The interior journal. [volume] (Stanford, Ky.) 1872-1881, 1873-06-27
THE ALABAMA CLAIMS

THE ALABAMA CLAIMS
The result ofthe award Of the Geneva
Conference, which had under cousidera-
ton the claims Of the United States
against Great Britain for damages on nc
count Of thedepredation of the Alabama,
reaches further than the United States
contemplated when she first chose TO as
sert Il. or even during the tendency Of
the negotiation. II will be remembered
by those who took note Of the terms Of
the protocol as agreed upon between
Reverdy johnson, the American minis
ter, at the Court Of st. james and the
British Government, and the rejection
of that protocol by the United States,
that the claim Of this Government
against Great Britain was based upon
the damage done to American commerce
by the pirate, leo called) Alabama by
driving the carrying trade 30 British
bottoms, rs well as damage inflicted by
the actual destruction Of ships belong
ing to the Government and TO individu-
ais. The Alabama was constructed in
British waters, fact Of which, ii was
alleged, the British Government had
knowledge Of at the time. The claim
was enormous, and was resisted by Great
Britain, partly on the ground that ii
embraced speculative damages, which
were not proximate TO the operation Of
the Alabama, even granting that this
vessel was constructed in British har-
Dor with the knowledge Of a British
Government. The whole question was
referred by both Governments to the ar
bitrament and award Of the Geneva
Conference, which, after considerable de-
lay, rendered an award against Great
Britain and in favor Of the United States
for very considerable amount of mon
ey.
Now the question arises, to whom does
this money in equity belongi Mani
testify the claim of the Government for
the destruction Of those vessels which
belonged to her. formed a very small
part Of the demand. The balance nee
essarily belongs TO private individuals,
who were ship owners, and whose vessels
were destroyed by the Alabama. 1t
can not he matter Of great difficulty
for the United States to ascertain how
many vessels, actually Government YES
sells, were disabled, as well as their val.
ne. This amount would rightfally 20
into the United States Treasury. As
for portion of the remainder Of the
fund, 1t should be held subject to the ap-
plication and proof Of individuals, who
sustained loss by reason Of the depreda-
tian of the Alabama. But the most
difficult question which could possibly
arise would be in reference to that por-
ton Of the damage which was awarded
as consequential The United States, in
pressing her claim, asserted that the car
rying trade. through fear of the Ala.
bama, had been driven to other flags,
and her commerce to a great extent in
iured. Who was il that was thus in
Iuredi Who, ir point Of fact, sustained
the consequen Al damage, Certainly
not the United States, for she had but
few, If any, Government vessels, en-
gagged in the carrying trade. If such
damage belongs to any one, it Is to the
actual ship owners who suffered the dam
ges, and not to the United States who
only sued, legally speaking. as the next
friend of the parties in interest. But
how is it possible for these parties in in
lerest to manifest or make proof of their
claimss How Is II possible for any ship
owner TO say that he has sustained any
liquidated amount of damage by the
carrying trade being driven to vessels
IF another nationality Right here the
enormous injustice Of asserting claim
% consequential damages manifests IT,
elf In the strongest possible light; aud
he vulnerability Of the Geneva award
stands forth in strong oolors. If it
be true in point Of fact that the ship
'wners can not maintain by force Of
proper testimony their right to any part |
# this consequential damage, what
hould be dose with the money! Keep
I In the United States Treasury That
would be legalized robbery, for the Uni
cd States i not entitled to it. The on
y honorable course. in this contingency,
) 70 return IL.