
Of Representatives has no direct means of knowing
what may be the course of negotiations be-
scarcely suppose that it has not been indi.
recty informed of the exact position of the contro-
versy. What, then, has the House Of Representa-
tives dOne2 We are informed that one OF its men,
bers brought in resolution pr0nouncing Judgment
entirely in our favor on the difficulties that have
arisen and the House deXterovsly shelved it by re-
ferring 1t to the Committee on Foreign Affairs. The
resolution, as reported, was, without doubt, deci-
sive. It began with a recital that the submits
sion of the indirect claims was contrary to
the oSeatons e ef neu ana s ses
precedents and it then proposed to declare that in
the opinion OF the House, these claims were waived
That they would be waived in case Of an Amicaee
settlement. This will be recognized as an embodi-
ment of our leading argument, and it could not be
expected that the House of Representatives would
accept it; but two months since it would have
been rejected or Immediately withdrawn. It is
now laid aside In such q form that 1t can be brought
up again If it should ever seem advisable or be left
to sumber undistdrbed II that course be preferred
II the House OF Representatives does wait upon
us II waits upon the American government, which
waits upon us. Is the opinion OF either or both as
to our tenaciy so low that neither the government
nor the House can be persuaded that II is vain to
walt Tor any wavering In our resolution The
course to be pursued before the arbitrators on
Monday T. 80 plain That 1t cannot be mistaken
company IL Nth protest that zoe do not dltOC that
the claims 0r consequential damages preferred IN
the American case are Included n. the reference to
arbitration, or that Is githin the prOUince Of the
drbftrdtOrs to determine Uhether they not
Included; ana ntrtner, that tender our counter
case WITHOUT pretdice to the p1tpiege Of 1DhiCh
intend to dUdH ourselves or withdrawing at the
aaert stage Of the proceedings U the claim FOR con-
internal The respect for the Board which in
duccd us last year to refer to their arbitration the
claims we nave referred remains undlHinished;
but the principle Of arbitration itself would be
hopelessy damaged II we did not insist
on restraining the reference within the limits to
which both governments had agreed. What nation
would ever again permit difficulty with another
country to be referred to friendly Judgment If it
were once allowed that the mere fact Of an arbi-
tration having been agreed upon gave the arbitra-
tors jurisdiction and authority to decide upon any
thing and everything which either tgant might in
sst on bringing before themS so far from soliciting
judgment OF the arbtrat0rs upon the construction
of the treaty, we must deprecate any expression OF
opinion from them upon 1t, and, indeed, we may be
certain that respect for their own dignity will re-
strain the arbtrators from making any declaration
as to the meaning OF the Convention when they
have been given to understand that IL would
have no authority. The counter cass itself should
not enter into any argument as to the admssibiity
OF the consequential claims. II should treat them
as a mere nullity, to be expunged or otherwise
removed from the case before the next stage is
reached. We shall thus have done all that can be
required OF US, leaving to the other side the re-
sponsibty OF deciding whether the arbitration is to
proceed or to become abortve. 1t was through the