The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1873-02-07

Of Edlnburg and tho Prince Of TecE
When the reading of tbs Queens speeCl
was ended the Earl of Clarendon rost
and moved an address in reply. He con
graduated his lordships on the remova
Of the long standing difficulties with TIT
United States. In regard TO the eastern
question he declared the government
would deal with II In a prompt and al
the same time dignifed manner, because
England had Witnessed with regret tht
encroachments oil Russia, whose iurthel
movements would tend to diminution o
the harmony which has so long prevailed
between the two powers.
Mont Engleseconded the motion for ar
address in short speech.
The Earl ol Derby then addressed The
House. He denied that the government
could congratulate itself on the issue d
the San Juan and Alabama controversies
and maintained that there was vast
difference between what was Contehded
for in 1864 and the absolute surrender oI
1879. The effect Of tho Geneva decision
would be that England would hereafter be
liable 10 damages in matters wherein she
could make no claim on others.
Lord Granville defended the course ol
the government in bringing about set
itIement Of tho Alabama claims. The
condition of the question which had arisen
concerning Central Asia did not justify
the sensational kilograms which created
alarm here and elsewhere. 1t was moi
probable that the affair would lead 10 any
serious complications.
Lords Salisbury, Ripon and Carnes
followed with a discussion on the Geneva
Arbitration. The latter held that the
rules as adopted, were ambiguous and
liable TO be misinterpreted.
The Lord Chancellor deprecated the
course the debate had taken on this sub
jeCt, especially after the verdict had been
rendered. He defended the rules as
adopted by the Geneva Board, and de-
clared that they should be maintained be-
tween England and the United States,
whether the other countries accepted
them or not. ..
The Duke OF Richmond objected not to
the spirit Of the compromise, but to the
fact that it had been one sided. lie OBJ
served that the speech from the Throne
made no reference to the army. This
omission was especially to be regretted at
this time, when desertions from the ranks
were more frequent than ever.
Tho motion for an address to the Queen
was adopted and their Lordships rose.
In the House of Commons an address in
reply to the Queens speech was moved
by Hon. Charles Lyttleton, who in o
speech congratulated the House and coun-
try on the settlement Of the disputes with
the United States. Although the dcCis-
ion was unfavorable to England there was
not the slightest ground tor impugning the
Judgment Of the Geneva Arbitrators or the
German Emperor. No nation should be
slow to follow England's example.
William Stone seconded the motion.
Disraeli rose and was loudly cheered.
He said ho had heard with alarm many
things in the royal speech. de would
not In the slightest degree critlCise the
sovereign and the arbitrGtors who had
given awards adverse to England. Hc
approved of the negotiations OF Washing
ton, but could not but condemn the pros.
pectiye rules adopted. The government
pretends that it followed Palmerston, but
that statesman never would have placed
England in such dangerous and undig.
nihed position. The Geneva judgment
showed that the government was to.
tally wrong. What would be its
effect on the future position of the Coun.
try? What was the scope of the term
due diligence? Was 1t in accord with
our municipal law, or, as the arbitrators
said, such as to totally prohibit the evil
complained Of? Was England absolute
ly bound to stop vessels violating the
neutrality laws whether suspected or notE
In the case OF q commissioned vessel that
would be an act Of war, involving us in
hostilities immediately. The Washington
Treaty bound the government to adopt
new laws and urge them on other coun-
tries. Did the government intend to
adopt its own Interpretation or that Of the
Geneva Board Of Arbitration9 These
were the most important questions. They
involved the highest interests and honor
of England. Ho did not question the
Crowns prerogative 10 negotiate the treat.
les, but he bjeCted TO the Ministry enter
ing upon treaty which compelled the
alteration Of our municipal law. Disraeli
next turned his attention 10 the paragraph
In the Queens speech concerning the ne
gOtiations with Russia for the preservation
Of peace in Central Asia. He hoped the
papers on this subject which the govern
ment had promised 10 lay before the
House, would be full and satisfactory.
Should Russia attempt to seize CONSTANT.
nople and conquer India, she would and
must be resisted. He hoped the diploma.
cy would settle the question, but war
must If necessary.
Mr.. Horsman severely criticised the
Governments foreign policy, which was
involving the country in new and serious
complications. The Geneva decision was
one.sided and humiliatiDg. lie hoped the
case was an exceptional one, and as such
was to DO accepted by force if necessary.
Bornal Osborn condemned the arbitra.
ton, but believed the less said about it
the better. Any outlay which secured
the good will OF America was profitable
investment. lie thought the result might
have been obtained without sacrifice and
humiliation.
Mr.. Gladstone followed with general
defense ol tho Royal speech, replying to
the criticism on the manner in which the
disputes with America had been settled.
He declared that if o similar case should
arise arbitration would again be resorted
to. Honor was not sacrificed and the fear.
full horrors Of war had been avertcd. No
alteration OF the municipal law was re.
quired.
The debate was continued by Catherine,
Hardy, Vernon, Hsrcourt and Others
GnANN