EM 
 
 1 
 
 
 t^.^. ^ 
 
 Si 
 
 
 4 
 
 4t 
 
 
 
 i 
 
 I 
 f 
 
 I 
 
 <? 
 
 ^ 
 
 /] 
 
 -^F 
 
 
 
 IMAGE EVALUATION 
 TEST TARGET (MT-3) 
 
 1.0 !ffi 
 
 ^ 2.8 
 
 30 
 
 I.I 
 
 
 b& 
 
 ^ !IM 
 
 liM 
 M 
 
 I! 1.6 
 
 6" 
 
 Photographic 
 
 Sciences 
 Corporation 
 
 23 WEST MAIN STREET 
 
 W?aSTER,N.Y. 14580 
 
 (7 1 6) 8/^4503 
 
 mm 
 

 CIHM/ICMH 
 
 Microfiche 
 
 Series. 
 
 CIHIVI/iCIVIH 
 ColSection de 
 microficlies. 
 
 Canadian Institute fcr Historical Microreproductions / Institut cana jien de microreproductions historiquas 
 
 iiMWWiMtii^^ 
 
Technical and Bibliographic Notes/Notes techniquett et bibliographiquos 
 
 The Institute has attempted to obtain the best 
 original copy available for filming. Features of this 
 copy which may be bibliographically unique, 
 which may alter any of the images in the 
 reproduction, or which may significantly change 
 the usual method of filming, are checked below. 
 
 □ 
 
 D 
 
 D 
 D 
 
 D 
 
 Coloured covers/ 
 Couverture de couleur 
 
 I ~| Covers damaged/ 
 
 Couverture en^lommagda 
 
 Covers restored and/or laminated/ 
 Couverture restaur^e ot/ou pellicul6e 
 
 I I Cover title missing/ 
 
 Le titre de couverture manque 
 
 Coloured maps/ 
 
 Cartes gdographiques en couleur 
 
 □ Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or black)/ 
 Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire) 
 
 I I Coloured plates and/or illustrations/ 
 
 D 
 
 Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur 
 
 Bound with other material/ 
 Reli6 avec d'autres documents 
 
 Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion 
 along interior margin/ 
 
 La reliure serr6e peut causer de I'ombre ou de la 
 distortion le long de la marge int^rieure 
 
 Blank leaves added during restoration may 
 appear within the text. Whenever possible, these 
 havu been omitted from filming/ 
 II se peut que certaines pages blanches ajoutdes 
 lors d'une restauration apparaissent dans le texte, 
 mais, lorsque celo 6tait possible, ces pages n'ont 
 pas 6t6 film^es. 
 
 Additional comments:/ 
 Commentaires suppl^mentaires; 
 
 L'Institut a microfilm^ le meilleur exemplaire 
 qu'il lui a M possible de se procurer. Les details 
 de cet exempiaire qui sont peut-dtra uniques du 
 point d^ vue bibliographique, qui peuvent modifier 
 une image reproduite, ou qui peuvent exiger une 
 modification dans la m^thode normale de filmage 
 sont indiquds ci-dessous. 
 
 n 
 n 
 
 n 
 n 
 
 Coloured pages/ 
 Pages de couleur 
 
 Pages damaged/ 
 Pages endommagdes 
 
 Pages restored and/or laminated/ 
 Pages restaur^es et/ou pellicul6es 
 
 Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ 
 Pages d^colordes, tachetdes ou piqu^es 
 
 Pages detached/ 
 Pages ddtach^es 
 
 Showthrough/ 
 Transparence 
 
 Quality of print varies/ 
 Qualit^ in6gale de I'impression 
 
 Includes supplementary material/ 
 Comprend du materiel suppl^mentaire 
 
 Only edition available/ 
 Seule Edition disponible 
 
 Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata 
 slips, tissues, etc., have been refilmed to 
 ensure the best possible image/ 
 Les pages totalement ou partiellement 
 obscurcies par un feuillet d'errata, une pelure, 
 etc.. Out dt6 film^es d nouveau de fapon d 
 obtenir la meilleure image possible. 
 
 This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked bnlcw/ 
 
 Ce document est film6 au taux de reduction indiqud ci-dessous. 
 
 10X 
 
 
 
 
 14X 
 
 
 
 
 18X 
 
 
 
 
 22X 
 
 
 
 
 26X 
 
 
 
 
 30X 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 K 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 12X 
 
 
 
 
 16X 
 
 
 
 
 20X 
 
 
 
 
 24X 
 
 
 
 
 28X 
 
 
 
 
 32X 
 
 
 »<fa « ii ^i i,iiM w a a, i w iia fea-h i >«ii i i iii M ia ti i fim' ii i iiir iMti i ^ , 
 
e 
 
 itails 
 s du 
 lodifier 
 r une 
 Image 
 
 rata 
 ) 
 
 elure. 
 
 : 
 
 IX 
 
 The copy filmed here has been reproduced thanks 
 to the generosity of: 
 
 Library of Congress 
 Photoduplication Service 
 
 The images appearing here are the best quality 
 possible considering the condition and legibility 
 of the original copy and in keeping with the 
 filming contract specifications. 
 
 Original copies in printed paper covers are filmed 
 beginning with the front cover and ending on 
 the last page with a printed or illustrated impres- 
 sion, or the back cover when appropriate. All 
 other original copies are filmed beginning on the 
 first page with e printed or illustrated impres- 
 sion, and ending on the last page with a printed 
 or illustrated impression. 
 
 The last recorded frame on each microfiche 
 shall contRin the symbol — *► (meaning "CON- 
 TINUED"), or ihe symbol V (meaning "END"), 
 whichever applies. 
 
 Maps, plates, charts, etc., may be filmed at 
 different reduction ratios. Those too large to be 
 entirely included in one exposure are filmed 
 beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to 
 right and top to bottom, as many frames as 
 required. The following diagrams illustrate the 
 method: 
 
 L'exemplaire film6 fut reproduit grAce A la 
 g6n6rosit« de: 
 
 Library of Congress 
 Photoduplication Service 
 
 Les images suivantes ont 6t« reproduites avec le 
 plus grand soin. compte tenu de la condition et 
 de la nettet« de l'exemplaire film*, et en 
 conformity avec les conditions du com<^at de 
 filmage. 
 
 Les exemplaires originaux dont la couverture en 
 papier est imprim«e sont film«s en commenpant 
 par le premier plat et en terminant soit par la 
 derni&re page qui comporte une empreinte 
 d'impression ou d'illustration, soit par le second 
 plat, selon le cas. Tous les autras exemplaires 
 originaux sont filmds en commen^ant par la 
 premiere page qui comporte une empreinte 
 d'impression ou d'illustration at en terminant par 
 la derniire page qui comporte une telle 
 empreinte, 
 
 Un des symboles suivants apparaitra sur la 
 dernidre image de cheque microfiche, selon ie 
 cas: le symbols — »► signifie "A SUIVRE", le 
 symbole V signifie "FIN". 
 
 Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc.. peuvent Atre 
 filmis A des taux de reduction diff^rents. 
 Lorsque le document est trop grand pour Atre 
 reproduit en un seul ciichA, il est film« A partir 
 da Tangle supArieur gauche, de gauche A droite, 
 et de haut en bas. en prenant le nombre 
 d'images nAcessaire. Les diagrammes suivants 
 iiiustrent la mAthode. 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 4 
 
 5 
 
 6 
 
 Mt^triTfW namaHtMiff- mMWi>iW*IWIMiT«'ni*n»Nin-M— i«Wiii.bii| 
 
 ,ai 
 
v 
 
 LV 
 
 
Eli 
 
 
 i^^i 
 
 A 
 
 }> THE TREATY OF WASHINGTON. 
 
 > 1 
 
 AN ANALYSIS OF ITS PROVISIONS. 
 
 Our Losses, England's Gains. 
 
 ^li 
 
 ADDRESS 
 
 or 
 
 ./' 
 
 Hon. Benj. R Butler, 
 
 AT 
 
 Music HaU, Phaadelphia, Oct. 16, 187l! 
 
 «BOSTON: — 
 
 f W. F. Brown & Co, Printer No. 60 Bromfleld Street 
 
 1871. 
 
 ^"?fcj II— nixiiiiii»«« 
 
 -1 
 
 S 
 
 / 
 
"-sBw irri j W j t ta;^. 
 
