The new North-west. [volume] (Deer Lodge, Mont.) 1869-1897, 1872-09-21
THE NEW NORTHWEST, DEER LODI
oec1slnn oe tine GENEVA ca
AnglTRAIlOu.

Dec)Sjou Of TING GENEVA ooAR0 =
ARBITRATION.
New YoRx. September 1.-THE follow.
INK SPECIAL 10 published this morning:
GENEVA, September IL
The decision Of the Alabama Claims A'Oa'
sssiion tribunal, In the award Of the settle
meut of tho case between Great Britain and
the United States, delivered to-day In the
council nom In this city, bceins with the
recital in formal technical language Of the
treaty Of Washington. reci'cs the osmes and
titles Ut the arbitrstors and agents appointed
by the arbitrssing governments. and sets
forth the facts Of the sssemhlage OF the
court In Geneva. the exchange and vcrtfics
ton of the powers Of it, members, and the
presentation Of the national English and
American cases BY the sgents and counse'.
Having concluded this legal and judicial
preface the court, IN it, decision, continues
10 declare cerbntim - follows
Whereas. Having fully taken into consid-
Grafton the treaty, cases, countcr cases. doc
uments. evidence. arguments. and MI COM
municsiions which have been made, and
having impartially and carefully examined
the ssme, has arrived ct decision and pre-.
srnts - follows it, award and bases Of
award:
Whereas, Having regard to the 9Th and
7sh articles Of the treaty 1t Washington, the
article in deciding matter. submi;;tscaa Z; e
them, 10 be governed by three rules therein
specified, and by such principles of interna.
ttonal law ~ are not inconsistent Herewith,
- tho arbitrstors shall determine, applicable
to the case.
Whereas. Due diligence. q referred to In
the lat and Sd of ssid rules. should be cx.
erciaed by neutral governments In exact pro.
portion to the risks To which either of the
beI'iRercnts may he exposed ny failure to
fnlill the obligations Of neutrality on their
part:
Whereas. The circumstance out If which
the subject matter Of the controversy arose
were ~ nature tn call for the cxerrisc on
tho nart Of Her Mnjesty's government Of all
p"ssihle aolicitudc for the observance 1T the
rights and duties involved in Her Majcsty's
proclamation 1T neutrality. issued on the
thirteenth day IT May. in the year 1T onr
Lord ono thousand eight hundred and sixty.
one. and the effects Of the violation Of men.
irality committed by means 1T the construc.
ton, equipment and armament Of vessel
are not done away with ny any commission
which the government Of a hc'ligcrcnt po~er
benefited by the violation Of neutrality may
afterwards grant that vessel. and the ulsi.
mate step ny which the offense ia completed
cannot be admitted "A . ground for the ali.
solution If the offender. nor can the con
summation Of his fraud become means of
establishing his innocence;
Whereas. The privilege 1T cx-terrisorial
ity accorded to vessels Of war 10 admitted
into the law Of nations not % an absolute
right. hut a founded m the principles Of
courtesy and mutual Difference and there.
fore ran never he appealed 10 for \ justin
cntiou Of acts done in violation 1T neutral
ity: and
Whereas, The absence ~ previous ,eeis
lstive rule cannot he regarded - failure
In the law Of nations In case In which a
vcsacl carries Its own condemnation;
Whereas, In order 10 impart to supplies
of coal = character Inconsistent with the
sccond rule prohibiting the usc of neutral
p"rts and waters - basis Of operations It
Ia necessary that such supplies lie connected
with special circumstances of time, person
and place: and
.Wyhs.sss. With respect e : vessel called
facts relative 10 her construction in the port
OF Liverpool. her equipment and armament
In the vicinity of Terceira through the
agency of other vessels dispatched from
Great Britain for that purpose, that the
British government failed To use due dill
Gence 10 the performance Of ito neutral
obligations. and outstanding the Official
representations made by agents ct the
United States during the construction Of
aaid ship, omitted to take effective measures
for it, prevention. and that the order for
her detention which the British government
did finally give wcrc issued ~ late that
executing said orders was not practicable ;
and
Whereas, After the escape Of that vessel
the measures which were taken for her pur.
suit and arrest were 20 imperfect ~ IN lead
tn no resrlt, and therefore cannot be consid.
cred - sufficient release for Great Britain
from the responsibility she incurred snd
Whereas, Despite the violations of neu.
trsliiy thus committed. the came vessel was
on several occasions freeley admitted to ports
of the colonies Of Great Britain instead Of
being proceeded sgsinst. a. ahc ought tn
have been in any and every port under
British Jurisdiction where she might have
been found and
Whereas. The government Of England
cannot Justify itself for ito failure In due
diligence on the plea Of insumcicncy Of the
legal means OF action It possessed. four Of
tho srbitrstors for reasons above assigned,
and the fifth, Lord Chief Justice Cockburn,
for reasons separately assigned by him. are
Of the opinion that Great Britain has in this
case failed, by omission tn fulfil the duties
prescribed in the first and third rules estab.
'ished BY the treaty Of Washington and
Whereas, With respect to the Florida, it
results from Ill the facts. that the English
authorities failed t. take measures adequate
to prevent violation 1T neutrality notwtth.
standing the representations Of agents Of the
United States to the effect that fIcr Majesty
government failed to nee due diligence to
fu'fill ito duties Of neutrality, It likewise re-
suits from the facts which have becn pre-.
acntcd relative II the stay of the Orcto At
Nassau, New Providence, IN her issue
thence. her enlistment Of men. her supplies
and her armament, with the co.opcration OF
British vessels, tho Prince Alfred In Green
Bay. that there was negligence on the part
Of the British colonial authorities and