The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1872-03-23

submission Of what are called the claims for
indirect losses are not within the province of
the Tribunal of Arbitration, has been reached
by very slow process. The lease" of the
American government was Officially delivered
to the agent Of the British government at
Geneva, In pursuance of the terms of the
treaty, on the 18th day Of December last. A
dozen or more copies were delivered by Gen
eral Schenck to the Foreign ONCE in London
ON the goth day of December, and an addi-
tional number within q very few days there
after; and tho leading press in London were
furnished with copies about the same time.
Copies were freely distributed to those who
desired them as soon as they had been given
to the Foreign Office. The lease" was there
| fore in the possession Of the British govern
ment ON 10Th December, and fairly before the
British public by the 25th or 26th day of De-
| cember. oe
1t is believed that the first comment made
on our case was Ia tho Morning
Post, of December 20. Attention was
called to these claims and to their possible
| magnitude, aud the writer closed by saying -
''The extravagant nature of these demands Is
the best evidence that the arbitrators, ma
jority of whom are to make an award, which is
to be final, will refuse to entertain them But that
they should be made, when their rejection is
certain, is not a pleasant circumstance"
| Not one word about the presentation being
an infraction of the treaty. On the contrary,
England was to be protected by the rejection
OF the claims because they were extravagant.
| On the I'd of January the Times opened fire.
It said 1.-THE safest, as well as the most dig
nified course Is, therefore, to stand upon what
| we conceive to be sound legal principles, and
to demur to any such claim for indirect dam
ages. 1t is fair to notice that they
1.-THE rules of the treaty. are er post tactO
law, and to remember also that in
| past wars, when the United States were neu-
| trail, their government is admitted to have
acted quite at variance with the loosesi con-
| struction of such rules. The very
vagueness Of these demands, and the impossi-
bilty of estimating the damage and apportion-
ing the compensation, show their unsoundness.'
Still not word denying the right to pre-
sent the claims. They were to be demurred
to, not because they were not within the scope
of the treaty, but because they were vague
and impossible to estimate.
The next day the Daily Ne,os took up the
story. It said -" We have here to do with
demands that are capable Of boundless ex-
panslon. What that full extent may
be we are not expressly told; in fact the COM
putatons of the United States government
have not yet reached the mighty sum.
Happily claims such as these are no longer
matter of controversy between England and
the United States Confident in our own
recttude and in the substantial justice of our
cause, we have consented to refer it to tri-
bunal 80 constituted as to insure the conf
dence Of the world. We shall not anticipate
its decision, but we shall be quite ready to
| accept its justice"
! 1t will be observed that this journal, which
has been the most rabid In its counsels to
break the treaty unless the United States will
| withdraw its case without discussion, in its
issue nearly three weeks after the meeting at
Geneva and fortnight after General Schenck
had begun distributing the case in London to
whoever wanted it, was of the opinion that the
arbitrstors were to pass upon these claims.
On the 4th of January the Morning Post
was of the same opinion. That the agent of
the government of the United States, 1t said,
SHOULD contend, in the case he has presented,
that we should also be responsible,
even for the prolongation Of the war, Is not
surprising, since he speaks as an advocate
But no Judge could for an instant entertain
such claims"
The Standard Of the same day says COM
menting on our case :-''No demand has been
advanced for indirect or constructive dam
| ages, largely as these have been insisted upon
| in the argument with which the American
representatives have opened their pleadings.
The verdict of the Court upon such
an issue as that we shall not attempt to antici-
pate"
On the same day the Pail Mall Gazette gave
its views on our case, which the writer had
evidently read. "The Treaty of Washington
would have been almost certainly rejected by
the Senate if it had excluded the Americans
from stating their grievances by way of foren-
sic argument as strongly as they had done in
diplomatic communication. The real question
Is whether the treaty, which is undoubtedly
on its trial, has proved means Of applying
to these passionate statements, now seven
years old, the criterion of detailed inquiry,
settled law and sober reason. The
issue may well be awaited with the keenest
interest and even anxiety; but there is no
solid ground for the anticipations Of disaster
which have been abroad for day or two."
The Morning Post and the Standard Of the
9Th, and the Telegraph and the Spectator Of
the 9Th, each had an article on the subject,
showing that the several writer's had read our