The Portland daily press., 1872-02-15
TERMS $500 PER ANNUM, IN ADVANCE

tiers. -'' P'
g A neutral who fails in any of these du-
ties should pay damages.
10 The obligation Is not terminated bv the
offending vessel becoming a public man-of-
war.
IL Nor by fraud in the vessels evading the
local municipal law.
| IL Nor by the entry of the offending yes-
sells in port of the belligerent, and then be-
coming man-of-war, ''if any part of the
original fraud continues to hang about the
vessel.''
lN.-wHEREIN GREAT BRITAIN FAILED
Part fourth of the case tests the course of
Great Britain by the rules of duty established
in the proceeding part of the case This criti-
cism is sharp one, and is constantly direct
ed to the dllimus of the British government
A history of the trade of Nassau and Bermu-
da with the rebel ports is given, showing de-
fance by the British colonial authorities of
the neutrality avowed by the home govern
ment, and persistent ''winking att these
acts on the part of the home government it
sell. An account is then given of the pro-
ceedlngs concerning the Florida and Alabama.
the building and fitting out of them; their
sailing In March and June, 1862; the hospi-
talties shown by British ports to rebel ships;
the excessive slowness and unwillingness of
the British authorities to act upon any of Mr.
Adams complaints; their refusal TO modify
and strengthen the Foreign Enlistment act
the sailing OF the Georgia in April, 1868; the
case OF the Alexandra, with its judicial deci-
sion nullifying the Foreign Enlistment act,
and legalizing the building and sailing of reb-
ell ships from England; the case of Laird's
rams, so reluctantly detained by Lord Russell
in September, 1868; the different and more
friendly course of France in a similar case;
and the reception of the Tuscaloosa, captured
by the Alabama, as ship of war, at the Cape
OF Good Hope.
The whole theory of blockade-running is
then reviewed, with proof that the rebel gov
ernment was interested in, and that the gov
eminent of Great Britain connived at il,
thus virtually revoking the Queens procla-
nation, and declaring that there was no Of
fence in breaking blockade. The partiality
shown by the colonial authorities to rebel
ships in their hospitalities are recorded as
another proof of hostile spirit The whole
OF this part of the case is then summed up in
the language, so often quoted, of Mr.. Fish's
comprehensive despatch to Mr.. Motley, of
September 25, 1869. 1t will be remembered.
too, that the despatch itself is an indictment
against the want of good faith with which
Great Britain observed neutrality.
v.-THE REBEL CRUISERS.
The fifth division of the case purports to
give an account of each of the British rebel
ing and the destruction it wrought among the
commerce of the United States. So far as
these details are concerned, they are neces-
sarily part of any case which the United
States might present against Great Britain,
as the injuries done by the cruisers in ques-
ton are precisely the direct damages which
we all agree to claim, and against payment of
which the British case is defence. But the
manner of introducing these detailed histories
is peculiar, and is of piece with the whole
cease" as hitherto summed up.
LII Is urged that the rebels were permitted
Systematically to make British posts base of
their naval operations, and openly to estab-
lish and carry on a branch of their fiscal and
military operations in Great Britain 1t is
insisted that the partality shown them in
this, and in the whole course of the govern
ment and the courts, cheered, encouraged
and strengthened them, and depressed the
loyal people and the government of the Unit
ed States. The whole series of official acts
and sayings of the British government and of
the rebelacts permitted by it, is again recapitu-
lated, to show that Great Britain, in its neu-
trality, was equally insincere and partial"
only after this Is vigorously presented, in Or
der to lead the tribunal to regard that gov
ernment as hostile to us in spirit, are the de-
tailed histories of the several vessels COM
planned of introduced.
Thirteen vessels are then described and
their story told in detail. Every act of the
British government in connection with each
Of them is presented in double light, both as
expressing the disposition in general of Great
Britain towards the United States and as
making the British government directly re-
sponsible in detail for the injury it commit
ted; but as the spirit of the whole review is
sufficiently indicated by the preface to it,
given in substance above, it is not necessary
here to summarize the one hundred and thir-
fx- Io-rr IL. r
the stories occupy.
The important fact, however, is that the
history OF each of these vessels is followed up
by several demand and that the tribunal
will "hnd and certify that "Great Britain
has, by its acts and its omissions, failed to full
I'll its duties set forth in the three rules of the
Treaty OF Washington, or recognized by the
principles OF law not inconsistent with such
rules. Should the tribunal exercise the DOW
er conferred upon it by the 7th article of the
treaty, to award sum in gross to be paid to
the United States, they ask that, in consider
ing the amount to be awarded, the losses in
the destruction.of vessels and their cargoes
by the vessel in question, ''and the expense
to which the United States were put in the
pursuit OF it, may be taken into account"
1t may be observed that this formal demand
for an award is made separately for each yes-
sci complained of, and that no similar de-
mdnd, and IN fact, no formal demand for an
dtudrd at all is made dnytphere is tne case,
on the ground of Indirect damages suffered by
us in consequence of the acts of the cruisers.
1t cites Mr.. Adams able summary of the
points showing the unfriendliness of Great
Britain, and stating that the injuries thus re-
ceived "are of so grave nature as in reason
and justice to constitute a valid claim for rep
aration and Naturalization - it maintains
that MIR. Adams points are proved by the evil
dence, and leaves them with the tribunal
But they are too vague to be regarded as a
definite claim for any sum, and they are no
where In the case put into the form of claim
the amonnt Of which can be estimated in
money.
VIA GROSS SUM DEMANDED.
The treaty permits the Geneva tribunal, if
it finds Great Britain liable in damages eth
er to award gross sum to us in full satisfac-
ton Of the whole case, or to refer the vessels
severally to assessors to appraise the damages
done by each. The closing part of the case
is devoted to the reasons why our govern
ment demands gross sum rather than the
alternative reference for apprasement. 1t
sets forth that we have claimed, not alone (1)
direct injuries for the property destroyed by
the cruisers, and (2) for the cost of chasing
them, but other damages: ''3, the loss in the
transfer of the American commercial marine
to the British flag; 4, the enhanced payments
ofinsurance; 5, the prolongation of the war
and the addition of large sum to the cost of
the war and the suppression of the rebellion;''
and adds: $50 far as these various losses and
expenditures grew out of the acts committed
by the several cruisers, the United States are
entitled to ask compensation and remunera-
ton therefor before this tribunal"
1t gives, as to details, the various kinds of
injuries done to ships, cargoes and persons;
it presents bill for the cost of pursuing the
cruisers: it tasks the Tribunal of Arbitration
to estimate" what ought to be paid for the
transfer of our commercial marine to the
British flag; it offers list of the enhanced
payments of insurance caused by the acts of
the cruisers; and finally argues that the war
was prolonged after 1858 mainly by those acts,
while acknowledging the impossibility of esti-
mating with accuracy the injury done by
them in so prolonging the war. The tribunal
is asked to award gross sum, on the ground
that the delay involved in reference to an
other tribunal would be unjust to the private
claimants injured. Thus the complaints of
indirect injuries are nowhere put directly
in the form of a demand Tor compensation,
as the complaints against the several vessels
are. They are put into this chapter, as ap-
pears to the careful reader who permits the
whole case to build itself up in order in his
mind, not at all as specific claims for dam
ages but as endorsements of the somewhat
indefinite claims for the direct injuries, and
as reasons why an ample and round sum
should be awarded to the United States, in
satisfaction of all the claims, without any of