f--l 
 
 r— I *^ 
 
 THE LIBRARY 
 
 OF 
 
 THE UNIVERSITY 
 
 OF CALIFORNIA 
 LOS ANGELES
 
 This book is DUE on the last date stamped below 
 
 v^ 
 
 'iu2 1.IBRARY 
 
 .DIVERSITY OF CALIFOUMU. 
 
 LOS ANGELES
 
 THE 
 
 ALABAMA ARBITRATION
 
 THE 
 
 ALABAMA ARBITRATION 
 
 BY 
 
 THOMAS WILLING BALCH 
 
 A. B. (Harvard) 
 Member of the Philadelphia Bar 
 
 IC&I^ 
 
 Philadelphia 
 
 ALLEN, LANE & SCOTT 
 
 1900
 
 Copyright, 1900, by 
 THOMAS WILLING BALCH. 
 
 Press of 
 
 ALLEN, LANE & SCOTT, 
 
 Philadelphia, Pa.
 
 A7 
 
 INTRODUCTORY NOTE. 
 
 This is an attempt to tell the story of the Ala- 
 bama arbitration, as far as possible, in the words 
 of the participants in that drama. It is hoped the 
 work will be of use to historical students. My 
 brother, Edwin Swift Balch, Esq., has aided me in 
 one way or another in its preparation. 
 
 T. W. B. 
 
 Philadelphia, May 5th, 1900.
 
 B^^ml*^ ^* 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 fC(plB 
 OOON after the outbreak of hostilities in 1861 in 
 
 the United States between the Northern and the 
 Southern States over the Slavery question, the Con- 
 federate States, in order to injure the power of the 
 Union States by striking and destroying the mercan- 
 tile marine of the latter, sought with great energy, 
 tenacit)'' and skill to create a navy sufficiently strong 
 to force the Union maritime commerce to seek the 
 shelter of a neutral flag. And in this course their 
 Aasfy recognition as belligerents by England helped 
 them very much.^ Fort Sumter fell April 13th, 1861; 
 President Lincoln issued his proclamation declaring a 
 
 ^TAe National and Private ''Alabama Claims'^ and their 
 ''final and amicable settlement'' by Charles C. Beaman, Jr. 
 Printed by W. H. Moore, Washington, D. C, 1871, pages, 7-48. 
 Correspondence concerning Claims Against Great Britain. 
 Volume VI. Washington: Government Printing Office, 1871, 
 page 4 et seq. Letter of " C." on The American Blockade 
 and Belligerent Rights in the London Daily News, Thursday, 
 October 19th, 1865 : reprinted in Correspondence concerning 
 Claims Against Great Britain. Volume IV. Washington : 
 Government Printing Office, 1869, page 257. Charles Francis 
 Adams, by his son, Charles Francis Adams. Boston and New 
 York, 1900, pages 168-172. 
 
 (I)
 
 2 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 
 
 blockade of the Southern ports on April 19th ; and 
 in spite of Earl Russell's promise to Mr. Dallas, the 
 American Minister, to wait to hear Charles Francis 
 Adams, the newly chosen representative to England 
 of the new Administration, the British Government 
 published, on May 13th, the very day of Mr. Adams's 
 arrival in London, the Queen's neutrality proclama- 
 tion recognizing the Confederates as belligerents. 
 That act was the first step that made it possible for 
 the latter to carry on from the shores of England a 
 naval war against the United States. 
 
 The first ship of war of any importance that flew the 
 Confederate flag on the high seas, was the Sumter? Un- 
 der the command of Raphael Semmes, who equipped 
 her and, at the end of June, 1861, took her successfully 
 out of New Orleans past the Union ships, she proved 
 for six months a scourge to Northern commerce. 
 She did not destroy many vessels, but she inspired 
 sufificient fear to Northern ship owners to cause many 
 of them to place their boats under the neutral flag of 
 England. Her career as a Confederate cruiser was 
 cut short at Gibraltar in January, 1862, when her com- 
 
 ^ Memoirs of Service Afloat, during the War between the States, 
 by Admiral Raphael Semmes, C. S. N., Baltimore, 1869, pages 
 93~345 passim. Papers relating to the Treaty of Washington. 
 Volume I. Geneva Arbitratioii. Washington : Government 
 Printing Office, 1872, page 129.
 
 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 3 
 
 mander, finding it impossible to obtain coal, was forced 
 to have her sold. She was equipped in a Southern 
 port, and was accorded only such recognition by for- 
 eign nations as were in accord with the rules of in- 
 ternational law. But in the meantime, the Southern 
 Government was preparing to build in England, and 
 equip and man with English guns and English sea- 
 men, a fleet of sufficient strength to largely ruin the 
 United States mercantile marine. 
 
 Captain James D. BullocH, of the Confederate 
 States Navy, was the naval representative, and Messrs. 
 Eraser, Trenholm and Company were the financial 
 agents of the Confederate Government in England. 
 Captain Bullock first had built at Liverpool in 1861-62 
 the Oreto, subsequently known as the Florida.^ To 
 avoid suspicion it was given out that she was intended 
 for the Italian Government. But upon inquiry to 
 the Italian consul at Liverpool, he disclaimed all 
 knowledge of her; and the United States Minister 
 to England, Charles Francis Adams, informed Earl 
 Russell on February i8th, 1862, that she was in- 
 tended for the Confederate Government. On the 
 
 ^Papers relating to the Treaty of Washington. Volume I. 
 Geneva Arbitration. Washington : Government Printing Office, 
 1872, page 133 et seq. The National and Private ^^ Alabama 
 Claims ' ' and their ' 'filial and amicable settlement, ' ' by Charles 
 C. Beaman, Jr. Printed by W. H. Moore, Washington, D. C, 
 1 87 1, pages 49-68.
 
 4 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 
 
 2 2d of February the commissioners of customs re- 
 ported to the British Government that the Oreto 
 was built to carry guns, but that she then had on 
 board neither guns nor gun-carriages, and that she 
 was intended for the use of a Palermo firm. Again, 
 on March 26th, Mr. Adams called Earl Russell's atten- 
 tion to the probable destination of the vessel : but four 
 days before she had sailed with a general cargo, osten- 
 sibly for an Italian port. She next was heard of in the 
 West Indies at Nassau^ New Providence. There she 
 aroused the suspicion of the American Consul and of 
 some British naval officers, who advised her detention. 
 Other vessels arrived from England with equipments 
 and guns. Finally she was seized ; but the Vice- 
 Admiralty Court released her on the ground of lack 
 of evidence. She then sailed for Nassau, received her 
 armament at sea, and was christened the Florida. 
 From that time until October, 1864, when she was 
 captured by the United States ship of war Wachu- 
 sett, she destroyed many ships of the United States 
 merchant marine. 
 
 But it was the Alabama^ that of all the Confederate 
 cruisers did the most to cause the transfer of United 
 
 * Memoirs of Service Afloat, during the War between the States, 
 by Admiral Raphael Semmes, C. S. N. Baltimore, 1869, pages 
 370-773, passim. Papers relating to the Treaty of Washington. 
 Volume I. Geneva Arbitration. Washington : Government
 
 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 5 
 
 States merchant vessels to the protection of the 
 English Bag. She was better built, equipped and 
 commanded than any of the others to prey upon the 
 Union commerce. Captain Bullocl^ contracted with 
 the Messrs. Laird of Birkenhead for her construction. 
 She was known as the "290."^ No secret was made 
 of the purpose for which she was built. She was 
 launched on May 15th, 1862. The United States Con- 
 sul at Liverpool, Mr. Dudley, finding ample evidence 
 that she was intended as a vessel of war for the Con- 
 federate Government, sent it to Mr. Adams. On June 
 23d, Mr. Adams wrote to Earl Russell inclosing Mr. 
 Dudley's letter, and requested that action might be 
 taken either to stop the projected expedition, or else 
 to establish the fact that its purpose was not hostile to 
 
 Printing Office, 1872, page 146 et seq. The National and 
 Private "■Alabama Claims'' and their '^ final and amicable 
 settlement,'' by Charles C. Beaman, Jr. Printed by W. H. 
 Moore, Washington, D. C, 1871, pages 69-100. Charles 
 Francis Adams, by his son, Charles Francis Adams. Boston and 
 New York, 1900, page 306 et seq. 
 