 ^^'^ 
 
 i:'^f\m 
 
 
 i r i , i ■ ■ ^ ^ ■ ■ 
 
 • i 
 
 
 fLX. 
 
 xV 
 
 \0' .^!i J' 
 
 IM ! J 1^ 
 
 
 "■y'iyui j.._r,?- 
 
 .j'iT.: 
 
 ' -^Wfi^^SSi^^jS^^ 
 
 ^■*i&f 
 
 .. ^ 
 

 ADDRESS. 
 
 - .'.i,i 
 
 ■fuO 
 
 t\ 
 
 
 ft»1 
 
 Permit me to discuss with you for the brief hour of our con- 
 
 I^ZL Mr- "f ' °"^''' ^ ^^^^^ "^°- Po-»« «f di«^-ce 
 tions of . ) .T '''*^°"'' *^j"^' "^°^« "^"d difficult ques- 
 tions of nght; be more momentous in its effects for good or 
 
 of Peace blVr? T '''''''''''' "^•"^' ^'"^'^^^ '^' *-«ty 
 01 Feace between the colonies of Great Britain and their mother 
 
 countr,, wh,ch established our independence and existence Is a 
 
 mo t n tellectnal c. y, m the centre state of the arch of the 
 vir«n^ * people who are supposed to examine with the utmost 
 ^g^^Iance, so that they may approve or disseri irom every act of 
 their government. / av* wi 
 
 vol^'Jr' q-^estion, therefore. I wish to'ask is V How many of 
 Cl! T ''fJ'r^ *•'« ^''^'y «f Washington? the product of 
 t ant « H ^f ««----«• If this audience ha! not read 
 Llu f!? ''"'^''" ^^^ '""^^«^^' *^>e°' ho^ many of the 
 
 knowledge of its provisions ? And yet we are told by newsoa- 
 
 that the Treaty meets the entire approbation of the people of the 
 
 ea«ntry,and we pass resounding resolutions in pVrty convent 
 
 ons sometimes very effectively in the small hours of L morn- 
 
 kSwlXJT '"' ?' '" °'^^ *^'^"-«^ Substantially all 
 
 ob^-Jn H P"^''^**'^'^ ^f * »"PPOsed copy surreptitiously 
 obtemed by a newspaper correspondent, but which was pr<^ 
 uounced in he Senate of the United States to be more orZ 
 ^correct. These observations are made as an apology in you 
 
 It consists of forty.three articles, the first eleven of which 
 concern the depredations upon American commerce by certb 
 
 \ 
 i. 
 
 ! -■'f 
 
 M 
 
 'MIk. 
 
m^'^oldLI"'" ■"""'"' provide for tl,o settlement and par- 
 
 fi:;:/:nc;:p^e^ 
 
 fished" ";;d° t'hff " '" '"''"' ^^ ^'^j"^""« ^'^^ "g»^t« of tho 
 
 fisS '° »«>Portation and exportation of fish and 
 
 Tho next eight articles treat of opening tho navigation of th« 
 H. Lawrence and the canals whicll improve itrwaters ^ ^hn 
 use of the citizens of the United States, but g Lr^ nrl rn 
 
 Iho remaunng articles from 36 to 42 are devotP^ fn ,u 
 t on, whethnr fi.o i;. „ .^ aevoted to the ques- 
 
 Treaty 'f"'i,l;5thtT8:r "' ^"""' '°'"'°'^' "■'^- '"e 
 
 l»ve nothing eLTto TLZTy Tl\oZ ZTT^^ "1 
 determination. ^ '"' """' '""^ anil 
 
 2d Th„ ; •'■f-';'^'"'""^ "f O'O Alabama and oti.er vesX 
 
 otates, and injuries to oar citizens hv tlio Rrici. n 
 ernment, from April 18, 1861, ,„ April 9 1865 t X 
 
 OU • "f "Vl"'" '"""''' '"' '"^ -''""'«- »' « >; a, d fi.° 
 Lakes Id re'?rsit"of *b"-.'7" T" '™ """' "" «™' 
 
 e. f^- 
 
"^ III 1^1- 
 
 :'rT 
 
 V 
 
 I^ritain, and 
 Jf the nation 
 od for, deter- 
 
 snt and pay- 
 ther govern- 
 ations, com- 
 botween tho 
 
 ights of tho 
 of fish and 
 
 ition of the 
 ters, to tho 
 ?, in return 
 ding Lako 
 ts of Great 
 j^ears after 
 itish goods 
 
 the ques- 
 stwoen tho 
 >r through 
 md of San 
 mdor the 
 
 7 the Em- 
 ut it, and 
 ward and 
 
 se topics 
 
 vessels ; 
 at of tlie 
 tish Gov- 
 
 3d, Of 
 and fish- 
 he Great 
 e United 
 an. ft;!. 
 
 It would seem, when we examine tho matter actually in 
 controversy, or which may become subject of difference between 
 the two countries, that the Treaty is as remarkable for what it 
 does not deal with at all, as for the number, importance and 
 manner of its treatment of those matters which it does attempt 
 to adjust. 
 
 It attracts observation that the Treaty makes no provision for 
 the payment or settlement of claims for injuries done by Grout 
 Britain upon American citizens since tho last Convention of 1863, 
 and prior to April, 1861. 
 
 Secondly, it makes no provision for the outrages committed 
 by the British Government upon American citizens since 1865, 
 although it is well known, to speak of no others, that for the last 
 four years British and Canadian cruisers have been constantly 
 seizing our fishing vessels along the shores of Nova Scotia and 
 New Brunswick, maltreating their crews, confiscating their 
 property, and ruining the owners. 
 
 Thirdly, again, it is too well known that numbers of American 
 citizens, — some of whom bear honorable scars of wounds re- 
 ceived in our war — have been, since 1865, imprisoned in Eng- 
 lish prisons, as well on this continent as in the British islands, 
 without duo process of law, and against right, and in deroga- 
 tion of our national honor and the protection that America 
 owes to each and all of her sons, whether by birth or adoption ; 
 yet the treaty provides for the payment to the Englishman for 
 every bale of his cotton destroyed by us, even by accident, in the 
 war for tho Union. It makes no provision for the redress of 
 tho imprisonment of the citizen. Is not the liberty of one Amer- 
 ican citizen of more worth than many bales of cotton ? 
 
 Fourthly, The Treaty has no prohibition of the payment of 
 claims of British subjects in the Confederate debt, claimed to be 
 due to them, and secured by pledge of cotton, though that subject 
 was thought important enough by the people of this country to 
 cause them to amend their Constitution to provide against tho 
 payment of that debt to their own citizens. We shall see that 
 the Treaty has left the question fairly open to be determined- 
 against us by the arbitrators. 
 
 Fifthly, It does not settle, in terms nor by implication, in how 
 fai- the claims of British subjects shall be recognized in prop- 
 
 ' s 
 
 fWMM 
 
ff 
 
 f i 
 
 Situ U„tr "^ "' '^' "»' '"■' ^ »"> P->«™n.io„ Of 
 
 ..« Jh'o' i':,j::t:?:aer;'f ■'°'""'''™'' "■» "o-"- 
 
 do^ed to ha™ held toward 2'. "^ "'"°"™' """' •>» 
 failo carrying on war a. .„rl, „. «"'«"«"• a goTornment rfe 
 would haT. l«o„,.,„ j^.^ «!«» of ,„„,„„„, bj,,,,, J J^ 
 
 govommenund .ho oUilT. rfof Lfltl''""' °""°' "'''""='' 
 arlitrator, proridod in «,o Troar. ' T ° "'""■"' '"""'^'"f 
 
 I'ithn.orodivi.ion'^of „p2„ ;tr "'" , """"'T «"d Europe, 
 
 Sovo„t!,|y, While oZlr , """^"'J' ""^ »"><«•• 
 «..;oHos on^ho uHretr '1 r I" Trrt ™'"«"« '" '"« 
 v...on about the fisheries claimed Vorcl jtL ' ■"°'"' "" P"" 
 we.»flm coa.t, between our newlv Z ^ ^'" °" <"" ' """"h- 
 a..d tho British P0.«s,r, a,«'„'!,Tr',P"«'«'»'' »' Alaska 
 there as important and irr ,'at 1 7 '"° '°"' °™ ""'»■ »™"'g 
 
 Having tlin, «n cxa t^wS hL"7 """'"' "^ "•" ■^'^■«^ 
 -^ been left untouched l^'tireW^Trr"''''' »"'' "^"' 
 inalruetlre to learn pix^eisclv th^t. f ^^""'""gton, it will t„ 
 
 State,, and what h« been rWded k. ' '"'' '^ *■= '^°"='' 
 subject abont which negotiatilwere'h^d.'" "'"°"°' "^ ~* 
 
 THB ALABAMA CLAIMS. " 
 
 ^a J c,:;L,^t ^'r :;rnf ff r ^''™°'^™'' «■" "^"- 
 
 fourteen Rebel eruiserraZl„? ''h"""™' '='""""""' "7 
 prosented,to«,Vfe«„„J„ ""!"'"« "' 'J'j asgwgate, as far as 
 
 than thirteen millions a^tfourr"-^ *"'»'"'"*»■<>«' 
 »els_tho Alabama, Ploridl Shf ^ .' committed by four ^c 
 
 "..y did not r rert Z^^T- "1° '~'^. " •» -k 
 -ouof the liahilityby orrr^-rLToftsr- 
 
 kASft(i6»,s^l,. 
 
