New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1878-05-18
THE AWARD AT HALIFAX.
Continued from First Page

British subjects which not admitted By the Govern
mcnt OF the United States, II was "agreed that
Commissioners shall be appointed to determine;
having regard the privileges ted by the United
st lied in Articles 10 and 81 of this Treaty the amount
OF any compensation which IN their opinion ought TO De
Government Of Her Britannia Majesty IN return for the
privileges accorded the citizens OF the United states.
under Article i OF this Treaty, and that any sum OF
money which the said Commissioners may so aWalu
shall be paid by the United States Government IN gross
sum within twelve months after such award snail nave
been given Article %.
as follows One commissioner SHAH be named ny the
President II the United states, one by Her Britannia
Majesty. ana a third 10y the President OF the United
States and Her Britannia Majesty conformity; and III
tn third commissioner shall mot have beer: 80
when this article shall rake effect then third commits
Oner shall be named by the representative az London
HunsaT,"@IrtieIe 93
The order procedure before the Commission ia pre-
shall b. closed WITHIN period OF ak months from the
DIS Of the organization Of the Commission and tie Com
~ possible I! GREATER Article 81
THE AWARD 8Y TWO MEMBERS.
The Commissioners as organized consisted Of Mr..
Maurice Dclfos5e, the Belgian Minister mt Washington
nlmed by the Austrian Ambassador ut Lon
don, presiding; the Hon. Ensign II. Kellogg,
ngmed by the President of the United States;
and Sir Alexander r. Gait, named by Her Britannia
Ma, sly. II held its first conference on the lJth oI
June, 1877. The case both sides concluded al
ycnber. 1877 and the result OF its deliberations was
announced a. the succeodn conference hea the 23d
dayoi The month TINS result stated Ill the pro-
tycol Of that conference ~ follows;
The undersigned is>ioners, appointed under
AIT crs - aud % OF the Treaty OF Wa Lnson Of the
sth OF May, ISL to determine having regard to the
privilege, red by the United States 10 lnr subjects
81 Her Britannia Majesty "a stated III Articles IL ana
81 of said treaty, the amO mt or any compensation
which IN their opinion ought TO be paid by the Govern
mcut OF the United states TO inc Government OF ier
Brtannc Majesty return for the privileges accorded to
Jhe citizens OF the United states under Arct - o sai
treaty, having !uiy and impartay examined Tue
matters referred tu them according to JuStceaud equS
in conformity with the solemn declaration made and
subscribed Dy them On the lJth day Oh Ju.e, 1871
award the of 80 OoOO IN gold to D" raid by The
Government OF The United States 10 tie Government OF
Her Ert!nn!c Maze ~ haccoiHaLce WIN ne pfo'IsUh5
of said treaty. signed at HaiiI& tubs - gay 81 NO
vember, 1877. MtTMcE D&LfossE'
"Tha United States Comm-sione- Is OF opinion thar the
advauIgs aacuing to Great Britain untrr the Treaty
Of Washington are Greater than the aaHaniaSes con
irricd United state, 6y said treaty aud he cali
not therefore concur 10 the conclusions announced by
his c"lea cues. Ana me American CUWIssoher deems
IL his duty 10 state further that ID Is questionable
whether il competent The board to make IN award
under the treaty except with the unanimous consent OF
It's members. T.. II. KELLOGG, Commissioners"
Upon the announcement Of TN, result III. Foster the
agent of the Un.cd states, adJ'esaad the Commission,
saying: - F.. A. ,,......,..,. ,, a.,
uugtucS OF such rpsut has just been announced.
two Cpmis oners might be claimed hereafter mat rs
~, ut Of 90" Cuitcd ~'"t' had acqmc'ccd IN anS
To be- dEy 10 guard therefore make this stacme.t,
which q, sire 10 Dave placed on record.