 ^ The Alaba7na was known as the ' ' 290 ' ' because she was the 
 two hundred and ninetieth vessel that the Lairds built. It is a 
 curious coincidence that when, a few years since, Mr. Herbert, 
 then Secretary of the Navy of the United States, was to name 
 one of the great battleships building at Philadelphia by the 
 Cramps, he called her after his native State, the Alabama ; and 
 she, too, though quite unknown to the Secretary, was the two 
 hundred and ninetieth ship that the Cramps built, and was re- 
 corded in their books as " No. 290."
 
 6 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 
 
 the United States. On July ist, the commissioners of 
 customs, to whom were referred Mr. Adams's letter to 
 Earl Russell and its inclosure, reported to the Gov- 
 ernment that the* vessel was undoubtedly intended for 
 a warship, but that she had neither guns nor gun-car- 
 riages on board, and that their solicitor did not think 
 that there was any cause to detain her. The com- 
 missioners suggested also that the American Consul at 
 Liverpool should submit to them any further evidence 
 he might obtain. Mr. Dudley soon laid before the 
 commissioners a mass of evidence showing the true 
 state of affairs. The same evidence was submitted to 
 Mr. Collier, an eminent barrister, who, on July 23d, 
 gave his opinion that the " 290" should be detained. 
 The next day Mr. Adams sent Mr. Collier's opinion 
 and additional evidence to Earl Russell. While the 
 British Government was deciding what action it would 
 take in the matter, the " 290," on July 29th, went to 
 sea without a clearance, ostensibly on her trial trip ; 
 she carried a party of ladies and gentlemen, but her 
 guests were sent back from the bar on a tug, and she 
 herself proceeded to a bay on the island of Anglesea. 
 The order for her detention arrived only after she had 
 sailed.*^ She then proceeded to the Azores. There, 
 
 * When the Alabama escaped, the Confederate cause was at high- 
 water mark, and there were good reasons for believing that the 
 Union would be broken. But Meade's victory at Gettysburg and
 
 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 7 
 
 two English boats, carrying her armament and addi- 
 tional seamen, met her. After receiving from them 
 her equipment, the " 290" was turned over to Captain 
 Semmes and a crew composed almost entirely of Eng- 
 lishmen, who, on the broad Atlantic, christened her the 
 
 Grant's capture of Vicksburg at the beginning of July, 1863, 
 and the gradual, but steady ebbing, thereafter, of the tide of 
 Confederate power, undoubtedly influenced the action of the Brit- 
 ish Government. At the beginning of the following September 
 (1863), in spite of the ample evidence that Mr. Adams furnished 
 to Earl Russell of the ultimate destination and use of the two 
 iron-clad rams that the Lairds were building at Birkenhead for 
 the Confederates, Mr. Adams received from Earl Russell, on Sep- 
 tember 4th, a note dated the ist, in which the Earl said that under 
 the circumstances, " Her Majesty's Government are advised that 
 they cannot interfere in any way with these vessels." Mr. Adams, 
 seeing that one of the iron-clads was about to escape to sea much 
 in the same way that the Alabama had done, sent the following 
 vigorous communication to the Earl : — 
 
 " Legation OF the United States, 
 
 "London, September 5, 1863. 
 
 "My Lord: — At this moment, when one of the iron-clad 
 vessels is on the point of departure from this kingdom, on its 
 hostile errand against the United States, I am honored with the 
 reply of your lordship to my notes of the nth, i6th, and 25th of 
 July, and of the 14th of August. I trust I need not express how 
 profound is my regret at the conclusion to which her Majesty's 
 Government have arrived. I can regard it no otherwise than as 
 practically opening to the insurgents free liberty in this kingdom 
 to execute a policy described in one of their late publications in 
 the following language : 
 
 " ' In the present state of the harbor defences of New York, 
 Boston, Portland, and smaller northern cities, such a vessel as
 
 8 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 
 
 Alabama. Then for nearly two years, under the 
 skilful command of her brave and able captain, the 
 Alabama, until her destruction by the Kearsarge off 
 Cherbourg, June 19th, 1864, became the terror of 
 
 the Warrior would have little difficulty in entering any of these 
 ports and inflicting a vital blow upon the enemy. The destruction 
 of Boston alone would l)e worth a hundred victories in the field. 
 It would bring such a terror to the ' ' blue-noses " as to cause 
 tliem to wish eagerly for peace, despite their overweening love of 
 gain, which has been so freely administered to since the opening of 
 this war. Vessels of the Warrior class would promptly raise the 
 blockade of our ports, and would even, in this respect, confer 
 advantages which would soon repay the cost of their construction.' 
 " // would be superfliwus in me to point oiU to your lordship 
 that this is war. No matter what may be the theory adopted of 
 neutrality in a struggle, when this process is carried on in the 
 manner indicated, from a territory and with the aid of the subjects 
 of a third party, that third party to all intents and purposes ceases 
 to be neutral. Neither is it necessary to show that any govern- 
 ment which suffers it to be done fails in enforcing the essential con- 
 ditions of international amity towards the country against whom 
 the hostility is directed. In my belief it is impossible that any 
 nation, retaining a proper degree of self-respect, could tamely 
 submit to a continuance of relations so utterly deficient in reci- 
 procity. I have no idea that Great Britain would do so for a 
 
 moment. 
 
 ******* 
 
 " I pray your lordship to accept the assurances of the highest 
 
 consideration with which I have the honor to be, my lord, your 
 
 most obedient servant, 
 
 "CHARLES FRANCIS ADAMS. 
 
 " Right Honorable Earl Russell, &c., &c., &c." 
 
 Mr. Adams's protest bore good fruit ; for a few days later he 
 received from Earl Russell the following note : —
 
 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 9 
 
 American seamen. She hoisted the British flag to 
 lure prizes to their destruction, was welcomed at 
 Cape Town, Singapore, and other British harbors,' 
 and practically drove the American flag from the 
 
 "Foreign Office, September 8, 1863. 
 
 " Lord Russell presents his compliments to Mr. Adams, and has 
 the honor to inform him that instructions have been issued which will 
 prevent the departure of the two iron-clad vessels from Liverpool." 
 
 The English Government did not allow the vessels to sail to 
 enter the Confederate service, and subsequently bought them itself. 
 
 Papers relating to Foreign Affairs, acco7npanyi7ig the Annual 
 Message of the Preside7it to the First session of the Thirty -eighth 
 Congress. Part L Washington : Government Printing Office, 
 1864, pages 357-360, 361-364, 367, 368. Charles Francis 
 Adams, by his son, Charles Francis Adams. Boston and New 
 York, 1900, pages 334-336, 341-344- 
 
 'The following letter from Dr. Edmund W. Holmes, of the 
 University of Pennsylvania — who was during a part of the Civil 
 War at Cape Town, South Africa, where his father. Captain Gid- 
 eon S. Holmes, was formerly the United States Consul — shows 
 how hostile British feeling was towards the Union cause : — 
 
 "Philadelphia, April 9th, 1900. 
 
 " My dear Sir : — I send you herewith the remarks about the 
 visit of the Alabama to Cape Town, as requested by you. 
 