I ipn»WT I 11 TTTT fT"" 
 
 1 
 
 clamation of 
 
 t'lo position 
 'CO, shall be 
 liothor as a 
 oniment de 
 ory simply, 
 the Treaty 
 tho highest 
 imsofeach 
 »1 boards of 
 'hich have 
 d Europe, 
 
 '"ng to the 
 do no pro- 
 o«i ■ north- 
 of Alaska 
 w arising 
 
 Treaty, 
 and what 
 it will be 
 «o United 
 
 to each 
 
 ho "Ala- 
 itted by 
 as far as 
 ch more 
 bur ves- 
 J. The 
 tions of 
 orations 
 
 to ask 
 
 recog- 
 
 ise Tea- 
 
 sels, so far as we moan to insist on this liability, so as to leave 
 no room for dispute before tho arbitrators upon such questions. 
 This, it would seem, should have been granted, and something 
 certain would have boon gained. On the contrary, the British 
 comraisBioners nowhere admit any liability ; aad the only atone- 
 ment they give for the substantial dftstruction of the entire com- 
 merce of America, tlie untold losses which never can be put in 
 the form of claims of Americaa merchantmen, the insult to na- 
 tional honor, the violation of national rights, the aiTront to the 
 national heart, by the fitting out, harboring, ownership, aiding 
 and abetting the depredations of these fourteen vessels, is an 
 expression, "in a friendly spirit of regret" felt by Her Majesty's 
 ''government for the escape, under whatever circumstances, from 
 "British ports, of the Alabama and other vessels, and their sub- 
 "sequent depredations." But, the majority of the vessels did 
 not, in fact, "escape" from British ports, and we have no claim 
 upon Great Britain for that reason. Many others were har- 
 bored, thoir officers feted, their crews enlisted, their provisions 
 and coal and war material supplied, their repairs furnished, in 
 several British ports, notwithstanding the urgent and frequently- 
 i-epeated remonstrance of our minister ; and, for all that, there 
 is no word of regret, in a "friendly spirit" or otherwise. 
 
 Therefore, our whole case is open before the Board of Arbitra- 
 tion, of which I will speak hereafter, pTooisely as if the treAty 
 had never been made. 
 
 Instead of the recognition by Great Britain of her liability in 
 the case of either vessel, three rules, to be international law in 
 the future, have been agreed upon, for the guidance of the ar- 
 bitrators, but which the British commissioners required, before 
 they would agree to them, as appears by the protocol, should be 
 made rules of international law betwixt this country and 
 Great Britain, for all future time, and they further demanded 
 that these should be impressed upon every other maritime na- 
 tion as international law, before they would be bound by them 
 in the arbitration of the Alabama claims. They even declaring, 
 at the same time, that theise rules were not now the law of 
 nations. .,.,...».•-?<?•..•, .--,..-■>.-;.. »'«^ ^"^ -- ■■• - 
 
 The reason for this persistence, on the part of Great Britain, 
 upon these as rules of international law in the future will be 
 
 I 
 
 i 
 
 ■?«*• 
 
'rl ! 
 
 8 
 
 apparent in a moment, and will show Low much wo have con- 
 coded and pa.d for th« poor privilege of having our chumn laid 
 l>oforo a hoard of arbitration to «it .n (Joneva, Switzerland. 
 lhi«, in fuc, IB all we have gaiued ; and the results, if any, 
 ohtan.ed from that privilege even, must l,e shared with the ua- 
 derwriters of Great Britain, because the vessels destroyed by 
 roM cruisers were either insured or re-insured by British 
 oftices, who will get a largo share of whatever is awarded to the 
 clanuants. 
 
 I think I can state with sufficient distinctness, for the pur- 
 poses of this discussion, these three rules of international law 
 without g.vmg you their exact words, except in case of the sec' 
 ond which .s too remarkable to be passed over by any paraphrase 
 or digest of its contents. P^^pmaso 
 
 The first rule requires the neutral govornmont to uso duo 
 diligence to prevent the fitting out of any vessel to carry on war 
 against a friendly j^wer, and to use like diligence to pre've" Ih 
 departure from its ports of any vessr^ intended to ca;r/ on war 
 such vessel being adapted in whole or in pari, wUhin the j^isdil 
 lion, to warlike use. '' 
 
 The third enjoins the exercise of due diligence to prevent any 
 viola ion of its obligations and duties within its jur Idictio/ 
 Herein lies the weakness of the case of the United Ks We 
 mus prove that each Rebel vessel was adapted to warlike use 
 
 t:p::v:;ur '^^^^^^ -' ""^^^"'' -'^ ^^'-^^^ ^^^^^^ 
 
 give^t^'ntrdr"' "^^ '''' '^^^"^^ °^ ^^ ^"^P-^--' ^^^ ^ 
 " Secondly, not to permit or suffer either belligerent to make 
 u^ Its ports or waters as the base of naval operations ag^nst 
 th other, or for the purpose of the renewal or augmentatfoTof 
 military supplies or arms, or the recruitment of men " 
 
 Witliout stopping to comment on the fact that, with one or 
 two exceptions none of the Rebel cruisers had been'dV^^^^^^ to 
 warlike use within the jurisdiction of Great Britain, anf" es 
 caped ' therefrom, and a majority of them had not be n "daptd" 
 at all to that use w.thin her jurisdiction - but admitting thafwe 
 may get many thousands or a few millions of dollars by 1 ati^^ 
 these rules of interuatioual law made the basis of argum nt^ 
 
 
f«n 
 
 1 
 
 9 
 
 ) have con- 
 cluiniH laid 
 iwitzorliuid. 
 ilts, if any, 
 ith tho uu- 
 stroyod by 
 by Jiritish 
 rdod to tho 
 
 r tho pur- 
 ion al law, 
 of tho sec- 
 paraphraso 
 
 > uso due 
 ■ry on war 
 re vent th j 
 r/ on war, 
 ejurisdic- 
 
 ovent any 
 risdiction. 
 ites. We 
 jllke use, 
 diligence 
 
 ce, and I 
 
 ' to make 
 IS against 
 itation of 
 
 h one or 
 lapted to 
 uid " es- 
 adapted 
 : that we 
 f having 
 ment be- 
 
 fore tho Itoard of arl)itratlon — lot ua «eo tho price we are to 
 pay for wliiit wo do get. 
 
 Before tlio mind tiiruH to that, please bear in recollection that 
 Groat Britain, during tho war, had in oflbct ruined our com- 
 merce ; tliat from tiiat sliock it has in no considerable degree 
 recovered ; that England is to-day doing the carrying trade of 
 the world in her ships ; tliat it is of tho last importance to her 
 to bo able to protect her 8hij-,)ing, so that she may bring to her 
 island raw material and there manufacture it and carry back the 
 product; and you will understand the nocessity of this second 
 rule to Great Britain in time of war — especially, if adopted, as 
 we have covenanted it shall be, l>y the other maritime powers ; 
 and this nocessity appears more clearly in view of tho fact, as 
 the British (/ommissioncrs claim, that this rule is not now a part 
 of tho Law of Nations. 
 
 Under this rule, no private or public armed vessel of a nation 
 at war can get any supplies to aid her in carrying on warlike 
 operations in any foreign port of the world. Now it has, without 
 doubt, come to be settled law that coal, to a steam vessel-of-war, 
 is a military supply. Nothing is more certain than that all at- 
 tacks upon an enemy's commerce must hereafter be made by 
 swift armed atoam-vessels, as was done by tho Shenandoah and 
 Alabama in the Con focf<< rate raid upon om own. But speed i;? 
 a steam-vessel uses up coal almost in an arithmetical ratio of 
 progi-ession to the amount of spoed attained. Therefore steam- 
 vessels pursuing the commerce of an enemy must use vast quan- 
 tities of coal, requiring frequent visitations to ports and harbors 
 for renewal. Now, tlie United States have not a single coaling 
 station in the world, beside i-he harbors on her own coasts, other 
 than hired docks in neutral ports, from which, under this rule, 
 we tansi, be at once shut out in case of war. The establishment 
 of this rule of law, therefore, protects British commerce in all 
 time, because under it no steam-vessel of war of the United 
 States, either private or public, can steam more than five days' 
 distance from our own coasts, for the reason that no one of them 
 can carry, with its armament, more than ten days' coal, and it 
 is neither prudent nor safe for a war steamer to be on the ocean 
 without coal to return to port — five days out and five days 
 back. 
 
