Year: 1867

appeal to plecedents. and as th3 burden
OF proof lay upon Mr. Adams, Lord Russell DOS
sessed great advantage, which he turned skill
fully to account. There we're very few precedents
relevant to the argument, but of these oae of
the most recent ana important, in which the
united states had occupied the position of de-
tend9nt, happened to be in our favor. Lord
RUSSELL chiefly on this case, had already COM
mltted himself to denial OF the American claim
before II was ultimately presented in a
practical shape, and his prompt rejection of
u IN that shape followed almost by way of
logical consequence. We do not justify this
part OF Lord Russells policy, and we regret
the ungraclous language in which an unpalatable
reply was conveyed. II would have been better
TO suggest change In the form Of the claim than
to cut of all prospect of its being entertained in
any form whatever. At the same time, Lord
Russelps error may be partly explained by the
turn which the discussion had taken, and partly
excused by the peremptory tone of Mr.. Adams
lemOnstrances. But an error 1t was as we have
more than once pointed out, not only ln policy,
but on principles Of reason and right. There
are doubtless, some demands so monstrous that
II would be impossible for any nation to con.
sent to arbitration upon them; but when
Government on terms of amity with our own
complains OF having been aggrieved by our
default, and offers to submit its ALLEGED grievance
TO arbitration, 1t is no sufficient answer TO say
that we cannot allow foreign sovereign to sit
in Judgment on our conduct. We have been
parties to a declaration in favor Of referring
International disputes to arbitration; we have
actually referred a late dispute with much
weaker power TO arbitration, and bowed to the
arbliratOr's award; and we should certainly
tender arbitration to any State against which
Great Britain had cause OF complaint Then,
why demur to arbitration, when proposed
by the United States only because we have
implicit confidence in the justice of our cause
We say again that Lord Russell's unqualified re-
lection OF Mr.. Adams tender was a false step,
and II a false step, that Lord Stanley was bound
to TetraCe it without needless delay and without
unworthy reservations. There is nothing half
SO undianifed as being in the wrong, nor was
there any means of placing us in the right
except by assuming the initiative and inviting
the United States 10 meet us halt way.


Whether they will do so, and if so in what
spirit they Will do so, remains TO be seen. We
can hardly expect that Mr.. Seward will lose
the opportunity OF commenting on our change
OF attitude, or that some of our New York
contemporaries will fail to attribute Lord SIAN.
ley's profered concession TO base motives. 1t
will perhaps be said or insinuated, but with an
entire oblivion of dates, that we presumed on
the weakness of America in the day of her
calamity, and truckle to her when she has
regained her stIeneth. Now if this reproach
were ever so well deserved, yet it ought not
to deter us from acting on our own con-
viCtiOns of duty. 1t is. however, wholly
undeserved, and capable OF being rebutted
by plain facts. The moment selected by Mr..
Seward for pressing his demands upon Lord
Russell was precisely that at which the United
States. triumphant by sea and land, had utterly
crushed the insurrectiOn, still maintaining

dulging hopes OF a speedy reconstruction, which
experience has since disappointed. Ii there
ever was time at which Great Britain had
reason to fear q rupture with America II was
that very time when LORD Russell, in its name,
repudlated the Alabama claims. But we cannot
bring ourselves 10 dwell on this topic, nor can
we suppose that motives SO petty and unstates-
manlike will influence the counsels OF the United
States. Enellshmen did not suspect Ame-
rca OF Cowar0lCe when, in Difference to the
clear rules OF maritime law, she gave up the
prisoners wrongully captured on board the
Trent; and Americans OF sense will not suspect
England of cowardice because, in Difference to
equally clear dictates of International morality,
she retres from an untenable position The
United States Government yielded then.
although many persons in this country pre-
dicted that national pride would be 100 strong
for them. It Is the turn of our Government to
yield now, and, whether or not their motives be
appreciated, we have confidence in the result of
their efforts to renew those friendly relations
with kindred people which should never have
been interrupted.