 ' ' Upon the signal hill is the station from which approaching 
 vessels are signalled and reported down into the city by sema- 
 phore. From here, on that memorable day in '63, was announced 
 the approach of the luckless American bark The Sea Bride ; 
 quickly followed by that of a steamer, under the British flag, 
 supposed to be the bi-monthly mail steamer of those days. Soon 
 the British flag changed to the Confederate colors and she proved 
 to be the cruiser Alabama. I arrived on horse-back, at Sea
 
 lO THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 
 
 high seas to the shelter of the Union Jack. What 
 
 ^he United States lost, England gained. The feeling 
 
 in the United States towards England grew bitter.* 
 
 The Alabama was openly called a British pirate,^ and 
 
 Point in time to see her fire a shot and bring to The Sea Bride, 
 and put a prize crew aboard. Every American swore the bark was 
 within the three mile limit ; every Englishman swore she was 
 without these limits ; she was declared to be a lawful prize by the 
 British authorities. 
 
 ' ' I went aboard of the Alaba^na, saw the mark of the un- 
 exploded shell of the Hatteras, which one of the junior officers 
 with great gusto declared if exploded would have ended the 
 steamer's career. 
 
 ' ' I saw Captain Semmes in his cabin, with flowers piled higher 
 than his head surrounded by the elite of English aristocratic so- 
 ciety ; and when anyone talks now of British friendship I cannot 
 help thinking of this vessel, built in England, built with English 
 capital, armed with English guns, manned with English men to 
 prey upon the commerce of a friendly nation. 
 
 ' ' The day after the arrival of the Alabama in Table Bay the 
 merchants were gathered upon 'change, and in a bantering spirit, 
 taunted my father, Gideon S. Holmes, publicly upon the sucess- 
 ful career of the Confederate cruiser in evading the United States 
 men of war, when he replied : ' Well ! you dance now, but you 
 will pay the piper,' and the Geneva award was the fulfillment of 
 that prophesy. "Yours truly, 
 
 " E. W. HOLMES. 
 
 "Mr. T. W. Balch." 
 
 ^Proceedings of the Chamber of Commerce of the State of New 
 York on the continued piracies of vessels fitted out in Great Brit- 
 ain tipon American commerce. Saturday, February 21st, 1863. 
 New York, 1863. 
 
 ^English Neutrality. Is the Alabama a British Pirate? (By 
 G. P. Lowrey.) New York, 1863.
 
 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. I I 
 
 her successful destruction of American commerce 
 roused public opinion to fever heat. 
 
 American sentiment was well expressed in Lowell's 
 Jonathan to John : — 
 
 "We own the ocean, tu, John: 
 You mus' n' take it hard, 
 Ef we can't think with you, John. 
 It's jest your own back-yard. 
 Ole Uncle S. sez he, ' I guess, 
 Ef iheV s his claim,' sez he, 
 'The fencin' -stuff '11 cost enough 
 To bust up friend J. B., 
 Ez wal ez you an' me ! ' 
 
 "Why talk so dreffle big, John, 
 Of honor when it meant 
 You did n't care a fig, John, 
 But jest for ten per ceyit. ? 
 
 Ole Uncle S. sez he, ' I guess 
 He's like the rest,' sez he: 
 'When all is done, it's number one 
 Thet's nearest to J. B., 
 Ez wal ez t' you an' me ! ' " 
 
 Of the numerous other commerce destroyers flying 
 the Confederate flag for whose existence the United 
 States held Great Britain answerable, two, the Georgia 
 and the Shenandoah, gained a good deal of notoriety. 
 The former sailed before notice of her destination was 
 addressed to the British Government, but ample warn- 
 ing was given of the intended shipping of her arma- 
 ment to her off the French coast for the British
 
 12 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 
 
 Government to have stopped the shipment. After 
 destroying many American ships, the Georgia returned 
 to Liverpool. ^° Thomas Baring, in a speech in Parlia- 
 ment on May 13th, 1864, thus described her career:" 
 "At the time of her departure the Georgia was reg- 
 istered as the property of a Liverpool merchant, a 
 partner of the firm which shipped the crew. She re- 
 mained the property of this person until the 23d of 
 June, when the register was cancelled, he notifying the 
 Collector of her sale to foreign owners. During this 
 period, namely, from the ist of April to the 23d of 
 June, the Georgia being still registered in the name 
 of a Liverpool merchant, and thus his property, was 
 carrying on war against the United States, with whom 
 we were in alliance. It was while still a British vessel 
 that she captured and burned the Dictator, and cap- 
 tured and released, under bond, the Griswold, the same 
 vessel which had brought corn to the Lancashire suf- 
 ferers. The crew of the Georgia were paid through 
 
 ^^Papers relating to the Treaty of Washington. Volume I. 
 Geneva Arbitratioyi. Washington : Government Printing Office, 
 1872, page 156. TJie Natio7ial and Private ''Alabama Claims^' 
 and their ''final and amicable settlement,^ ^ by Charles C. 
 Beaman, Jr. Printed by W. H. Moore, Washington, D. C, 
 
 1871, pages 101-106. 
 
 ^^ Papers relating to the Treaty of Washington. Volume I. 
 Geneva Arbitration. Washington : Government Printing Office, 
 
 1872, page 160.
 
 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 1 3 
 
 the same Liverpool firm. A copy of an advance note 
 used is to be found in the Diplomatic Correspondence. 
 The same firm continued to act in this capacity through- 
 out the cruise of the Georgia. After cruising in the 
 Atlantic, and burning and bonding a number of vessels, 
 the Georgia made for Cherbourg, where she arrived 
 on the 28th of October. There was, at the time, much 
 discontent among the crew ; many deserted, leave of 
 absence was given to others, and their wages were 
 paid all along by the same Liverpool firm. In order 
 to get the Georgia to sea again, the Liverpool firm 
 enlisted in Liverpool some twenty seamen, and sent 
 them to Brest. The Georgia left Cherbourg on a 
 second cruise, but having no success she returned to 
 that port, and thence to Liverpool, where her crew have 
 been paid off without any concealment, and the vessel 
 is now laid up. Here, then, is the case of a vessel, 
 clandestinely built, fraudulently leaving the port of her 
 construction, taking Englishmen on board as her crew, 
 and waging war against the United States, an ally of 
 ours, without once having entered a port of the power 
 the commission of which she bears, but being, for some 
 time, the property of an English subject. She has now 
 returned to Liverpool — and has returned, I am told, 
 with a British crew on board, who, having enlisted in 
 war against an ally of ours, have committed a misde- 
 meanor in the sight of the law."
 
 14 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 
 
 The S/ienmtdoah^'^ was originally the Sea King. On 
 September 20th, 1864, she was sold to the father-in- 
 law of the managing partner of Fraser, Trenholm and 
 Company, and the transfer was registered the same 
 day. In October she cleared from London for Bom- 
 bay. About the same time a smaller steamer, carrying 
 her armament, sailed from Liverpool. They met at 
 Madeira where the Sea King, from that time known 
 as the Shenandoah, took on board her equipment. 
 She then cruised in the Atlantic and the Pacific for 
 ninety days, destroying many ships, when she arrived 
 at Melbourne. The news of her escape from Eng- 
 land had preceded her to Australia ; but, neverthe- 
 less, in spite of the protests of the American Consul, 
 she was allowed to make repairs, recruit her crew, 
 and replenish her supply of coal. Then the authori- 
 ties permitted the Shenandoah to sail to still further 
 harass and destroy American commerce.^^ After de- 
 stroying a number of whaling vessels — some, owing 
 
 ^"^Papers relating to the Treaty of Washington. Volume I. 
 Geneva Arbitration. Washington : Government Printing Office, 
 1872, page 165. The National and Private " Alabama Claims'" 
 and their '' final and amicable settlc?nent," by Charles C. Beaman, 
 Jr. Printed by W. H. Moore, Washington, D. C, 1871, pages 
 107-149. 
 