 
 J" 
 
i 
 
 '.i**^r!!*n^»Ei|a»:'; 
 
 .»;r*_ 
 
 
 10 
 
 Heretofore when I liave suggestcti this diflicnlty of want of 
 coal depots, to unreflecting persons, the answer has been: 
 "Well, Great Britain, by this iulo, has deprived herself of the 
 right to coal in neutral ports, as well as the United States. If 
 ihis nile is so disastrous as suggested, wliy did the English Com- 
 missioners insist upon its establishment, and insist furtlic that 
 it should l)e made a rule of public law for all time and for all 
 maritime nations ? " Please reflect that Great Britain has for 
 two-hundred years been acquiring and fortifying harbors and 
 naval stations all over the world now fitted and used as coaling 
 stations, Halifax, the Barbadoes, Jamaica, Honduras, Guiana 
 and the Falkland Islands, make a cordon along tlio Atlantic 
 shore, north and south. Heligoland, (Gibraltar, St. Helena, 
 Gambia, Gold Coast, Mauritius, Cape Good Hope, in the eastern 
 and Indian Ocean ; Malta in the Mediterranean ; India, Hong 
 Kong, Ceylon and Labuan, Australia, New South Wales and Tas- 
 mania, New Zealand and the islands of the Eastern Archipelago, 
 furnish her with both coal and coaling stations in that part^of 
 the world, so that England has *o-day, without striking a blow, 
 moving a man or mounting i ,i, ample supply of coal stations, 
 to a degree that with an expenuiture of a thousand millions of 
 money, twenty years' time and fifty millions yearly outlay iv 
 keep them up, would not put the United States on an equality 
 with her in that regard. 
 
 When I stated this view of the effect of this rule of law to 
 
 one of the learned Senators from my own State, who had served 
 
 on the Committee of Foreign Aflairs, and asked for explanation 
 
 of its effect upon our naval power, what would you suppose 
 
 was that statesman's patriotic and far-reaching reply ? This and 
 
 nothing more: "As there will never be any more wars, I am 
 
 glad that the United States hasn't a coaling station anywhere 
 
 away from our own coasts. That will keep our navy at home." 
 
 Alas ! I had heard the declaration of that Senator that there 
 
 were to be no wars before. I listened to his peace lectures 
 
 quite a quarter of a century ago, and quite that time since, I 
 
 was told to lay off my uniform as a Massachusetts volunteer 
 
 soldier, as it was useless to keep up military organizations 
 
 and prepare for war which could never happen in this civilized 
 
 and christianized age of the world. Happily wiser counsels 
 
 ^■>. 
 
 «^*:iS-45*?a;„..-art: 
 
 '*'^**^-^a«^5»SW»?5. 
 
 ■-■larfjpj' ^5 
 
 m 
 

 of want of 
 has been : 
 rself of the 
 States. If 
 iglish Com- 
 urthc that 
 and for ail 
 tain has for 
 arbors and 
 I as coalhig 
 •as, Guiana 
 10 Atlantic 
 it. Helena, 
 the eastern 
 idia, Hong 
 ?s and T -is- 
 rchipelago, 
 hat part of 
 ig a blow, 
 al stations, 
 DJHions of 
 r outlaj tt- 
 n equality 
 
 of law to 
 lad served 
 cplanation 
 I suppose 
 
 This and 
 a-rs, I am 
 anywhere 
 it home." 
 that there 
 J lectures 
 e since, I 
 volunteer 
 mizations 
 i civilized 
 ' counsels 
 
 11 
 
 prevailed, or the Sixth Massachusetts Regiment would never 
 have marched side by side with a Pennsylvania Regiment first 
 of all to save the nation's capital from rebel arms. In spite of 
 the mistaken ipse dixit of that Senator, I have lived to take 
 part in one of the most gigantic wars the world ever saw, and 
 within six years of its termination the other continent was 
 swept by wars, foreign and civil, on a scale that has not been 
 equaled since tiie fabled hosts of Xerxes. 
 
 I agree our Republic will never be a great naval power, be- 
 cause our people will never appropriate the money in time of 
 peace to keep up a large naval establishment, which is then 
 looked upon as useless; and wars are never long enough to 
 enable any country to build fleets of ships. We are to look, 
 then, for our means of naval warfare to our private armed ves- 
 sels, the militia of the seas, which, in six mouths, can sweep 
 from the ocean the entire commerce of any nation at war with 
 us, provided always, that they can get the modern necessity of 
 naval warfare, — coal, from which we are cut oflf by the terms 
 and express provisions of this Treaty. 
 
 Let lis pathse here. Am I right upon this point ? If I am 
 right, where have we found any discussion of this momentous 
 question, either in the protocols of the Commissioners, on the 
 floor of the Senate, or in those illusory and useless editorials 
 of newspapers in which alone some features of the Treaty have 
 been portrayed ? Yet, with this great rule of public law underly- 
 ing the maritime superiority of this country for all time, estab- 
 lished against us before our very faces, will you do me the favor 
 to remember, that the principal journals of the country were 
 more busily engaged in discussing, with more or less of virulence 
 and vituperation, the right of a newspaper correspondent to steal 
 a portion of the secret archives of the nation and publish it to the 
 world, than in showing to the people the provisions of that same 
 treaty by which theii' navai pjwer was crippled forever. 
 
 If in this I am correct -^ and as an American I only hope I 
 am not, for I have struggled to get rid of tlie conviction that 
 such is the result of our negotiation on the Alabama claims — 
 have we not indeed paid a fearful price for the regrets of the 
 English Government, in however "friendly spirit" expressed, 
 and for the few millions whicli by possibility may be awarded to 
 
 I ., 
 
 
 ^'^JSUT'i 
 
 p<^ >5* »^*rf* 
 
 " *j>)»iai<^Ez 
 
 i<]WiiH 'Uiiiw.iittiXiiliW^j*" 
 
. -„,^„,s«.w«».wi,^»,si«jJ2^<!5<ftf*!^' 
 
 i 
 
 12 
 
 «s hy the arbitration at Geneva composed of a representative of 
 the United States, a representative of Her Britannic Maiesty, a 
 representative of the King of Italy, a representative of the Swiss 
 Confederation, and an umpire -the cause to be decided by a 
 majority-, chosen by the Emperor of Brazil, whose subjects har- 
 bored the Rebel steamer Florida in the port of Bahia, giving her 
 aid and comfort until she was cut out by the brave and patriotic 
 CoUms and brought home, but not until after she had committed 
 three millions of damage upon our commerce to the five done 
 by the Alabama. 
 
 The Emperor of Brazil did not then regard the capture of 
 that pirate in a friendly spirit, but insisted that she should 
 be returned with her armament and crew, in full piratical order, 
 to his safe harbor, from whence she might sally forUi again to 
 prey upon and burn our merchant ships. His Majesty, the 
 Emperor, insisted that the right of his neutral territory to pro- 
 tect pirates had been invaded by our gallant navy, and demand- 
 ed ,„ an unfriendly spirit, instant reparation then in aid of the 
 
 I?t 'i fT^^' /'^I '^'* ^"'^'^ '""^ ^" *^« ^"«'- arbitrator on 
 hke acts of England now. In compliance with his majesty's per- 
 emptory demand, an order for the return of the Florida was civ- 
 en and she would have again been let loose upon our commerce, 
 but luckily she was in James River when the order came witll 
 
 he Department of Virginia and North Carolina, the Cola Sr 
 of which now addresses you, so that he has knowledge of the 
 f«5t of which he speaks; and unfortunately for the Confederacy, 
 but happily tor our commerce, the Florida collided, as she lay a 
 anchor, with an army transport, and sunk in six fathom of 
 water where she has lain harmless ever since; and the person 
 now addressing you, as counsel for Commodore Collins and his 
 crew, IS endeavoring to recover her value in prize for the darini. 
 gallant and patriotic act of her capture. ^' 
 
 Is it not possible that in considering the duty of a neutral 
 nation not to harbor the armed vessels of belligerents who are 
 preying upon the commerce of a friendly power, under the third 
 rule, the arbitrator representing the Emperor of Brazil may 
 pause to reflect whether the consequence io his master of find^ 
 .ig England guilty in case of the Alabama and ShenandoA 
 
 T T ^ t ''"?'' ^"" "*^^^ ^'' "'^ '^''^ '"^"'o^ of damages . 
 done by the Florida, sheltered in the port of Bahia ? 
 
