New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1872-02-23
THE WASHINGTON TREATY.
DOES 1T WARRANT A CLAIM FOR INDIRECT
DAMAGES.

there is stated 10 be subsiding and the probability
Of rupture is said 10 be diminished yet as the pos
siblity of such rupture exists. 1t may not be amss
in the great duty and interests of conserving peace
to present some views which it is hoped will not be
inspposite Carefully, to mark now the charac-
ter 81 the communications from the foreign Office Of
Great Britain with the United States during the late
Rebellion is not worth while for the reason that the
Government of the former country looked conf
IDENTIFY to q disruption of the American Republic,
and was not reluctant to its taking place thus, she
would not be very nice nor very alert III the per
formanco Of the great duties of o strict neutrality
nor very careful of the manner I'm when she elthcr
Vindicated or excused her TemissneSs The suppress
sion of the Rebellion. and the vast resources and
mighty mower of our American Republic, which this
s,nnrsssion eyinced brought Great Britain to her
senses. when she saw that the day of account must
come and that in rendering this account she might
he called upon to do two things of which deeply
affected her character the other her pride and last
ing national interests. Her pride was touched
deeply touched-n the question of the admission OF
her violation of good faith and of international
law which not only had the United States charged
upon her but the higher order of her public men
had admitted and deplored-and which her lasting
national interests compelled to be made, II not Oil
rectly. resultngly. Her unsuccessful Conventions
modes by which she sought to escape her dilemma
but instead Of relieving, increased her emDaTrasS-
ments The attitude of this country, on the other
hand. was assured and firm. Her councils sought
and would be content with nothing less than repa-
ration for past injuries and security against future
injuries-the PREPARATION to be such as could be rea
snnably asked and reasonably granted the security
10 be qnite sufficient OF reasonably sufficient 10
attain these ends required in the Department. OF
state discretion, decision, skill. 1t may be truly
said that in the negotiation of the recent Treaty
with Great Britain these several qualities OF action
were eminently shown. Although not officially,
vet the Secretary Of State apprsed of the views
of the leading mind in England 1t would not adj
NIT her liability for the depredatOns of any of the
Confederate cruisers, because she would not admit
wrong motive OF careless eXertiOn or non-exeTuOn
Of her pcacr 10 prevent those depredations. The
fact of the wrong committed the excuses, II any
existed: the amount of compcnsation-could IN her
view be best and perhaps only ascertained by
arbitration; and that the Unites States regarded
such resort as meeting the case was shown by the
facts that it had been proposed twice by Mr. Seward
first by Mr. Adams and declined by Mr.. Russell; a
second time by Mr.. Johnson, and accepted by stan
ley and Clarendon. 1t was the policy nauguratcd
by Washington, and subsequently, pursued by sew
era of his successors. The rejection by the Senate
Of the Johnson clarendon Treaty without any pub
lie statement Of the grounds of that rejection, at
tended as it was by violent deClamatOry attack
upon orc of the contracting parties-GTeat Britain
followed by the language of the President III his adj
dress 10 Congress- and the wise restrictions or silence
ON the American Envoy to London, precluded any
direct overture to this country for renewal OF a
meditation in relation to the piTatcal Confederate
cruisers This was avoided by note, after long
interval from the British Minister, Thornton to the
Secretary Of State Of the 26th Of January ISL
which. declaring that his Government deemed it Of
nportauce to the good relations which they are ever
Uanxions should subsst and be strengthened
between the two Governments as to the fish
cries and as TO The Anglo-AmeriCan possessions
proposed q Joint High Commission to sit at Wash
ington to treat of and discuss the mode of settling
The different questions which have arisen out OF the
fisheries as well rs those which affect the relations
az the United States toward Her Majcsty's posses
,ions in North America" That the terms here used
contemplated what followed four days after III a
reply of the Secretary Of State is seen i'll that reply
Ueneatiu., these terms it states the President s
appreciation Of the importance of friendly and
COMPLETE understanding between the two Govern
,nepts" ~ to the topics mentioned i'll the note, and
s,bioins a declaration of the Presidents opinion
Tint without the adjustment of class OF questions
NOT alluded to in the note of the British Envoy inc
uroposed Commission would fail TO establish the
rcI1nancnt relations, and the sincere, substantial ana
lasting friendship" which he desires should prevail
.'He thinks" il odds that the removal Of the dill
ferences which arose during the Rebellion and
which have existed since then growing out OF the
acts committed bv the several vessels which have
given rise to the claims generally known as the Ala
hama Claims will also be essential to the restoration
If cordial and amicable relations between the two
I;oyernments" With this view, he asks " the assent
of Her Majestys Government that tins subject also
may be treated of by the proposed High Commission
and may TINS be put in the way OF final and AMIGA
BILE settlement in order TO an entire and ABIDING
friendship between the two nations" The response
of the British Envoy, acceding to the Presidents
proposal. stated as condition that all other
claims, both of British subjects and citizens of the
United States arising out of acts committed during
the recent civil war in this country, are similarly
,eferred" The answer accepted the proposition.
A careful consideration Of that correspondence is
lr,ortapt for the reason that it was the basis OF
the Treaty that was made and that, when claim
..for iuuries suffered from the Fenian raids was
offered by the British Commissioners, this claim was
Objected TO- as mot embraced in the scope of the
correspondence, and was not contemplated at the
time of the creation Of the Commission" This OBJ
irction prevailed the British Commissioners stating
that they had the less difficulty in doing so, as
portiOn of the claims were of constructive and
inferential character Who, we now ask, Oh a
scrutiny of this correspondence, can aver that il
indicates the intention OF either party to include
,ecoonize as ground of claim, constructive, infer
rnt,aI" or consequential damages Taking the
tpening note of the British envoy, which asked a
discussion of the mode of settling the questions
which had arisen out of the fisheries as guide il
cannot be pretended that any claim OF constructive