 ^^Papers relating to the Treaty of Washiyigton. Volume I. 
 Geneva Arbitration. Washington : Government Printing Office, 
 1872, page 165 et seq. Letter of Mr. Adams to Earl Russell,
 
 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 1 5 
 
 to her captain's ignorance of the cessation of hos- 
 tilities, after the close of the war — she finally made 
 her way back to Liverpool, where her commander 
 gave her up to the British Government, by whom 
 she was transferred to the United States Consul. 
 
 The havoc and terror wrought by these vessels 
 ruined the mercantile commerce of the United States. ^^ 
 After Charles Francis Adams, who represented the 
 United States at the Court of St. James with ability 
 and dignity, had done everything possible to prevent 
 the escape of the Oreto and the Alabama, he sum- 
 marized with great vigor in a letter to Earl Russell 
 written on October 23d, 1863, the case for the United 
 States at that time against Great Britain. That letter 
 was as follows :— 
 
 " Legation of the United States. 
 
 (Received October 23.) 
 
 "London, October 23, 1863. 
 
 "My Lord : — It maybe within your recollection that 
 in the note of the 1 7th of September which I had the 
 
 April 7th, 1865 ; Papers relating to Foreign Affairs, accom- 
 panying the Annual Message of the President to the First 
 Session Thirty-ninth Congress. Part I. Washington : Gov- 
 ernment Printing Office, 1866, page 578. 
 
 " Speech of Richard Cobden delivered in the House of Com- 
 mons, May 13th, 1864.
 
 1 6 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 
 
 honor to address to you in reply to yours of the 14th 
 of the same month, respecting the claim for the destruc- 
 tion of the ship No7'a, and other claims of the same 
 kind, which I had been instructed to make, I expressed 
 myself desirous to defer to your wishes that they should 
 not be further pressed on the attention of Her Majesty's 
 Government, so far as to be willing to refer the ques- 
 tion of the withdrawal of my existing instructions back 
 for the consideration of my Government. I have now 
 the honor to inform your lordship of the result of that 
 application. 
 
 "After a careful resurvey of all the facts connected 
 with the outfit and later proceedings of the gun-boat 
 ' No. 290,' now known as the war-steamer Alabama, I 
 regret to report to you that the Government of the 
 United States finds itself wholly unable to abandon the 
 position heretofore taken on that subject. 
 
 " The reasons for this conclusion have been so often 
 explained in the correspondence which I have hereto- 
 fore had the honor to hold with your lordship touching 
 this case that I shall endeavor to confine myself to a 
 brief recapitulation. 
 
 " The United States understand that they are at 
 peace with Great Britain. That peace is furthermore 
 secured by treaties which oblige both parties to refrain 
 and to restrain their subjects from making war against 
 each other.
 
 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. J 7 
 
 "They greatly regret to be compelled to admit the 
 fact that the vessel known first as the gun-boat, * No. 
 290,' and now as the Alabama, is roving over the seas 
 capturing, burning, sinking, and destroying American 
 vessels without lawful authority from any source recog- 
 nized by international law, and in open defiance of all 
 judicial tribunals established by the common consent 
 of civilized nations as a restraint upon such a piratical 
 mode of warfare. 
 
 "That this vessel was built with the intent to make 
 war against the United States by British subjects, in a 
 British port, and that she was prepared there to be 
 armed and equipped with a specified armament adapted 
 to her construction for the very purpose she is now 
 pursuing does not appear to them to admit of dispute. 
 
 " That this armament and equipment, adapted to 
 this ship and no other, were simultaneously prepared 
 by British subjects in a British port, with the intent to 
 complete her preparation for her career, seems equally 
 clear. Furthermore, it is sufficiently established that 
 when this vessel was ready, and her armament and 
 equipment were equally ready, she was clandestinely 
 sent, by the connivance of her British holders, and 
 the armament and equipment were at the same time 
 clandestinely sent, through the connivance of the same 
 or other British subjects who prepared them to a com- 
 mon point outside of British waters, and there the
 
 I 8 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 
 
 armament and equipment of this vessel as a war-ship 
 were completed. 
 
 " This war-ship, thus deriving all its powers to do 
 mischief from British sources, manned by a crew of 
 British subjects enlisted in and proceeding from a Brit- 
 ish port, then went forth on her work to burn and de- 
 stroy the property of the people of the United States, 
 in fraud of the laws of Great Britain and in violation of 
 the peace and sovereignty of the United States. From 
 the earliest to the latest day of her career she does not 
 appear to have gained any other national character on 
 the ocean than that which belonged to her in her 
 origin. 
 
 "From a review of all these circumstances, essential 
 to a right judgment of the question, the Government of 
 the United States understand that the purpose of the 
 building, armament, equipment and expedition of this 
 vessel, carried with it one single criminal intent, run- 
 ning equally through all the portions of this prepara- 
 tion, fully complete and executed when the gun-boat 
 'No. 290' assumed the name of the Alabama; and 
 that this intent brought the whole transaction in all 
 its several parts here recited, within the lawful juris- 
 diction of Great Britain, where the main portions of 
 the crime were planned and executed. 
 
 " Furthermore, the United States are compelled to 
 assume that they gave due and sufficient previous
 
 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 1 9 
 
 notice to Her Majesty's Government that this criminal 
 enterprise was begun and in regular process of execu- 
 tion, through the agencies herein described, in one of 
 Her Majesty's ports. They cannot resist the conclu- 
 sion that the Government was then bound by treaty 
 obligations and by the law of nations to prevent the 
 execution of it. Had it acted with the promptness and 
 energy required by the emergency, they cannot but 
 feel assured the whole scheme must have been frus- 
 trated. The United States are ready to admit that it 
 did act so far as to acknowledge the propriety of de- 
 taining this vessel for the reasons assigned, but they 
 are constrained to object that valuable time was lost in 
 delays, and that the effort, when attempted, was too 
 soon abandoned. They cannot consider the justice of 
 their claim for reparation liable to be affected by any 
 circumstances connected with those mere forms of pro- 
 ceeding on the part of Great Britain which are exclu- 
 sively within her own control. 
 
 "Upon these principles of law and these assump- 
 tions of fact resting upon the evidence in the case, I 
 am instructed to say that my Government must con- 
 tinue to insist that Great Britain has made itself 
 responsible for the damages which the peaceful law- 
 abiding citizens of the United States sustain by the 
 depredations of the vessel called the Alabama. 
 
 " In repeating this conclusion, however, it is not to
 
 20 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 
 
 be understood that the United States incline to act 
 dogmatically, or in a spirit of litigation. They desire 
 to maintain amity as well as peace. They fully com- 
 prehend how unavoidably reciprocal grievances must 
 spring up from the divergence in the policy of the two 
 countries in regard to the present insurrection. They 
 cannot but appreciate the difficulties under which Her 
 Majesty's Government is laboring from the pressure 
 of interests and combinations of British subjects ap- 
 parently bent upon compromising by their unlawful 
 acts the neutrality which Her Majesty has proclaimed 
 and desires to preserve, even to the extent of involv- 
 ing the two nations in the horrors of a maritime war. 
 For these reasons I am instructed to say, that they 
 frankly confess themselves unwilling to regard the 
 present hour as the most favorable to a calm and 
 candid examination by either party of the facts or the 
 principles involved in cases like the one now in ques- 
 tion. Though indulging a firm conviction of the cor- 
 rectness of their position in regard to this and other 
 claims, they declare themselves disposed, at all times, 
 hereafter as well as now, to consider in the fullest 
 manner all the evidence and the arguments which Her 
 Majesty's government may incline to proffer in refu- 
 tation of it ; and in case of an impossibility to arrive 
 at any common conclusion, I am directed to say there 
 is no fair and equitable form of conventional arbitra-
 
 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 21 
 
 ment or reference to which they will not be willing 
 to submit.^^ 
 
 " Entertaining these views, I crave permission to 
 apprise your Lordship that I have received directions 
 to continue to present to your notice claims of the 
 character heretofore advanced, whenever they arise, 
 and to furnish the evidence on which they rest, as is 
 customary in such cases, in order to guard against pos- 
 sible ultimate failure of justice from the absence of it. 
 
