New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1896-03-07
IRRITATION AND DIPLOMACY
AN UNPUBLISHED LETTER OF SECRE-
TARY FISH.

AND THE TREATY OF WASHINGTON.
To the Editor Of The Tribune.
Sir. recent issue Of 1.-THE London Times
presents suggestions respecting the feasipihty
and expedency Of treaty plan Tor enforcing
arbitration. One Is Ia the form OF letter oy
Professor Westlake. the author or learheo
treatise on Private international Law III
which he alludes to the United states as 'he
classical country of international arpitratioh
and contends that the Alabama settiemeh.
"proves that by the confession OF the uhiteo
States themselves. It cannot be justly required
that every international claim shall be submitted
to arbitration without reservation that no ia.
ton is bound to incur the risk Of being defeated
in arbitra ton on grounds which 1t deems TO De
preposterous"
In editorial comment the next day Inc Ii"es
upholds the contention by Professor Westlake'
and says
The most important leading case" in interna-
tlonal arbitration Is the Geneva Award, ana II is
important, as Professor Westlake shows, not ohy
by reason of the nature and the magnltuue oi
the issues but because the action or the Chiteu
States In regard to II forms decisive preceuei!.
for a refusal to enter upon an arbitration without
limits.
The following letter, not hitherto made public
affords a glimpse of the part which diplomacy
and a tribunal of arbitration played In that great
achievement of peace which was so comprehen-
siye as to adjust all the political questions then
at issue between the two nations and remove all
resentments: ~ CO.,,
Washington, May 80. 1871.
MY dear DR.. Lieber The injunction or secrecy
which still rests upon the treaty (Which half the
reading world has already read VIII soon De
removed. You have asked me whether the trans
fer Of the negotiations in the Alabama question
from London to Washington originated win me.
The idea and the determination were mine pefore
even the rejection OF the Johnson-Clarendon
treaty Soon after | entered upon the office or
Secretary Of State l saw that that treaty was
| foredoomed TO be rejected. | then decided and
expressed to the President the opinion that we
must take pause in the discussion with Great i
Britain and that when the excitement and irrl-
tation (Which should ensie on the rejection OF lhe
treaty. had subsidized we should insist that any
renewed negotiations be had here. IN my IN
structions to Mr.. Motley or May 10, 1903, III
structed him to suggest a suspense OF the ques-
ton On June 2S, 1869, l instructed him that
! when the negotiations should be renewed we oe-
| sired them to be conducted In this country Al
| though this was the first official declaration on
the subject OF transfer OF the negouation Ia
change OF venue. the lawyers would call ~ IL
was what I had expressed In conversation IN
priyate In some official correspondence. in de-
| liberation in the Cabinet and in consultation
with the President, after my entrance IN ONCE
| March, 1869.
! The sending Of special mission and some per-
sons OF high official rank was suggested by me
| I'm May 1869 and the subject or close con-
! fdential conversation and OF correspondence
! with influential persons In England, as early as
the LIST OF June. 1869. The correspondence was
continued in this note. until the fruit rpened.
| lie official letters between Sir Edward thornton
| ard me (Which Of course, were written, received
| exchanged and had passed through the cable,
word for word. before they were signed hnahy
took date and signature in the latter part oi
January last Those four letters were the ON
cal particulars Of twenty months secret dipl)-
macy. am. very faithfully y ours TON FISH
Francis Lieber. LII. D., No. As East Inirty-
fourth-st., New YORK.
The secret diplomacy Of twenty months re-
ferred to by Mr. Fish began in the middle OF
June 1869 when In Washington he confidentiaNy
unfolded his plan to Sir John Rose. then in that
city Oh his way from Montreal to London. the
leading features OF the plan were an expression
| by England Of regret for what mad nappeheu
| definition OF neutral duty and a tribunal TOT
applving the facts TO that definition and award
ing damages. Sir John went to LONDON autn .S
| lied TO present the plan confidentially 10 me
| English Cabinet. Early ir January OF lo.l ne
was again in Washington. and the four letters
were prepared and sign ID which concluded ana
| expresced an Arrangement in outline binding
| each Government. That was the work OF dlplo-
| macy.
Could any permanently established cour,;
! whose members had not been especially anu
carefully selected for the special occasion. have
probably accomplished the great result!
! What was the situation?
When the War of Secession had been cioseu
| our state Department made formal demand
! on Great Britain for compensation Tor Nationat
|
proposed arbitration. Great britain reiuseu
| reparation. and also refused TO refer the ques-
non 10 any foreign State Subsequently treaty
vas concluded almost in the terms proposeu oS
us but II was overwhelmingly rejected by our
Senate because. although 1t secured arbitration
the possible umpire was 10 be chosen by iot; pc
cause il was a mere claims convention ana S-
nored the National grie, ance; because II ala NOT
contain expression Of contritlon. ana because
1t defined no rule OF neutral duty.
The treaty and its rejection stimulated IN
cad NJ
ments England could not be expected to pro
pose another plan Time and effective system
| attic work to compose the strife were needed on
| both sides the ocean or else no adjustment ana
| no decree by any international court had a pros
pect OF universal acquiescence.
| After the -four letters which may. using the
| analogy OF our own National system, be described
| as the mandate Of tie Constitution, there quickly
came the Joint High Commission, selected TO
execute and not thwart the prearranged scheme
which Commission may be described as the legis-
! lative body to define the duties of a neutral ad
hoe, as the lawyers say. and to create by treaty
Ave courts provided for therein two Tor the
disputes growing out of the depredations by
cruisers one for the San Juan boundary one
| for the reciprocal Civil War claims and one for
| the fisheries which. II not adjusted threatened
armed collision on the fishing grounds during
the next summer. . -
| A settlement Of serious and long-standing diff
| ferences between two powerful nations. which
| differences profoundly stir popular passion, may
| have one or both Of two purposes, one 10 settle
definitely disputed questions of law and Judicially
ascertain the facts. and the other TO compose the
| strife remove its causes and restore good FEELING
in some sure way, but without much regard to
which way IL so be 1t promises to be sure.
The Alabama settlement literally cleared the
/ calendar of pending suits between the two Gov
| ernments and did 1t in a way to satisfy nearly
every Englshman and American; but ii con-
tanned a consent by England to be tried and adj
Judged by rules OF neutral duty which she de-
| clared In the treaty We're not law and never had
been law but were assented to in order to evince
| her desire for reconciliation with the United
| States
| 1t has been result of the decision Of the
| Geneva court that neither Government now
| wishes to be bound by the three rules Of neu-
trail obligation. or Will invite other Governments
| to accede to them.
| As peacemaker the Treaty of Washington
| WAS a colossal achieN ement of Diplomacy. great