The question uusus upon the actual result
Of the do,iD.rations OF the CGmmi,,slon IN
iu.-sipurrs. ana su,c .strd by Ar. Commissioner
Kellogg whether BE- b. competent for the board - make
award under tie treaty, except with the UNANIMOUS
u of u.s. members" &, one that can bc treated aud
determined ont b.lwecn the two Governments. Inc
under The treaty did not att,mp, tu do No con-
sidcrhtIon has as yet arisen between TIE i"o Govern
quite in advance even NJ the organization Of the Com
M SION, On debate iu tic inc DOMINION Parliament on
t- for p .ltfT sa
n,id Ia tb I-yot Sflf, Ia canada uu1r he Treaty of
Washington Tor the night Of fishing Canadian
wucI-,' the requirement Of uuanlmity OF thr
Comma. ION IA niI, valid award was distinctly stated
by Mr.. BlaEc Munster Of Justice. H. said "tnat the
amount OF Cupri a'iUu mat soc would receive from uur
uslt u d. 900 auuut, uuan mDusy agreed upon py
he Commits ues aud tAat, Therefore, wc must bee VIII
hug 'o accept sGch ompn''ilon as ihr American ,on-
ni-s..n'r would Do wilhng to concede To US or We
turt declaration 90 the B1t-h opinion or The require
mens Of the treaty IN this pont appeared IN ne columns
"I t'r rad NJ newspaper % ibit '"Lui me IO'"V'
unquA incd that On every pun that comes before
il Cuc Fisher ConmIsun) Tor decision the uuan NOUS
cois NJ % ~ Us ~ ny IN, ill' o mo
Necessary tefpr au M hortJtyc verdict can be even
IN this country no public discussion ON this point seems
- nave ss'n uutii since The conclusion oil Tue I'ViS
Il vi be- ai e comr,t,nr Tor Congress in considering
ap.rupraIpn % meet tie proper Obligations ~ the
Gu'cu,u. ut uuIcr 90, treaty t. wave or ius- Uion
ol he Commission for mono ufnuuity 10 the require
mcuiso tie treaty. In tie absence Of any deciu4
ton hy Congress tuNcr,, 20 abe YlGl OF the award
VIII not BE- dut' of the Executive to raise any ds-
cJls-iuu with the EIush Government upon this point
II. ou the Ocr baud. Congress should accompany TIE
Intention OF The B.iii t;vcrg,cnt shond be- drawn 10
me sub ort tue actual payment oi o., award mgat,
far Ills point Is concerned well be made to depend
upon the Wow wh.cu thar Government should MAINTAIN
to The meaning ot tuc treaty "a tG. regard tnhk
may assumed that Uclu,r the people of TINS CUuu
inv nor any bancn o.. t.. government viii desire to
cure exemption rom money payment upon any judg-
mcut Of Us own upon POINT 81 tis nature under THIS
the concurrence Of the other high contract
luz party.
Az EXCESSIVE AWARD.
pas, now TO an examination Of serious importance
that Is 10 say, conn arison between the award OF
the Commission IN its su stance with the sub
thereto under which the Jurisdiction OF the Com
and the limitation Of It's power over he matter
IA contention between the two countries are defined.
TAa thcawa I'd should comport with and not transcend
the submission Of The parties Isl vital principle OF al.
arhrIlon~ whether public or private: and a. rm main
tcn essential To the preservation 81 this b'nthocLt
method OF settling controversies between nations ana
NAV dhaIs Too ready or To" severe an application OF
TINS rule III reference to International arOltratOhN Is
easily avoided uy a recognition OF certain manifest
PROPOSITIONS In thcao Respects, Toe latErh'1 Oh t!e
subjects and the generality OF the elements
OF controversies brtweou nations preclude the hAing OF
an award lar exceeding the 'h'hIla7"h unless upon
measure Of disparity wnc cIunut reasonably Do over
looked, and which cannot fairly be disputed. In the sec
ond place. the absence 81 dh' possible resort 10
On" form OF Judgment To the Tccti-
tude Of the objection 10 international award. aud
tho resdr, renewal therefore ana aG-rNaoh Oh the
original CUntruS crsy "a result q! imugnug the award
may wen DG trusted To a tf "a government from at
tempting such criticism, except upon almost certain and
adequate grounds, and uud tine most urgent motives
0f avoiding stlll more serious mlscheis to TIE pubuc
interests.
Toe of testimony and the amplitude of argument
produced before the Commission ana submitted here
with, will. | think, leave NJ doubt upon the
main fcgture OF the controversy upon wnich
the award should be tested In respect To It's
conformity TO the submission. IL Is greatly 10 be
regretted that the protocols OF the Conferences nave
preserved records Of the steps IN the investigation OF
the methods OF reasoning by which the widely diverse
conclusions OF the two commiSsoners tmI coheuIIru
and the commissioner that d,scnted respectively were
reached. Tue PRONUNCIATION OF the judgments OF the
several commissioners followed Immediately upon tnc
closing of the arguments, and was accompanied Dy no
exposition Whatever the grounds Of such arguments
In of direct nstruc ion from these sources
il Necessary To unfold from tine roofs Ia practical nature
Mml rMAncL.r INC IANmmIn mLerc.LA Mhcn COmsll-