 " In accordance with these instructions I now do 
 myself the honor to transmit the papers accompanying 
 the cases heretofore withheld, pending the reception 
 of later information. 
 
 " I pray, &c., 
 
 "CHARLES FRANCIS ADAMS." ^^ 
 
 Earl Russell wrote to Mr. Adams three days later: — 
 
 "Foreign Office, October 26, 1863. 
 " Sir : — I have had the honor to receive your letter 
 of the 23d instant. 
 
 ^^See Seward's letter of September 27th, 1865, to Adams, 
 post, page 66. 
 
 ^® The case of Great Britain as laid before the Tribunal of Ar- 
 bitration, convened at Geneva under the provisioiis of the treaty 
 between the United States of America and Her Majesty the 
 Queen of Great Britain, concluded at Washington, May 8th, i8yi. 
 Printed by order of Congress, U. S. A. Washington : Govern- 
 ment Printing Office, 1872. Volume III., page 490.
 
 22 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 
 
 "In that letter you inform me that you are in- 
 structed to say that the Government of the United 
 States must continue to insist that Great Britain has 
 made itself responsible for the damages which the 
 citizens of the United States sustain by the depre- 
 dations of the vessel called the Alabama. 
 
 " But toward the conclusion of your letter you state 
 that the Government of the United States are not dis- 
 posed to act dogmatically or in a spirit of litigation ; 
 that they desire to maintain amity as well as peace ; 
 that they fully comprehend how unavoidably reciprocal 
 grievances must spring up from the divergence of the 
 policy of the two countries in regard to the present 
 insurrection. You add, further on, that the United 
 States frankly confess themselves unwilling to regard 
 the present hour as the most favorable to a calm and 
 candid examination by either party of the facts or the 
 principles involved in cases like the one now in question. 
 
 " With this declaration Her Majesty's Government 
 may well be content to await the time when a calm 
 and candid examination of the facts and principles in- 
 volved in the case of the Alabama may, in the opinion 
 of the Government of the United States, usefully be 
 undertaken. 
 
 "In the meantime, I must request you to believe 
 that the principle contended for by Her Majesty's 
 Government is not that of commissioning, equipping,
 
 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 23 
 
 and manning vessels in our ports to cruise against 
 either of the belligerent parties — a principle which was 
 so justly and unequivocally condemned by the Presi- 
 dent of the United States in 1 793, as recorded by Mr. 
 Jefferson in his letter to Mr. Hammond of the 13th of 
 May of that year. 
 
 "But the British Government must decline to be 
 responsible for the acts of parties who fit out a seem- 
 ing merchant ship, send her to a port or to waters 
 far from the jurisdiction of British Courts, and there 
 commission, equip, and man her as a vessel of war. 
 
 " Her Majesty's Government fear that if an admitted 
 principle were thus made elastic to suit a particular 
 case, the trade of shipbuilding, in which our people 
 excel, and which is to great numbers of them a source 
 of honest livelihood, would be seriously embarrassed 
 and impeded. I may add that it appears strange that 
 notwithstanding the large and powerful naval force 
 possessed by the Government of the United States, no 
 efficient measures have been taken by that Govern- 
 ment to capture the Alabama. 
 
 " On our part I must declare that to perform the 
 duties of neutrality fairly and impartially, and at the 
 same time to maintain the spirit of British law and 
 protect the lawful industry of the Queen's subjects, 
 is the object of Her Majesty's Government, and they 
 trust that the Government of the United States will
 
 24 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 
 
 recognize their earnest desire to preserve, in the 
 difficult circumstances of the present time, the rela- 
 tions of amity between the two nations. 
 
 "I am, &c., " RUSSELL." 1^ 
 
 The unfriendly course pursued by the English 
 Government toward the Union States in permitting 
 the building of Confederate cruisers in English ports, 
 was forcibly brought to the attention of the people of 
 the North by the totally different policy followed by 
 the Russian Government. The Government of the 
 Tzar not only did not recognize the belligerency of the 
 Confederate States,^^ but in addition, when there were 
 various credited rumors that the English and the 
 French Governments contemplated an intervention in 
 behalf of the Confederacy,^^ it sent a fleet under Admi- 
 
 " The case of Great Britain as laid before the Tribunal of Ar- 
 bitratio7i, convened at Geneva under the provisions of the treaty 
 between the United States of America and Her Majesty the 
 Queen of Great Britain, concluded at Washi7igto7i, May 8th, i8yi. 
 Printed by order of Congress, U. S. A. Washington : Govern- 
 ment Printing Office, 1872. Volume III., page 505. 
 
 ^^The case of Great Britaitt as laid before the Tribunal of 
 Arbitration, co7ivened at Geiieva. Washington : Government 
 Printing Office, 1872. Volume III., page 46. 
 
 ^^ Papers relatiiig to Foreign Affairs, accompanyijig the Annual 
 Message of the President to the First Session of the Thirty-eighth 
 Congress. Part I. Washington : Government Printing Office, 
 1864, pages I, 3. 
 
 The following extracts from the correspondence between Lord
 
 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 25 
 
 ral Popoff to San Francisco^ and subsequently another 
 
 Palmerston and Lord John Russell in 1861 and 1862 will help to 
 explain the policy of the English Government during the ups and 
 downs of the Union cause. 
 
 Referring to the strong opinion in May, 1861, of the French 
 Minister to Washington, Monsieur Mercier, in favor of raising the 
 blockade, Lord John Russell wrote on October 1 7th of that year 
 to Lord Palmerston : — 
 
 "There is much good sense in Mercier' s observations. But 
 we must wait. I am persuaded that, if we do anything, it must 
 be on a grand scale. It will not do for England and France to 
 break a blockade for the sake of getting cotton. But, in Europe, 
 powers have often said to belligerents. Make up your quarrels. 
 We propose to give terms of pacification which we think fair and 
 equitable. If you accept them, well and good. But, if your 
 adversary accepts them and if you refuse them, our mediation is 
 at an end, and you must expect to see us your enemies. France 
 would be quite ready to hold this language with us. 
 
 ' ' If such a policy were to be adopted the time for it would be 
 the end of the year, or immediately before the meeting of Parlia- 
 ment." 
 
 The next year Palmerston wrote to Russell : — 
 
 "94 Piccadilly : September 14, 1862. 
 
 "My Dear Russell, — The detailed accounts given in the 
 Observer to-day of the battles of August 29 and 30 between the 
 Confederates and the Federals show that the latter got a very 
 complete smashing ; and it seems not altogether unlikely that still 
 greater disasters await them, and that even Washington or Balti- 
 more may fall into the hands of the Confederates. 
 
 ' ' If this should happen, would it not be time for us to consider 
 
 ^" JS/arrative of the Mission to Russia, in 1866, of the Hon. 
 Gustavus Vasa Fox. New York : D. Appleton and Company, 
 1873, pages 20, loi, 107, III.
 
 26 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 
 
 under Admiral Lessovsky to NewYork.^^ Indeed, it was 
 
 whether in such a state of things England and France might not 
 address the contending parties and recommend an arrangement 
 upon the basis of separation ? * «• * 
 
 ' ' Yours sincerely, 
 
 " PALMERSTON." 
 
 Earl Russell replied : — 
 
 " GoTHA, September 17, 1862. 
 