 '*'** '^ f ift^^ ■ "^^^1^^ 
 
 Sra^SStriSfSSRB 
 
13 
 
 In the ottiissions of the treaty to provide specifically for dam- 
 ages done to our citizens, I have a grief which almost partakes 
 of the character of a private one, because the vessels of my con- 
 stituents and neighbot3, the fishermen of Massachusetts, wore 
 destroyed by the Tacony. Now as there is not only no evidence 
 that she was ever in a British port so as to come within either 
 rule laid down in the treaty, but, on the contrary, full evidence 
 that she was not, although she was a tender or consort of one of 
 the pirates fitted out by England's subjects, I see no redress 
 whatever, even negotiated for, in behalf of the brave and hardy 
 fishermen of my State ; and yet Massachusetts had a member of 
 the Joint Higli Commission. 
 
 But what shall be said if the treaty is so looseiy framed, after 
 all, that Great Britain has left to her, by its provisions, a valid 
 defence to all our claims for tlic Alabama outrages, or at least 
 one exceedingly difficult to answer ? What is to be done or said 
 if our Commissioners on the Joint High Commission have not 
 only wholly failed to get an acknowledgment of liability for 
 our claims, but by an express provision have left the door open 
 to a defence by Great Britain which may be well urged as 
 sounding in equity and justice ? Curiously enough, although 
 the claims are those of individual merchants for their property 
 destroyed, yet there is an express provision that " if the tribunal 
 find that Great Britain has failed to fulfill any duty or duties, it 
 may, if it think proper, proceed to award a sum in gross to be 
 paid by Great Britain to the United States for all the claims re- 
 ferred to." I was puzzled, at first, to understand why this pro- 
 vision should have place in the treaty. But Lord Redesdale, 
 in the House of Lords, has not left us in doubt as to what use 
 is to be made of this provision for the payment of a gross sum 
 to the treasury in connection with the other provisions, or rather 
 want of them, in the treaty. It is to bo remembered that our 
 claim for damages for the depredations must be primarily upon 
 the rebels who destroyed our vessels, and that on England 
 is a secondary one, because she aided them by affording the 
 means of doing the acts of which we complain. The wrongs 
 were actually inflicted by our Southern brethren of the 
 Confederate States, and we hold Great Britain as accessory 
 only. — * , 
 
 
 wm^ 
 
ff 
 
 j. 
 
 u 
 
 Tlicreforo may not Britain well urge before the Arbitration, 
 that as the United States have condoned the onbnces of the 
 Soutliern States committed during the war, — have taken them 
 back as an integral part of the Government of the nation, and 
 as the money paid for tlie depredations of the Alabama will go into 
 the treasury of the United States, for the joint benefit of all the 
 citizens of the United States, as well Admiral Semmes who com- 
 manded the Alabama, as Admiral Winslowand officers and crew 
 of the Keartarge that sunk her, it is unjust and inequitable to 
 call upon England to pay money for the depredations of the 
 Alabama for the benefit, in part, of the very men and States who 
 did the acts, and who are now a portion of the nation demanding 
 payment. In other words, in justice and equity the accessory can- 
 not be called upon to pay his principal for the amount of damages 
 done by himself in committing a rol)bery. Yet in the protocols 
 of the Commissioners, in the discussions in the Senate, so far as 
 they were permitted to come to the public ear, and especially in 
 the pauses of the defence of the larcinious newspaper correspond- 
 ents by their employers, wherein some mention has been made 
 of the provisions of the treaty, not a word of all this vital ques- 
 tion of defence by England, so cunningly planned and so artis- 
 tically provided by the British Commissioners, has been said. 
 Yet, say the newspapers, all the people are in favor of every pro- 
 vision of the treaty of Washington ! 
 
 But these are not all the price we pay for the regrets of Eng- 
 land, and for the privilege of presenting our case for tlie few 
 millions which we suppose wo may get back, lost by rebel 
 depredations. 
 
 PAYMENT OP CLAIMS OP BRITISH SUBJECTS. 
 
 We have agreed, by the Twelfth Article of the Treaty, to pay 
 all the claims of British subjects for losses suffered at the hands 
 of the United States government during tho war that may be 
 determined against us by a commission, tl<e majority of whom 
 give decree, to be appointed jointly by Great Britain and the 
 United States, and in their failure by the representative of the 
 King of Spain. 
 
 What is the amount of those claims ? Does any man know ? 
 
 Have they ever been stated ? Of what do they consist ? 
 
 "W I .JM I IH 
 
 
Arbkration, 
 jiices of tho 
 ) taken them 
 I nation, and 
 a will go into 
 slit of all the 
 es who corn- 
 ers and crew 
 loquitablo to 
 lions of the 
 i States who 
 L demanding 
 jcessory can- 
 t of damages 
 he i)rotocols 
 ite, so far as 
 3speci,ally in 
 correspond- 
 3 been made 
 s vital ques- 
 md so artis- 
 i been said. 
 >f every pro- 
 rets of Eng- 
 for the few 
 it by rebel 
 
 eaty, to pay 
 ;t the hands 
 liat may be 
 ty of whom 
 in and the 
 itive of the 
 
 nan know ? 
 7 consist ? 
 
 15 
 
 Was any bill of particulars or schedule received or ever asked 
 for by our Commissioners ? Docs any body know whether they 
 are four or four hundred millions ? Does any body know tho 
 validity of them or tho grounds on which they rest ? Tho pro- 
 vision is " for all acts done or committed against the persons or 
 property of British subjects between the 13th of April, 1801, 
 and tho Oth of April, 18G5, not being Alaboma claims, which 
 may have been presented and yet remain unsettled, or which 
 may uereaftcr be presented within six months after the date of 
 the first meeting of the Commissioners." 
 
 Observe the difference in the statement of the two classes of 
 claims. When our claims of any magnitude are made upon Eng- 
 land, they are specified as known under the head of " Alabama 
 Claims." When th > English claims are provided for, as against 
 us, there is not even a generic specification, but are all that 
 have been or may hereafter be presented. 
 
 .True, it is well argued that this country is not liable for dam- 
 ages done in the war to the persons and property of a neutral 
 foreign resident here, any more than to our own citizens. 
 Granted. But this government, by appointing the Southern 
 Claims Commission, has admitted its liability for all the proper- 
 ty taken and used by the armies of the United States in tho 
 course of its m'ilitary operations, belonging to its loyal citizens. 
 Every subject of Great Britain being a neutral, must be taken 
 to have been loyal, under the provisions of this treaty, unless 
 some overt act is shown, and stands, therefore, upon the ground 
 of the most loyal citizen of the United States ; and for every 
 dollar of his property taken, used or injured, by the United 
 States, and for every injury to his person, the United States by 
 this treaty is made responsible. What that amount may be de- 
 pends upon the advocacy of the English Commissioner and the 
 conscience of the representative of the King of Spain. 
 
 I have already called attention to the fact that there is no 
 prohibition against British claims as holders of the Confederate 
 loan. 1 shall probably be answered that there was no need of 
 such a prohibition because the Confederate debt was neither an 
 " act done or committed against a British subject by the United 
 States." True, but I cannot forget, however, that this Confed- 
 erate loan was specially secured by a pledge of the cotton 
 
 \ I 
 
 
 i n m I iiii i i .'i"" 
 
 jL^j^ ; .w-»y .■.,-;**'. w«r =^'«*''*' 
 
r 
 
 >-i'»'*mmam!&ei>lkg^ij^'- 
 
 10 
 
 owned by the Confedorato government, placed in the hands ot 
 agents as security for the loan at a given price per pound, mak- 
 |..g asful a pledge m the eye of municipal law as between 
 individuals as could be well stated. Therefore, it would seem 
 to me quite clear that all such Confederate cotton so pledged 
 became the qualiHed property of the holders of the loan for 
 whose benefit it was held as a pledge. Indeed I remember that 
 portions of that very cotton were shipped and sold to pay the 
 interest as long as the Confederacy had existence. 
 
