The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1873-01-25


three yessels-t0 w.t. the Alabama, the Florida and
her tenders and the Shenandoah after February IL.
1861 so that by no possibility OF calculation OF
claims that were allowed or calculation OF interest
thereon could the tribunal have reached the sum
of SIS, 500 900 as the amount OF indemnity TO be
paid TO the United States Tor losses by individual
| citizens or corporations.
| This conclusion, Il IT needed iortlac;ation, Is
10 make an award OF gross sum as sncn ln.eni-
nliy instead of sending the individual claimants 70
The Board of Assessors, provided Tor In the tenth
article of the treaty. to .ascertain and determine
what claims are valid and what amount or amounts
shall be paid by Great Britain to the United States
on account of the liability arising IRON such failure,
TO each vessel. according TO tne extent Oh such
| liability, as decided by the arbitrators."
The treaty also provides In express terms that,
in order TO remove and ADJUST al comr! saiis
s sna e on high Contracting parties agree
| that all OF said claims :. e., claims
acts ac " Committed by tho Aforesaid vessels aud gem
erically known as the Alabama claims shall be re.
It will be thus that IL claims on the part
of the United Stases that were submitted by the
treaty to the tribunal and passed upon by the arbi
arbitrators had Intended individual claims, such,
should be passed upon by any tribunal under the
Board OF Assessors, where the individual could be
heard as to the validity and amount OF his claims
This view Is further strengthened by the TACT
that in the Johnson Clarendon treaty the claims
''geneTically known as the Alabama claims" now
m M S were hs ned sates
the government OF Her Britannia Majesty" But
the treaty Of washington assumes that NO md
struction Of his property by hostile power In war
or its ally SO mat they are described las the
protocol the claim made by our Commissioners was
that the United States had sustained great
| wrong"
| THE DUTY OF THE UNITED STATES TO CITIZENS
| SUFFERING SPECIAL LOSSES IN THE WAR.
might be presented your committee have come to
the conclusion that the amount awarded at Geneva
| nj a. ity nj n n
to no legal rights, in any individual or corporation
by whom a legal or equitable claim can be set up
| against the United States.
MERIToRIoUs LOSSES, ORDER OF THEIR PRICE,
| DENCE, TO BE PAID IN FULL
With these views OF the obligations OF the gov
eminent to its citizens your committee have at
ported to the House, to present such legislation as
will equitably and fully do all that can be justly
Your committee can have no doubt that the per-
sons who ought first to be considered in this distri-
button were those VINO had suffered losses while me
| usual and ordinary mode, and have received no In
demnity whatever therefor; they, therefore, have
| provided first for tile uninsured vessels aud
Second for the losses OF the officers and crews
and for wages actually earned, and their property
on which no insurance was received and tue loss
in excess OF insurance received, and the damages
and losses which happened to them respectively,
because of being lett either at sent to q
foreign port by the capturing cruiser.
Third that the United States Itself should re-
ceive Indemnity for Its own vessels actually cap
tured and destroyed by cruisers. This, however,
is not a large matter as there were but two or
more of them, and these comparatively OF small
value.
Next, your committee assume that the merchants
who in the general course OF business, had their
vessels and cargoes anoat at the time of the sailing
and who were obliged, for that cause, to pay
largely increased war premiums or war risks 10
event. be total loss 10 them Of right be cIassed as
among the most meritorious and hence they are
direct an equitable distribution Of such war Ore.
mlums among those who actually paid them.
1t has been and may again be objected to this
class OF claims, that, however mertoIi0us, through
what may well be deemed an inadyertence Of our
government, claims for part OF these war pre-.
miums were presented by our agent among that
class Of claims made by the United States before
the tribunal for indirect losses or, and known as
consequential damages. We have said that 1t was
an inadvertence to have 50 presented the war
premiums. Certainly no more direct loss was
inflicted upon the citizen by the depreda. 1
increased war premium Although these were a
sSs nS IF
The loss of each increased premium paid reached
the purse of the citizen as directly as II the com
mander OF the Alabama had captured him and
| taken q like amount from his pocket.
/ Your committee is further led to believe that the
the indirect losses was an inadvertence. be-
cause they find in some cases warpremiums
agents OF the government as direct losses, as, for
example, the Oneida. destroyed by the Florida on
stroyeS by the Florida on the 23d OF April, 1864.
But II your committee are right In the conclusion
TO which they have come, as above stated, that
the fund obtained from the award at Geneva is the
property OF the United States to be disposed OF
Its WILL TO do justice to its citizens irrespective of
any supposed decision Of the arbitration upon in.
vldual claims, whether called direct or indirect
losses, then we can have no doubt that those who
paid war premiums upon their property were
most directly injured by the depredatons OF the
rebel cruisers, and that every consideration OF
equity and justice requires their indemni1caton as
cared for in its distribution.
| Assuming, for reasons which will be obvious
! upon an examination OF some tables appended to
| this report, to which we call special attention, AS
we believe that 1t will be concusively shown that
the award OF els 500 600 will much more than cover
the actual losses or damages sustained by these
four classes of our citizens. whose position US
! Guiding the government, your committee have pro-
vided Tor their payment ia full as soon as such
provided for in the bill, can be determined
NO SPECULATIVE DAMAGES TO RE PAID
pd n .de n All casse ~
committee nave established the principle That no
prospective profits, whether OF earnings by specu-
atons in trade or by catch, in the case oil whaers
and fishermen, and no unearned freights or pass
age money shall be considered. In coming to this
belief Of its correctness by finding that this has
been the universal rule in estimating damages for
marine torts, whether by collision otherwise, by
all courts, both IN this country and England.
We agree that the maxim OF law In such
party injured, but always with the limitation that
his loss is to be made good at the time, without
| reference to future speculative profits or dam
ages. The rule is laid down by Mr.. Justice Story in
divers reported cases. The limitation is stated in
the case of the Lively, GalIison's Reports, p. sl5
follows:-
upon the whole, am well satisfied that the
profits upon supposition OF prosperous termina-
ton of the voyage ought not In any case to const
tute an item Tor damages"
SO in the Of Williamson vs. Purdy qa How
ards Reports, l0l), the Supreme Court laid down
the general rule regulating damages In cases VI
collision Is ito allow the injured party an indem-
nifty TO the extent OF the loss sustained" This was
| "A case OIL collision.
The same rule IN England IVES enumerated In the
case or the Amelia Is New Reports p. l64), by DR..
Lushingt0n, in the High Court oil Admiralty. lie
asserts 1t to be mot only the doctrine OF Court OF
Admiralty, but OF the Courts OF common law.N