 "My Dear Palmerston, — Whether the Federal army is 
 destroyed or not, it is clear that it is driven back to Washington, 
 and has made no progress in subduing the insurgent States. Such 
 being the case, I agree with you that the time is come for offering 
 mediation to the United States Government, with a view to the 
 recognition of the independence of the Confederates. I agree 
 further, that, in case of failure, we ought ourselves to recognize 
 the Southern States as an independent State. For the purpose 
 of taking so important a step, I think we must have a meeting of 
 the Cabinet. The 23d or 30th would suit me for the meeting. 
 
 "We ought then, if we agree on such a step, to propose it first 
 to France, and then, on the part of England and France, to Russia 
 and other powers, as a measure decided upon by us. 
 
 ' ' We ought to make ourselves safe in Canada, not by sending 
 V more troops there, but by concentrating those we have in a few 
 defensible posts before the winter sets in. 
 
 ******* 
 
 "J. RUSSELL." 
 Then Palmerston wrote : — 
 
 " Broadlands : September 23, 1862. 
 
 "My Dear Russell, — Your plan of proceeding about the 
 mediation between the Federals and Confederates seems to be ex- 
 cellent. Of course, the offer would be made to both the contend- 
 
 *' Narrative of the Mission to Russia, in 1866, of the Hon. 
 Gustavus Vasa Fox. New York : D. Appleton and Company, 
 1873, pages 21, 88, loi, 106, 107, no, 357.
 
 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 2 7 
 
 even hinted that Admiral Lessovsky had secret orders 
 
 ing parties at the same time ; for, though the offer would be as 
 sure to be accepted by the Southerns as was the proposal of the 
 Prince of Wales by the Danish Princess, yet, in the one case as in 
 the other, there are certain forms which it is decent and proper to 
 go through. 
 
 ' ' A question would occur whether, if the two parties were to 
 accept the mediation, the fact of our mediating would not of itself 
 be tantamount to an acknowledgment of the Confederates as an 
 independent State. 
 
 ' ' Might it not be well to ask Russia to join England and France 
 in the offer of mediation ? * * * 
 
 ' ' We should be better without her in the mediation, because 
 she would be too favorable to the North ; but on the other hand 
 her participation in the offer might render the North the more 
 willing to accept it. 
 
 ' ' The after communication to the other European powers 
 would be quite right, although they would be too many for media- 
 tion, 
 
 "As to the time of making the offer, if France and Russia 
 agree — and France, we know, is quite ready, and only waiting for 
 our concurrence — events may be taking place which might render 
 it desirable that the offer should be made before the middle of 
 October. 
 
 " It is evident that a great conflict is taking place to the north- 
 west of Washington [Antietam], and its issue must have a great 
 effect on the state of affairs. If the Federals sustain a great de- 
 feat, they may be at once ready for mediation, and the iron should 
 be struck while it is hot. If, on the other hand, they should have 
 the best of it, we may wait awhile and see what may follow. * * * 
 
 ' ' Yours sincerely, 
 
 " PALMERSTON." 
 
 As, however, the Confederates were unable to follow up their 
 successes, and the Unionists had the larger population and
 
 28 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 
 
 that, in case of an attack upon the United States by a 
 foreign power, he should place his squadron at the 
 disposal of President Lincoln ; " and, as at that time — 
 
 resources, it became more likely that the latter would ultimately 
 win. The British Cabinet, when it assembled towards the end of 
 October, 1862, decided to do nothing, and, a month later, it re- 
 fused to join France in the offer to mediate that Napoleon the 
 Third made. 
 
 The Life of Lord fohn Russell, by Spencer Walpole. London, 
 1889. Second Edition. Volume II., pages 344, 349-352. 
 
 See also Charles Francis Adams, by his son, Charles Francis 
 Adams. Boston and New York, 1900, pages 280-290. " Black- 
 wood' s'' History of ike United States, by Frederick S. Dickson. 
 Philadelphia: George H. Buchanan & Co., 1896. Blackwood' s 
 Edinburgh Magazine. Volume 91 (January-June, 1862), pages 
 118, 129; volume 92 (July-December, 1862), page 646. 
 
 ^'^ The following letter from George Peirce, Esq. , of the Phila- 
 delphia Bar, throws light upon the attitude of Russia towards the 
 United States during the Civil War. Judge William S. Peirce sat 
 in the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia from 1866 to his 
 death in 1887. Andrew G. Curtin — "the War Governor" of 
 Pennsylvania — was Governor of the Commonwealth from 1861 to 
 1867. In 1869 General Grant appointed him Minister to Russia. 
 
 " Philadelphia, 
 
 "15 March, 1900. 
 
 "My Dear Mr. Balch, — Many years ago my Father, the 
 late Judge Peirce, told me that there had come into a conversation 
 between him and Governor Andrew G. Curtin a question of the 
 attitude of Russia toward the United States during the Civil War, 
 and that Governor Curtin had given him certain details of very 
 great interest bearing on that question. Those details my Father 
 repeated to me, and it gives me great pleasure to set down for
 
 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 29 
 
 as Mr. Laird,'-' formerly of Laird Brothers, the build- 
 ers of the Alabaina, had more than once shown — the 
 
 you here the story as told me by him. In order to understand 
 clearly a certain point referred to in it I should premise that, after 
 the war and during the presidency of General Grant, the Grand 
 Duke Alexis, a son of Czar Alexander II., came to this country 
 and when in Washington called on the President and was after- 
 wards, I think, entertained at a dinner at the White House. But 
 the President, unfortunately, overlooked making a formal call on 
 the Grand Duke, and at no time called on him either formally or 
 informally during his stay in Washington. His reception, how- 
 ever, by the people at all points visited by him was enthusiastic. 
 "Governor Curtin, who was the United States Minister to 
 Russia, said that when he was leaving Russia to return to this 
 country, he called to take leave of the Czar and, after a conver- 
 sation of a most friendly and cordial character, the Czar, in 
 bringing the interview to a close, requested the Minister to con- 
 vey to the people of the United States an expression of his kind 
 feeling and good will toward them. Governor Curtin thought it 
 strange that no message was sent the President, but said nothing 
 on the point, and then went to make his adieux to the Czarina. 
 She too was most friendly and on saying farewell, added, ' Mr. 
 Minister, you bear with you my salutations and those of Russia 
 to the people of your country, ' Governor Curtin said, ' And is 
 there no message to the President ? ' ' No ;' replied the Czarina, 
 ' there is not — my message is to the people. If you would know 
 the reason ask Gortschakoff. ' And so the Governor went to see 
 Prince Gortschakoff — he would have gone in any event to say 
 good-bye — and asked him what it all meant and why there was 
 no word to the President. Whereupon M. Gortschakoff sent for 
 
 ^' Mr. JoJm Laird, M. P., tipon riational defences. The 
 London Times of October 26th, 1863 ; Papers relati^ig to Foreign 
 Affairs, accompayiyiyig the Annual Message of the President to 
 the Second Session, Thirty-eighth Congress. Part III. Wash- 
 ington : Government Printing Ofifice, 1S65, pages 259, 260.
 
 30 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 
 
 English navy was inferior for defensive purposes to 
 that of the United States, the presence of Admiral 
 
 certain portefolios and, opening them, showed him : first, an au- 
 tograph letter fi-om the Emperor Napoleon III. to the Czar, ask- 
 ing him to join France and England in an intervention between 
 the United States and the States in revolt and in a recognition 
 of the Confederacy: second, a copy of the Czar's answer de- 
 clining the Emperor's request and informing him that, if France 
 and England attempted to intervene, Russia would give active 
 aid to the United States : third, a copy of the instructions to the 
 Russian Admiral in American waters directing him to assemble 
 his fleet in the harbor of New York and, on any adverse demon- 
 stration made by France and England, to communicate at once 
 to the President of the United States, that the Russian fleet then 
 at New York was at the command of the Federal Government 
 and further, that, if money was needed it would be furnished, 
 that if more ships were wanted they would be sent, and that if 
 men were needed they would be forthcoming. ' This' , said M. 
 Gortschakoft, ' is what Russia did for you at a time of need. 
 Your people remember it and were kind when Alexis was 
 among them — your President seems to have forgotten it. And 
 so the message of my Masters was to your people alone.' 
 