 Now, IS it not historically true that the United States took 
 a^id destroyed many millions of this cotton and put some forty 
 million do lars more into the Treasury realized from its sale? 
 i)id we not c'aun tins property as successors to the Confederate 
 Kates captured by us ,n the war ? But is it not under this Treaty 
 subject to the pledge and the rights of neutrals who had loaneJ 
 
 luhorr' T" '*' "^' '"'' '' '' ^'^^'^ ^^-»*« -d --"si 
 
 TTnfjl 7! '' ^^"^''^""«»^1 provision against the pay- 
 ment ol the Confederate debt, we have no constitutional pro- 
 vision against payment for the cotton that we have destroyed 
 or taken and sold belonging to British subjects, which we have 
 agreed to pay by the solemn provisions of a treaty w oh are L 
 themselves the supremo law of the land. 
 
 What answer to this view of the British right of pronertv? T 
 l.ave heard but one, and that is, that cotton 'being ZZlie of 
 property capable of being used in aid of the war in the South 
 orn States when captured by the United States became he "t 
 orty of the captors as against all the world, although It le 1 1 
 of capture the actual title might be in a n;itral Br U^ s'^^^^^^ 
 Grant that, or the sake of the argument, it would be so t 
 the absence of the Treaty. But by the TrUty of Washington 
 
 soiled timt tlid Bm,sl, subject under this rule may claim hi, 
 property .n daves Wully his property by our law. and 1 
 tut,on pnor o the war, and for which he could hare bXht 
 »uu m any of our court., although that cla« „f prope ty wo^j 
 
mjfWiHiiB 1 ■ 1 11 im^firtigi 
 
 
 17 
 
 swell British claims to millions in amount, because it is stated in 
 the protocol that the British Commissioners declared that the 
 Britisli Government would not present any such claims. Pro)> 
 ably not. But why not have made that certain in the Treaty 
 itself ? A declaration not put in the Treaty, and not in the 
 purview of the instructions of the British Commissioners may 
 bo determined not to be within their province, so as to bo bind- 
 ing on private claimants. 
 
 I trust it may so bo held. One would be grieved to find oven 
 in the Treaty of Washington an entering wedge to the payment 
 for slave property set free by the war, the proclamation of Eman- 
 cipation and the Constitutional amendments. 
 
 It will be observed that I have not dwelt at all upon the fact 
 that the Treaty provides for the payment by Great Britain of 
 claims of our citizens against England, for acts done or com-' 
 mitted against their persons and property in the same period, 
 because I have heard of substantially none. Perhaps the Con- 
 federate raid upon the Saint Albans Bank during the war would 
 come more nearly under this class of cases than any other, but 
 unless it can be shown that the Government of Canada con- 
 nived at and became parties to that raid it seems difficult to see 
 how such a claim can be validated. 
 
 Tliere is still another large class of claims which may come 
 jn under the provisions of this Treaty, and certainly will be 
 pushed, and that is for restitution of the blockade runners cap- 
 tured during the war. It hsis been insisted, and it is still in- 
 sisted by the British owners that all these captures are illegal, be- 
 cause, among other reasons, by the proclamation of the blockade 
 of President Lincoln it is distinctly ordered that our naval ves- 
 sels warn off the merchant vessels coming to a Southern port the 
 first time they are found within the inhibited waters, and that 
 capture should only be made for the second offence. But soon 
 these warnings were omitted, and a capture was made when- 
 ever and wherever a vessel was found attempting to enter a 
 blockaded port. 
 
 Again, it will be claimed that we have insisted, and do still 
 insist, that we never have accorded belligerent rights to the Con- 
 federates at sea, because they had neither ports nor a navy. 
 This is one of the grounds upon which the senior Senator from 
 
 It 
 
 -«fr.v*3»r*^*'*' 
 
 ^'sftSiff^^fc- 
 
 MIIK« 
 
1 
 
 "»•— ^"wWWMWfcf 
 
 ' 
 
 18 
 
 Massachusotts. in his speech against a former treaty, put his case 
 witli all his strength, and made the recognition hj Kngland of 
 the belligerent rights of the Confoderatos at sea, when wo had 
 accorded them none, a distinctive and most formidable ground 
 of liability to us for all wrongs done to us by the Alabama — a 
 view, by the way, whicn has been wholly ignored and ropidia- 
 ted by tins treaty — yet the newspapers said that the whole 
 country adopted this view. The British lawyers say, be it so • 
 assume that there was no state of belligerency at sea, how then' 
 do you maintain the legality of a blockade which could only be 
 set up because of a state of belligerency on the waters ? 
 
 And if there is anything in this doctrine tl.at a state of bel- 
 hgerency may exist between the parent state and its revolted 
 subjects on the land and yet there be no state of belligerency at 
 sea, so that we might liave been justified in hanging Confed- 
 erate sailors as pirates, — as we essayed to do, but were pre 
 vented by threats of retaliation, - then all our prize adjudica- 
 tions fall to the ground, and we are accountable for the vessels 
 captured, before a Court of Arbitration to l)e presided over by 
 the representative of the King of Spain, who has subjects with 
 like claims against us. 
 
 Remember, again, thit this question is not to be determined 
 bjr us with our patriotic emotions and ideas of international 
 law tinged by the decisions of our highest courts, but by the 
 • represeutative of the King of Spain, who sits as arbitrator in 
 all this class of cases, as well the cotton as the ships, and from 
 whose sole decision there is uo appeal or escape. Indeed in 
 regard to payment of this class of claims the English Commis- 
 sioners, as if fearing that we might deem ourselves ovei-reached 
 have taken great pains to bind the United States very securely* 
 and a special provision, the like to be found no where else, in any 
 diplomatic convention, not even in our treaty with the Mian 
 tnbes - seeming to question, in advance, by implication, the 
 gpod faith of the nation - is appended to article thirteenth. 
 
 Listen ; The high contracting parties hereby engage " to con- 
 
 "sider the decision of the Commissioners as absolutely final and 
 
 "conclusive upon each claim decided upon by them, and to give 
 
 full effect to such decisions witliout any objection, evasion, or 
 
 " delay whatsoever." 
 
19 
 
 ,, 
 
 ' 
 
 
 Why, this reads like an oath in a Ku-Kliix lodge, instead of 
 a provision of a treaty between two of the most powerful and 
 most honorable nations of the earth, and amounts to this : 
 " You promise and agree without any mental rosorvatiou or 
 equivocation or evasion of mind whatever." 
 
 Yet, we are all in favor of every provision of the Treaty of 
 Washington! . ..,,.,,, 
 
 TUB FISQEBIES. ' . '" 
 
 I have heretofore so often and at such length dwelt upon the 
 injustice done the people of the ^ uited States, and especially 
 my constituents and neighbors, in the settlement of the fishery 
 question under this Treaty, that I forbear wearying your pa- 
 tience with it hero by a recital of the wrongs done to us, es- 
 pecially because, Ijy the provisions of the Treaty itself, the part 
 of it relating to the fisheries does not become effective until 
 both Houses of Congress, after full revision and examination in 
 open session, with tlie whole country looking on, pass a law to • 
 carry it into effect and agree to it ; and that, I trust and verily 
 believe, never will be done. 
 
 The statement of the provisions of the Treaty relating to the 
 fisheries, is the best argument against them. For the privilege 
 of fishing without annoyance, and buying bait, for catching 
 mackerel only, within three miles of the shore of the British 
 province, which has been and can be demonstrated even by the 
 admission of the Canadian authorities themselves to be scarcely 
 worth seven thousand dollars a year, the Treaty throws open 
 all our fisheries, from Easport to Delaware Bay, to British fish- 
 ermen in full competition with our own. 
 
 In addition to which we are to give the introduction of all 
 kinds of fish and fish-oils free of duty into this country, and 
 virtually open to Canada a trade and industry which produces 
 more than twelve millions yearly to the United States. And 
 while we surrender all this, we make no provision for the reim- 
 bursement of our fishermen for their vessels seized' and confis- 
 cated without right, while prosecuting their hardy toil of the 
 sea, for a series of years by Canadian and British cruisers. 
 And yet all the people are in flavor of ©very provisiou of the 
 Treaty of Washington ! 
 
