Year: 1868




qbe AIabamn Claims-Earl Russell in Defence
of the English POsitiOn-Whnt Does MIR.
Seward Really Ask z


In the House of Lords on the 27th OF March Earl
Russell said:I rise for the purpose OF calling your
trality laws and OF moving for any further cores
pondence that may have taken place between this
government and the American government respect
ing the Alabama and other claims My object In so
doing is that We may avoid falling into an error just
the opposite OF that into which many members OF
both Houses of Parliament were disposed to fall a
few years ago. During the progress OF the civil war
in America It was evident that considerable num-
Der OF members were hardly prepared to perform In
good faith all the duties OF neutrality towards the
United States and to abstain from everything to
which that government could justly take exception.
remember that when on one occasion had men.
toned the "so-called Confederate States" o noble
have spoken OF the "so-caed United States,' and
the same noble lord indulged in apanegyric upon
tive of the Crown and endeavorng to make war on
his own account, thereby running the risk or invoy
ing this country in hostilites. 1t will also be remem
bcred that i'll the presence OF q large company OF
members Of the House OF Commons, Mr.. Laird said
he was proud OF having fitted out the Alabama, and
much preferred being the builder OF that vessel to
having made such speech as Mr.. Bright had re-
Gently delivered Moreover, some noble friends Of
lifted out in this country for the purpose OF running
the blockade To be subject to the common law OF
capture ii they carried anything coniraband Of war:
They were for protecting such ships by the naval
force OF this country ina that the the danger now s
for the South has altogether ceased, ana that instead
or the dlJrcu,tv aohtch had to encounter as the
neutrality, there Is a difficulty in preserving the
proper position and dtgnity OF this country against
Unreasonable or unJou7aded demands Not that
think any objection can be taken to the course
that has been pursued by the American government.
1t is only natural that people suffered from the
capture of their merchant ships and the destruction
OF their property should come to US for redress.
They have stated their case very temperatey, and It
1G frnm har INV nf Xntr xVh
has lately prevailed has arisen 1t Is persons in this
country who, when the excitement respecting these
the question anew, being apparently apprehensive
that we shall have to meet the heavy claims which
fear that the government may be SO pressed that,
either by negotiation or by the Introduction Of bill
INTO pariiament at time when the business OF the
session Is hurried through-or, perhaps by both
modes-our position as q neutral nation may De
endangered, and zoe naav concede demands to tchich
as an independent IOtcer tre ought not to submit.
Now, just before left the Foreign once had cor
respondence with Mr. Adams, and cannot mention
that gentleman's name without expressing my high
esteem and respect for him-(hear, hear)-the value
l place upon his character, and the assurance
everything which honor and good faith and
moderation could prescribe. While carrying
conciliatory conduct tended to render easy what
would otherwise have been an almost impossible
70 M a9s' sSe TO leave sa e EoE
case Of the British government, and about q fort
night afterwards an answer was received by my
points on which had touched / had stated that
thought the conduct OF the United States towards
Portugal in 1878 was such as might advantageously
be followed, since when some Portuguese ships had
been captured by privateers fitted out in America
they did all that was required by their neutral posi-
tion and by their dignity as an Independent State
Mr.. Adams at the commencement Of his letter,
stated that on that point he entirely agreed with me-
that there was no need OF carrying any corre
spondence upon the law OF the case, since the two
governments were agreed upon 1t. had expressed
hope that there might be some legislation which
would tend to ascertain more precisely the position
OF neutrals and on which both Powers might agree.
MIR. Adams, remarking upon this said-


SO long the heavy list of depredatons upon
consequent upon the issue Of succession Of hos
from Brush ports continues to weigh upon their
would be the height expect any legs


Upon this Lord Clarendon, in letter dated the Cd
OF December, 1865, remarked


Is nsvsraeess my duty in closing this correspondence
British port to cruise against the commerce OF the United
law OF the case there was the widest difference With
respect to the facts. The noble lord who now holds
the seals or the Foreign Office differed from me- mas
much as he thought II would be wise TO submit the
question to arbitration. did not anticipate any great
advantages from such course, but saw no rea-
son whatever against his adopting it II he be-
hcved IL would lead TO beneficial results. But as
10 tine questions to be submitted to arbitration,
own cannot concar with her Majesty's present gov
ernment. IL seems to me that Mr.. Adams having
stated that succession OF hostile cruisers, manned
and armed by this country had been sent out prey
upon the commerce OF the United States and Lord
Clarendon having distinctly denied that assertion
the first thing for an arblter for any commission
that might be appointed TO investigate would be
the facts II 1t was found that there had been armed
vessels, II there had been vessels built and
equipped In this country that had gone out TO prey
ON the commerce OF the United States IL would then
become a substantive question TO ascertain whether
there had been any want OF due diligence on
the part OF the government OF this country.
In the meantime IT would seem TO be useless
10 place so vague question before arbier
rs whether this country was morally responsible for
that which had been done during the war. Evi.\
la ntleav v.t,.n
tion. know not In what manner any arbiter or
commission could proceed unless first to ascertain the
we have already in spirit gone Jar enough IN o.,.
neutrality td,ps II would be wise precauton 70
armed vessels attempting to leave our coast for bel
ligerent purposes. But II we were by treaty or by
law OF the realm to impose such further obligations
as have Just mentioned and II We as a ship Jttiid
tng country, engaged to stop unarmed vessels from
leaving our coast, that would be a dangerous OBJ ga
10 enter. Another suggestion has been made with
regard to the Alabama claims and our differences
with America. 1t is understood to have been made
by Mr. Seward-namely that every other question
with regard to which We have had controversies with
the Occupation Of territory should be considered at
the same time, and that we should come, II possible,
TO some general agreement on all these points. be-
lieve that to be very wise and practicable sugges-
tion and at all events we should endeavor to settle
all these matters. MY lords, win now ask my noble
friend how soon the report OF the Neutrality Com
mission will be laid on the table.


The LORD CHAscELLoR-This time last year. az the
pointed TO inquire into and consider the character
working and effect OF the laws OF this realm avail.
able for the enforcement Of neutrality during the
existence OF hostilties In other. states with whom
her Majesty at peace, and further to report what
ff any, change ought TO be made to give them in
creased efficiency and bring them into full con-
formity with her Maesty's International obligations.
- The other question put by the noble
lord 10 ~ 70 any correspondence which may have
and the government OF the United States In reference
60 the Alabama and other claims. There Is no cor





already laid before Parliament by my noble friend
the secretary OF state. hope the noble earl will
decline to follow him into the somewhat large and
dificht field upon which he has entered. ! fee feel
quite aatisned as am sure your lordships DO that
W,sn tie noble lord at the head OF the Foreign once
felt a TO be his duty TO decline the arbltrafon