 " Sometime after my Father told me this, I met Governor 
 Curtin at an entertainment and, in conversation with him, I men- 
 tioned the interest I took in the story repeated to me by my 
 Father, and Governor Curtin confirmed the details as here set 
 down by me. 
 
 "You may observe that, as I recall the story, the first paper 
 shown Governor Curtin by M. GortschakofT simply asked Russia 
 to join France and England. I do not recall any assertion that 
 the Emperor Napoleon stated that England was ready to join 
 France or had already joined her in the purpose. But cer- 
 tain correspondence at that time between Lord Palmerston and 
 Lord John Russell, which has very recently come to light, goes 
 far to show that the Emperor Napoleon had a very substantial
 
 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 3 1 
 
 Lessovsky and his ships in American waters was an 
 important factor in the game of international politics. 
 
 basis for a thought (I will not venture to say a promise) that he 
 could command the co-operation of England. 
 
 ' ' I saw the Russian fleet in New York Harbor and remember 
 the demonstrations of welcome given its officers and men by our 
 people. 
 
 " Sincerely yours, 
 
 "GEORGE PEIRCE. 
 "T. W. Balch, Esq'e." 
 
 Under the title, "What we Owe to Russia," an article — 
 written evidently, by some one who heard the above story, not 
 directly from Governor Curtin himself, but only at second or 
 even third hand — appeared in the New York Evening Express 
 of September ist, 1874, on the front page: — "When Gov. 
 Curtin on the eve of his return to this country, went, in his ca- 
 pacity as Minister to Russia, to take formal leave of the Emperor, 
 the latter closed the conversation substantially in these words : ' I 
 wish, sir, that you would, on your return, express my hearty 
 thanks to the American people for the reception they have given 
 my son, the Grand Duke Alexis.' This, it will be remembered, 
 was shortly after General Grant had refused to return Alexis' call, 
 and the latter had left Washington in disgust. Gov, Curtin 
 noticed the Emperor's failure to send thanks to the Government 
 as well as to the people. He supposed, however, that it was a 
 slip of the tongue until the Empress bade him farewell in almost 
 precisely the same words. 
 
 ******* 
 
 ' ' He was invited by Gortschakoif to a conference on the sub- 
 ject. Three books were brought in from the archives of the 
 Foreign Office. The first contained an autograph letter from 
 Napoleon III., asking Russia to join with England and France in 
 breaking up the Federal blockade and guaranteeing th^independ-
 
 32 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 
 
 The fleet of Admiral Lessovsky, which consisted of 
 the Alexander Nevski, the Osliaba, the Peresvet, the 
 Variag, and the Vitias, arrived in the harbor of New 
 York in the autumn of 1863.-^ The citizens and the 
 
 ence of the Confederacy. The letter asserted that England had 
 promised her co-operation, which was probably a lie. [Compare 
 the Palmerston-Russell correspondence on the question of inter- 
 vention, ante page 25, note 19.] The second contained the Em- 
 peror's reply. He flatly declined the alliance proposed by Na- 
 poleon, and declared that, in the event of any European inter- 
 ference in the War, Russia would actively aid the North. The 
 third book had within it copies of the sealed orders given to 
 the Russian Admiral, who, as our readers will remember, brought 
 his fleet into New York Harbor during the war. The orders di- 
 rected him to proceed at once with his whole available force, to 
 New York city ; to remain at anchorage there for some time ; 
 and, in the event of European interference with the blockade, to 
 put himself and his whole force at the command of the Cabinet at 
 Washington, and promise abundant and speedy reinforcements." 
 
 " Harper s Weekly, for October 17th, 1863. Other Russian 
 war ships appear to have joined, subsequently, Lessovsky 's fleet 
 in American waters. La Politique Frangaise en Avterique, 
 1861-186^, by Henry Moreau, Paris, 1864, page 71, foot-note. 
 
 On October 6th, 1863, Sumner wrote to John Bright: "At 
 this moment -I am more solicitous about France and England 
 than about our military afiairs. In the latter there is a tempo- 
 rary check, and you know I said long ago that I was prepared 
 for further disaster ; but this can only delay, not change the 
 result. Foreign intervention will introduce a new, vast, and 
 incalculable element ; it would probably provoke a universal war. 
 You will observe the hobnobbing at New York with the Russian 
 admiral. Why is that fleet gathered there? " Charles Sic7n7ier, 
 by Moorfield Story. Boston and New York, 1900, page 247.
 
 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 33 
 
 authorities of the city gave the Russians a grand 
 welcome. They showed the Russian officers over the 
 fortifications of the port, gave them a public reception 
 and held a military review in their honor ;^ and the 
 
 " "Yesterday, our city gave proofs of the profound appreciation 
 by the American people of the friendly attitude which the Russian 
 Government has occupied toward our own, and especially since 
 the beginning of the Southern Rebellion. It was the occasion of 
 extending to Admiral Lessofsky {stc), and the officers of the Rus- 
 sian vessels of war now temporarily anchored in our harbor, the 
 hospitalities of the city, in accordance with the resolutions adopted 
 by the Common Council and approved by the Mayor. No unusual 
 effort had been given to give publicity to the proposed ceremonies, 
 and mere idle curiosity to see the military and civic display was 
 not sufficient to have drawn forth the immense concourse of 
 people which, with enthusiastic plaudits and shouts of welcome, 
 greeted our transatlantic visitors. The occasion was a grand 
 ovation, and in its proportions as well as the enthusiasm that 
 characterized it, was as gratifying to our distinguished guests as 
 it was unexpected." The New York Tribune^ October 2d, 1863, 
 page 3. 
 
 During the mission to Russia of the Hon. G. V. Fox, then 
 Assistant Secretary of the Navy, Captain Murray, in responding 
 at a banquet at the Merchant's Club of Saint Petersburg to the 
 toast, proposed by the Russians, "The health of our masters, 
 the Officers of the American Navy," said in part: — 
 
 "In bringing across the ocean, the sympathies of a great 
 people, the vessels -of- war which I have the honor to represent 
 have come freighted with a cargo more precious than the wealth 
 of the Orient or the mines of California ; but we were not the 
 first to bear across the ocean wares as treasured. I shall never 
 forget the thrill of joy that pervaded America when the Russian 
 fleet, under Admiral Lessovsky, anchored in the harbor of New 
 York and spread the glad tidings that one great nation sided with
 
 34 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 
 
 siofnificance of these festivities were the more marked 
 in that an English fleet, to whom only the usual cour- 
 tesies were extended, was also in the harbor at the time. 
 Afterwards Admiral Lessovsky took his squadron into 
 Chesapeake Bay and up the Potomac River ; and 
 President Lincoln and Secretary Seward gave the 
 Russians a most cordial welcome at Washington.^*' In 
 view of the sympathetic attitude taken by the Russian 
 Government towards the United States from the be- 
 ginning of the Civil War on the one hand,^ and the 
 
 us in our troubles. It is always a pleasure to renew the remem- 
 brance of such national sympathy, and I am rejoiced that the 
 duty of toasting the Russian Navy has devolved on me. It is 
 always agreeable to drink to our friends, our sympathizers, our 
 allies." 
 
 Narrative of the Mission to Russia, in 1866, of the Hon. Gus- 
 tavus Vasa Fox. New York : D. Appleton and Company, 1873, 
 page 162. 
 