 I 
 
 i^yE^SMCflBtfjK-.>M*ki-jii**^*- 
 
f 
 
 20 
 
 1 
 
 NAVIOATION OP THR ST. LAWnENOR. ■' ' 
 
 By tho 2.]tl. Article wo obtain the freo navigation of tl.o St 
 Uwronco, for which wo shouUl bo duly grateful, unless it shall 
 turn out as I foar it may upon oxanunation, that in this case 
 a so wc havo paid too great a price for the favor, or in the lan- 
 guage of Massachusetts' and Pennsylvania's greatest economist, 
 wo have ..pa.d too dear for our whistle." I am one of those 
 who believe m the demonstration made by Henry Clay, that tho 
 
 United States, as a proposition of national law, especially as 
 8 nco Ins argument every considerable river in the world, like 
 «.c St Lawrence, draining a part of one country and debouch- 
 mg mto ho sea m another, has been, by convention and othcr- 
 w e, declared free to the navigation of all peoples under regu- ' 
 lutions apphcable to all alike. Lot us not omit to mention that 
 we also get the nght to navigate tho Welland, and St. Lawrence 
 
 ,and other canals, m the dominion of Canada, under the same 
 condU.ons that the subjects of Great Britain have that right 
 ^Z:o-"'7 'f^r.' ' ''''''^''' privilege, which we have 
 of tins Treaty, i„ no greater degree than hitherto. That navi- 
 
 gation never would havo been hindered except in case of war 
 
 between tins country and Great Britain, and in such case the 
 
 provisions of tho Treaty are useless. 
 
 Wo have paid for these limited privileges oven in advance 
 
 nrs by givmg the free navigation to the subjects of G eat' 
 
 and by opening our great lakes to tho subjects of Grea 
 Britain to compete with us for our own coasting and earwig 
 rade That commerce is, at least, one and a half times greater 
 han the w^io e coasting trade on our Atlantic shores, whlh wo 
 We so sedulously guarded from the foundation of the Govern! 
 ment. We have also opened to British competition the com- 
 merce of Lake Michigan, which lies wholly within our borde" 
 We have not only given all this, but in addition we have granted 
 the free transit of all BritishK,wned goods through all our territ 
 nes, m bond, without payment of duties, thereby opelg a d^" 
 to smuggling and fraud upon the treasury many hundreVtim" 
 
 
 7!^^^' ' ""^ 
 
.r. • 
 
 w 
 
 21 
 
 greater than nil the Alahamn claims, however reckoned. Under 
 our Internal Uovonuo lawH, it was found iniposKiltlo to transport 
 whinkoy in bond by any safoKuards and ponallies wo could 
 throw around such transportatiou so as to protect the revenue 
 against untold niillic.iH of frauds. So imposHiblo was it tliat wo 
 wore obliged to prohibit such privilcRO to our own citizi-ns, of 
 spirituous liquors our own product. By this treaty we permit all 
 foreign liquors — wines and brandies, however valuable — to bo 
 carried all o/or our country and to bo deposited along the ex- 
 tended lino of division between the British dominions and this 
 country, a customhouso lino of nearly six thousand miles, in 
 bond, by every railroad and every other vehicle of transporta- 
 tion. Tho impossibility of prevention of frauds in transporta- 
 tion of spirits becomes now trebly impossible under these 
 provisions. Remember, tho owners of tho goods will l)0 British 
 subjects, not themselves amenal)l>3 to our customs laws, incur- 
 ring therefore no penalty save the loss of their merchandise ; and 
 who shall guarantee the integrity of tho throng of custom-house 
 officials through whoso hands these valuables must pass, under 
 so great temptation? Laws may bo passed, regulations made, 
 penalties provided ; but over the extended border of six thou- 
 sand miles of customs lines between the two countries, where 
 shall the witnesses come from to give evidence of their infrac- 
 tion ? Shall wo not find, in practice, that wo have in this regard 
 paid far " too dear for our whistle " ? 
 
 Again, I grieve that all tlieso advantages of our commerce 
 and our ports should have been accorded to the domain of 
 Canada, because it retards the consummation of that which is, 
 in ray view, a most desirable event to both countries — tho an- 
 nexation of the British dominions to tho United States, and the 
 unification of North America. If the Canadas can enjoy all 
 that we have without any of our burdens, annexation may be 
 retarded; but the most skillful and ingenious blundering of 
 diplomacy cannot long retard the inevitable. And yet every- 
 body is in favor of all the provisions of the treaty of Wash- 
 ington! 
 
 THE ISLAND OP SAN JUAN. 
 
 I will not detain you to comment upon the last provisions of 
 this treaty securing the adjudication of our title to tho island of 
 
 "*«8 
 
 ,14i.; fM .»i*^a> 
 
■fl 
 
 i^ 
 
 
 22 
 
 Ban Jimii hy tlio Kmporor of Pniwin, flr«t, hocn««c, in itwlf for 
 tl.o proHunt, th« title tc that island is of very «mftll consom.cnce, 
 In Tiew of the fact tl.at lon^ hoforo it hi-comos .i territory of con- 
 SKlorablo vnluo, with patriotic a.lininiHtration of public affairs in 
 this country not only the island of San Juan, if JJritish terri- 
 tory, hut all the l{riti«l. iH)s.soHsionR,-. Manitoba and IJritisli 
 Columb,a,~wiIl Imvo bocomo ours. S.,uce/ed in »K,tweeii 
 Alaska on the north and Oregon on the South, manifest, nay, 
 .novitablo doHtiny will settle the question of annexation that 
 inattention or timidity of .liplomats and commissioners have only 
 delayed. But oven in this we pay by far " ten, dear a price 
 for our whistle," because, while we have shown o.,r conf.dence 
 m Ins most Catholic Majesty of Spain, by entrusting him with 
 the appomtment of one of our arl>itmtors ; his less Catho- 
 lic Majesty of Italy to appoint another; his Protestant 
 Wajosty the Kn,g of Sweden and Norway to appoint another, 
 the 1 resident of the Swiss Confederation to appoint another 
 our good friend the Emperor of Austria and K\tw of rfungarr 
 in appointing another- who will probably not be Louis Kossuth 
 - and his slave-holding Majesty the Em,>eror of Brazil to ap- 
 poin another, it will be observed that we have apparently taken 
 great pains to pass over and by the only Christian monarch who 
 was our good friend during tl.o rebellion, and who set us the 
 example by emancipating all the slaves of his empire, one who 
 rules to-day over one-seventh of the population of the globe -- 
 Alexander of Russia -and have refused to trust him to ap- 
 point a single arbitrator to determine the value of a mackerel 
 even when swimming in the water olF the coast of New Bruns-' 
 wick, buch IS the return we make to the Emperor of all the 
 Kussias for his f.rm and undcviating friendship during the war 
 of the rebellion, who did not acknowledge the belligerent or 
 other nglvts of the rebels, and bestow oar confidence, at the 
 bidding of England, upon monarchs who took part in fact 
 against us. And yet all the people are in favor of every pro- 
 vision of the Treaty of Washington ! 
 
 WHY WERE ALL THESE CONCESSIONS TO ENGLAND MADE ? ' 
 
 In the course of this discussion, it has doubtless crossed your 
 minds many times, why were all these concewions to England. 
 
 
 — wmm 
 
 mim 
 
 ;:■*•«*'"" 
 
23 
 
 mailo ? Why did the Rood and patriotif, men who woro of tlio 
 Amoricau Conunission in tiiis bolialf yiold so iniich in return 
 for HO little if whut we liave eeun were all the indncdinent? 
 Of their patriotisni no man can doiil)t ; of the wibdom of what 
 Uuiy did, and the motivoH which lod to it, each for himself must 
 judge. The secret of the treaty of Washington Ih an all-{torva- 
 ding fear of war with (Jreat Britain. Conservative timidity 
 80e:u8 to have ruled the counsels of the American Coraroission, 
 tinged — unconsciously perhaps to themseves — with a desire to 
 link their names to a treaty hetween two great nations which 
 they might naturally suppoao would carry them down through 
 
 all time. 
 
 If we agree to this theory that there was any considcrahlo 
 danger of a war with Groat Britain, or with anybody else, then 
 wo can not only pardon thtjir acts, l)Ut commend tlioin for yield- 
 ing so much. War is to he averted from a nation, as personal 
 strife is to ho avoided by an individual, at all risks and at all 
 hazards, save the loss of honor and of life. Therefore, while wo 
 may well excuse the giving up our rights as a nation to Groat 
 Britain by the over-cautious prudence which dictated it, we 
 ore at liberty, each for himself, to judge whether tho danger, 
 th<* fear of which swayed tho negotiations, actually existed. 
 Undoubtedly tho cry that wont forth that ijcaco has bcon assured 
 between tho two great nations speaking the English language 
 forever by the Treaty of Washington, has been tlio compelling 
 cause of the acquiescence of the j)eople of tho United States in 
 its provisions without much of examination or weighing of their 
 
 oUects. 
 
