New-York tribune., 1873-02-07

the decision was unfavorable to England tnero e
the slightest ground for impugnng 'nc
Geneva arbitrators the German f"poioi, W. 49, No.
should be slow To follow EpglandS eA""p NJ
liam Stone, member Tor ro''A"oU'"'
motion , IT. ,,,o
-, 80, utth alarm many things I'm the Royal speech
n ,d not in the slightest degree crticise the Sover
~ and The arbitrators who had given awards adverse
80 England He had approved of the negotiations at
asbineton but could but condemn the prospective
rules adopted.
The Government pretended that they had followed
Palmerston, but that statesman would never have
placed England in such dangerous and undignlhed
position. The Geneva judgment showed that the
Government was totally wrong. What would De lts
effect on the future position OF the country What was
the scope Of the term "due diligencei" Was 1t in
accord with municipal law, as the arbitrators
sad such totally prohibit the evil complained OF
Was England absolutely bound TO stop vessels violat
ing the neutrality laws whether suspected or notf In
the case commissioned vessel that would De an act
of war, involving us in hOsttes Immediately. The
Washington Treaty bound the Government 10 adopt ne"
laws and urge them other countries DID the Govern
ment intend to adopt its Interpretation or that OF
the Geneva Boardl These most important ques-
ons they involved the highest interests and the honor
Of England.
He did not question the Crowns prerocatve to nego
tate treaes but he objected TO the Ministry entering
upon a treaty which compelled the alteration OF our
municipal law.
Mr. Disrae next turned his attention 10 the paragraph
in the Queens speech concerning the negotiations
with Russia for the preservation Of peace IN Central
Asia He hoped the papers this subject which the
Government had promised TO lay before the House.
would be full and satisfactory.
Should Russia attempt 70 seize Constantinople ana
conouer India she would and must be resisted lie
hoped diplomacy would settle the question but war
must II essary.
The Right Hon. Mr. Horsman severely criticised the
Governments foreign policy, which was lnvOVlng lhe
country in new and serious complications.
The Geneva decision was one-sded and Illuminating
He hoped the case was an exceptional and as such
was 70 be accepted by force Of necessity
Mr. Bernal Osborne condemned the arbitration, but
believed the less said about it the better Any outlay
which secured the good will OF America profitable
investment He thought that result might have been
attained without sacrifice and humiliation.
The Hon. Charles White upheld the Government, and
denounced certain Liverpool parties who preferred pr-
vate gain 10 public honor.
MI John Laird, the member for Birkenhead, warmly
protested against such remarks. His firm had always
been desrous Of the fullest inquiry during the building
of the Alabama but their requests for investigation
were neglected.
Mr. Gladstone followed, with general defence Of the
royal speech Replying the criticisms on the manner
In which the disputes with America had been settled he
declared that If similar should arise, arbitration
would again be resorted TO. Honor not sacrificed,
and the fearful horrors Of war had been avered No
alteration of the municipal law was required.
The debate was continued by the Hon. Claiborne
Hardy, Mr.. Vernon Harcourt, and others.