The Montgomery advertiser., 1902-03-09

The following is dissenting opinion of Commissioner w. l.. Chambers as to na- biilty of the United States to relatives of the U. s. warship Maine. in the har- Dor of Havana:
 Harry s. McCann vs. the United States:
 Catherine Burns vs. the United States;
 Alexander Lynch vs. the Uniteo Opinion of Commissioner Chambers.
 All my colleagues having concurred in a decision that the petitioners have no claims against the United States. ana the opinion just read being confined to that single proposition, shall confine myself
 The act of Congress creating the Span. ish Treaty Claims Commission was passed feet the following provisions of the treaty of peace between the United States
 The United States and Spain mutually reIinquish all claims for indemnity. na. fionai and individual, of every kind. of either Government, or of its citizens or subjects. against the other Government. that may have arisen since the beginning of the late insurrection in Cuba and prior to the exchange of notifications Of the present treaty, including all claims for Indemnity for the cost of the war:
 The United States will adjudicate ana Spain retinquished in this article. lAr- ticle VII, treaty of peace, December lo lS9S.)
 sion provides that its duty shall be-
 to receive. examine. and adtudicate all claims of citizens of the United States against Spain. which the United States agreed to adjud1cate and settle by the seventh article, of the treaty concluded between the United States and Spain on the 10th day of December, A. D., 1SSS. It shall adjudicate said claims according to. the merits of the several cases. tne principies of equity and of international lev, tsection l. act of Congress. March
 The material facts stated by the claim ants and admitted by the defendant are: t1vo-born citizen of the United Sites; that he was an enlisted seaman in the United States Navy, and as such was on board the snp sss thsa h he severe, lasting and incurable injuries. permanently destroying his health and ability to work: that before, at the time esisted : ted between Spain and the United States; that the battle ship was on friendly visit in the hacbor of Havana at the time of the explosion, and that caused by or resulted from agencies for which Spain was responsible.
 In the case of Burns the suit is brought in the name of the mother as surviving heir and next of kin. The deceased was corporal of marines on board the battle ship ct the time of his death, which was caused by the explosion, and was a na-
 fn the case of Lynch the petition is sled in the name of the brother as sur viving hedr and next of kin. Deceased was a coal passer. and was in discharge of his duties at the time of the explosion in which he was killed. and was a na- five-born citizen of the United States.
 The question Is, Did the claimants who were citizens Of the United States fn the ssryice Of their Government as sailors At the time of the explosion of the battle ship Maine, lose their individual right to claim indemnity from the Spanish Gov ernment because of such service. 1t being admitted that the Spanish Government
 A correct understanding of this question depends upon clear presentation of the condition of things which existed at tho moment that the damage inflicted by the destruction of the Maine was consum- mated. The simplest principles of andy sfs divide the damage resulting from that act into two distinct parts:
 First-There was the direct damage done to the nation by the destruction of national property, such as the ship itself and its armanent. and the indirect dam, age resulting from the indignity offered to q friendly State If no war had @ en. made, the gross sum accrufng to the United States as damages for property and insulted dignity vested in Its corpor- ate person would nave peionseu Io tnc National Treasury separate and apart from the claims of private individuals.
 Second-If no war had ensued. if no treaty of peace had been made, the Gov ernment of the United States would have owed it. as a plain duty under interna- tional law, to the survivors of that dis aster, or to the families of such as were dead. the collection from the Goyernment of Spain of reasonable compensation for such injuries inflicted in time of peace in the waters of friendly State.
 Having thus separated the distinctly national claims-that is, the claims of the Government exclusively independent of the claims for injuries to individuals from those that accrue to the sailors as Jsndividuals, and such national claims not being involved in these cases, lay down the following propositions:
 A sailor neither forfeits nor waves any of his individual rights as citizen, ex- as an immediate relief but to permanently