 Was, then, war imminent or probable if tho treaty had not 
 been concluded ? The answer must be, by every reflecting per- 
 son, clearly not. War with England was not possible except at 
 the'will of the United States ; and the same desire for the avoid- 
 ance of war which has rendered even the Treaty of Washing- 
 ton acceptable to us would have effectually controlled all prob- 
 ability of it. England could not go to war with us. She had 
 neither grievance nor cause. We had fitted out no Alabamas 
 and Shenaudoahs against her commerce. We had acknowl- 
 edged no belligerency of her rebels, either at sea or upon land. 
 We had loaned uo money to her enemies to aid them to fight 
 
 wXtt^Mfa 
 
 TtrA.^^-^ 
 
;i;i2.i',fc3ai.--»»"<r< u-»:'-'. ^"vsfpr^^.'S''!-'??'-'' '!^^:. 
 
 ^^ i 
 
 24 ~ 
 
 her. We had run no blockade with our sliips for the purpose 
 of supplying her enemies with arms. We had not destroyed 
 her commerce and crippled her maritime resources for years, if 
 not forever. She had no cause of complaint against us ; she 
 made none. How, then, could there have been a war between 
 this country and England unless wo had taken the initiative ? 
 
 There was no cause why we should begin. Our claims against 
 E.igland could very well wait for settlement until liie time when 
 hor exigency should be our opportunity. 
 
 A little less than a year ago, on the lecture platform, I took 
 occasion to state to the country tiie causes why it was im])ossible 
 that Great Britain could permit a war between the United 
 States and herself. The fact is, England was at that time 
 and is now menaced by Russia whenever she is embroiled with 
 a naval power approaching in strength to her own, of which alono 
 this country has, since the crippling of France, the capability. I 
 also stated the fact that upon no battle-field had England ever 
 placed more than twenty-five thousand of her own men, not even in 
 the battle of Waterloo ; that Ireland — heretofore the beehive of 
 soldiers for her recruitment — ■ was now unavailable through emigra- 
 tion and discontent. The unification of the German empire had 
 rendered it imfwssible for her to send to America to fight her bat- 
 tles, as in the days of our fathers, the subjects of Hesse Cassel, 
 except as they are now coming, the soldiers of the plow and of the 
 armies of the industries of peace. Attention was further called to 
 the fact that the inhibition of the importation of breadstuff's and 
 cottou into England would work a revolution in her government in 
 six months ; and that in fact, from its own inherent defects, her 
 monarchy was now tottering to its fall. I again call attention to 
 the fact that quite one in every eighteen of the people of England 
 enter the poor-house or the prison annually ; that some less than 
 thirty-two thousand of her people own the great bulk of her soil ; 
 that her agricultural population is decreasing in the same ratio ; 
 that her small farms are diminishing in number ; that there are 
 but little more than three million inhabited houses for her twenty 
 millions of population ; that four-fifths of her inhabitants reside in 
 towns and cities and but one-fifth in the country ; that the great 
 bond which is supposed to bind her people together, her national 
 debt — now twice the amount of ours — is held by a little more 
 
jr the purpose 
 not destroyed 
 IS for years, if 
 ainst us ; she 
 I war between 
 le initiative ? 
 ilaims against 
 he time when 
 
 tform, I took 
 as impossible 
 
 the United 
 It that time 
 3 broiled with 
 f which alone 
 iapability. I 
 England ever 
 1, not even in 
 le beehive of 
 ough emigra- 
 empire had 
 ght her bat- 
 tesse Cassel, 
 V and of the 
 lier called to 
 adstuffs and • 
 vernment in 
 defects, her 
 attention to 
 of England 
 ae less than 
 of her soil ; 
 same ratio ; 
 
 there are 
 her twenty ' 
 its reside in 
 it the great 
 ler national 
 little more 
 
 25 
 
 than one hundred and twenty-six tliousand of her people, out of a 
 total of thirty millions in the U»\ted Kingdom ; and how little it 
 may affect the vast population over which she holds sway may be 
 judged from the fact that the inhabitants of her colonial dependen- 
 cies are nearly one hundred and sixty millions of people. To all 
 this I. may add the further facts which have lately occurred. 
 England finds herself powerless to collect a tax of half a million 
 dollars upon friction matches without stirr,ing an emeute by her 
 people with which the government dared not contend, while we 
 here collect a revenue of two millions on the same article, and I 
 have never heard the question discussed, in Congress or elsewhere ; 
 and the still further fact that such is the consciousness of her weak- 
 ness in case of war that Great Britain has been thrown into a 
 ferment of preparation, and a change has been made in her entire 
 army system, by a mere magazine article of one of her citizens, 
 describing the disasters of a possible invasion. 
 
 Is such a country likely to go to war with the United States ? 
 Need I stop to contrast the situation of America in view of the 
 possibiUties of war ? Forty millions of "^eople ; without a colony or 
 other dependency to be a source of weakness ; without a vulnerable 
 point ; with a veteran army of a million and a half of soldiers lately 
 disbanded and thoroughly trained, two-thirds of which may be 
 brought into the field in ninety days ; a navy of which I wish I could 
 say more, but sufficient to protect our home ports, while our naval 
 power, as a means of offence, consists in the speedy adaptation of 
 the merchant-marine to the purposes of war, and the enterprise of 
 our people which would cause private armed vessels to sally forth 
 everywhere to attack a commerce extended all over the globe ; a 
 country so situated that even the stopping the importation of goods 
 by war would only deprive us of that we do not need, and are only 
 the extravagances and not the necessaries of life, and thus save a 
 great part of the cost of a war to the nation ; containing everything 
 within ourselves, as we have demonstrated, to carry on war for 
 years with no possibility of being crippled in our resources by any 
 attack from abroad ; and— what is not to be forgotten in case of a 
 war with England — a million and a half of our Ypting population 
 absolutely eager for such a war to avenge the wrongs suffered by 
 themselves and their fathers from the tyranny of Great Britain over 
 the green isle, their fondly loved home. I say, with this contrast 
 
 ..^JiS^'"-'- 
 
 *S«DBIl«W^^fe»»5K5<«**^ ■ 
 
 -^■:iii.mi^irT~y 
 
h 
 
 I 
 
 26 
 
 ONE WORD IN CLOSING. 
 
 hav^Tat?a7oLthr' ^"^" '^^ ^- who addresses ,ou to 
 
 his adhesion t 17 T eaVT^Wa: T^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^ ^^"^ 
 attention, and that of thlx '^^^^»"8^°' ^^an to bring to your 
 have los t li, r ! "''""''" P'^P^^' *^^* which I believe we 
 
 ourse,:::! n%t;^zvtT' ^^--^-^'-^aii 
 
 fleeting, All, all is Poacer ThI ^ *t ''^ ^^*^ *^« '^«- 
 
 there need e no pZl"tion f '' """""' *" ^' ''''' '^ ^^' ^^ 
 the condition of the J f u' ''"'■' '' *^""g^' ^^ what may be 
 tinctly theses t ZlZt: Td'ffi 7' ^"^ ^^^^"^ ^- 
 have incurred, the unnecesTar.n ' f '"'^ dangers we 
 
 Treaty of Wa;hingtoT i fel^^^^^^^^^^^^ "' '7 "''^' '" *° 
 
 having to do with nnblt !ff • 7 , ^ "•' ^" '^"^'"^^ ^^^^^. 
 fellowt^ountry: n, ifs Lt^ f t{ '" •*'"^ *'<^^ ^"-« -3r 
 for their calm, careful In,- 1 7 ^"! ''''' "^'^^^ ''^'^ them. 
 
 ' "°oas^j^!JEj^ 
 
.^jWJBr^ 
 
 "i|Jll.jgi- 
 
 K 
 
 
 27 
 
 that they and their representatives may be prepared to lot upon 
 them as they arise upon the determination of the several Boards of 
 Arbitration as may become a great, wise, and powerful people. If 
 I am right — as I verily fear I am — then my warning voice will 
 have prepared the public mind for not too great revulsion when they 
 find themselves disappointed in the treaty of Washington. If I am 
 wrong, then, as a patriot, I shall rejoice with my countrymen in 
 finding that the Joint High Commission " builded wiser than thoy 
 knew." 
 
 vl^ 
 
 ■-■^ 
 
 ■ . i. 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 -i-es^ip-. 
 
 
 g*»!-tf"^"' 
 
H