 "^^ Papers relating to Foreign Affairs acco7}ipanying the Ayinual 
 Message of the President to the Second Session of the Thirty- 
 eighth Cojigress. Part III. Washington : Government Printing 
 Office, 1865, page 279. 
 
 " Papers relating to Foreign Affairs accompanying the Annual 
 Message of the President to the First Session of the Thirty-eighth 
 Congress. Part 11. Washington : Government Printing Office, 
 1864, pages 763, 765, 767, 769, 779. Abraha?n Lincoln, by John 
 G. Nicolay and John Hay. New York, 1890. Volume VI., 
 pages 63-66. Charles Sumner, by Moorfield Story. Boston 
 and New York, 1900, page 339.
 
 THE ALABA^rX ARBITRATION. 35 
 
 Mexican expedition carried on by Louis Napoleon ^ 
 
 ^^Ouelgjies Pages d^ Histoire Contemporaine. Lettres Poli- 
 tiqiies by Prevost-Paradol. Paris, Michel Levy Freres. Deuxi- 
 eme Sc'rie, 1864, page 201 et seq. Troisieme Scrie, 1866, page 
 166. Commentaire sur les Elements du Droit hiternational et 
 sur r Histoire des progi'es du Droit des Gens de He7iry Whea- 
 ton. Precede d'une notice sur la carriere diplomatique de M. 
 Wheaton by William Beach Lawrence. F. A. Brockhaus, 
 Leipzig, 1869, Volume IL, pages ■^y^2)^'], passim. 
 
 The following letters from Richard Cobden to Charles Sumner 
 throw a flood of light on the Anglo-American relations during 
 the Civil War ; but some of the letters that passed between Lord 
 Palmerston and Lord John Russell (see ante page 25, note 19) 
 show that the English Cabinet was not nearly so friendly to the 
 Union as Cobden supposed. 
 
 " Athen^um Club, London, 
 ''Private. "2 April, 1863. 
 
 "My Dear Sumner. 
 
 "On receipt of your letter I communicated privately with 
 Lord Russell, urging him to be more than passive in enforcing 
 the law respecting the building of ships for the Confederate 
 government. I especially referred to the circumstance that it 
 was suspected that some ships pretended to be for the Chinese 
 government were really designed for that of Richmond, and I 
 urged him to furnish Mr. Adams with the names of all the ships 
 building for China and full particulars where they were being 
 built. This Lord Russell tells me he had already done, and he 
 seems to promise fairly. Our government are perfectly well in- 
 formed of all that is being done for the Chinese. 
 
 ' ' Now there are certain things which can be done and others 
 which cannot be done by our government. We are bound to do 
 our best to prevent any ship of war being built for the Confeder- 
 ate government, for a ship of war can only be used or owned 
 legitimately by a government. But with munitions of war the
 
 36 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 
 
 and the buildlnof of the Alabama and other Confeder- 
 
 case is different. They are bought and sold by private merchants 
 for the whole world, and it is not in the power of governments 
 to prevent it. Besides your own government have laid down 
 repeatedly the doctrine that it is no part of the duty of govern- 
 ments to interfere with such transactions for which they are not 
 in any way responsible. I was therefore very sorry that Mr. 
 Adams had persisted in raising an objection to these transactions 
 in which by the way the North has been quite as much involved 
 as the South. If you have read the debate in the House on 
 the occasion when Mr. Forster brought up the subject last week, 
 you will see how Sir Roundell Palmer, the Solicitor General, 
 and Mr. Laird the shipbuilder availed themselves of this opening 
 to divert attention from the real question at issue — the building 
 of war-ships to the question of selling munitions of war — in which 
 latter practice it was shown you in the North were the great 
 participators. 
 
 ' 'You must really keep the public mind right in America on this 
 subject. Do not let it be supposed that you have any grievance 
 against us for selling munitions of war. Confine the question 
 to the building of ships in which I hope we shall bring up a 
 strong feeling on the right side here. 
 
 " I remain truly yours, 
 
 "R. COBDEN." 
 
 " MiDHURST, 22 May, 1863. 
 ' ' Private. 
 
 " My Dear Sumner. 
 
 " I called on Lord Russell and read every word of your last 
 long indictments against him and Lord Palmerston, to him. He 
 was a little impatient under the treatment, but I got through 
 every word. I did my best to improve on the text in half-an- 
 hours conversation. 
 
 Public opinion is recovering its senses. John Bull you know 
 has never before been a neutral when great naval operations have
 
 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 37 
 
 ate cruisers In England on the other hand, the pubHc 
 
 been carried on, and he does not take kindly to the task. But 
 he is becoming gradually reconciled. He also now begins to 
 understand that he has acted illegally in applauding those who 
 furnished ships of war to prey on your commerce. // will 7iot be 
 repeated. I cannot too often deplore the bungling mismanage- 
 ment on your side which allowed the two distinct questions of 
 selling munitions of war, and the equipping of privateers to be 
 mixed up together. It has confused the thick wits of our people, 
 and made it difficult for those who were right on this side on the 
 Foreign Enlistment Act to make the public understand the dif- 
 ference between what was and what was not a legal transaction. 
 In fact your Foreign Office played into the hands of our politicians 
 by affording them the means of mystification. If a plain, simple, 
 short and dignified declamation had been at first made against the 
 fitting out of ships of war, with clear statement of the law, and a 
 brief recital of what your government had done under similar 
 circumstances, to us, it would have been impossible for our 
 government to have resisted it. But when you opened fire on us 
 for not stopping the export of arms and munitions of war, you 
 offered an easy victory to our lawyers, and gave them an oppor- 
 tunity of escaping in a cloud of dust from the real question at 
 issue. 
 
 S- Jt* tT ^ 3jS !jC 3fC 
 
 ' ' Yours very truly, 
 
 "R. COBDEN." 
 
 " MiDHURST, Sussex, 7 Aug., 1863. 
 "My Dear Sumner. 
 
 ***** * * 
 
 ' ' Though we have given you such good ground of complaint on 
 account of the Cruisers which have left our ports, yet you must 
 not forget that we have been the only obstacle to what would have 
 been almost a European recognition of the South. Had England
 
 38 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 
 
 looked on the visit of the Russian fleet as a mark of 
 sympathy and encouragement. 
 
 joined France they would have been followed by probably every 
 other State of Europe, with the exception of Russia. This 
 is what the Confederate agents have been seeking to accomplish. 
 They have pressed recognition on England and France with per- 
 sistent energy from the first. I confess that their eagerness for 
 European intervention in some shape has always given me a 
 strong suspicion of their conscious weakness. But considering 
 how much more we have suffered than other people from the 
 blockade, this abstinence on our part from all diplomatic inter- 
 ference is certainly something to our credit, and this I attribute 
 entirely to the honorable attitude assumed by our working pop- 
 ulation. 
 
 1* 1* I* 1* Vv •f» 'I* 
 
 ' ' Yours very truly, 
 
 "RIC. COBDEN." 
 
 The American Historical Review. Volume II. New York, 
 1897, pages 309, 311, 313.
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 
 Towards the close of the Civil War, the temper of 
 the American people against England was thoroughly- 
 roused, and a hostile demonstration at Washington 
 would have met with a hearty response throughout 
 the country.^^ The situation was not encouraging for 
 
 ^'At the eleventh annual meeting of the National Association 
 for the Promotion of Social Science (September, 1867), Mr. 
 David Ross, of the English Bar, in discussing international arbi- 
 tration, said : — 
 
 ' ' During a somewhat prolonged visit to the United States in 
 the year 1865, I talked freely and frequently with men of all con- 
 ditions of life in the Northern and Western States, and none of 
 them, so far as I can recollect, had the slightest ill-will to England 
 on account of the Trent aifair, because they seemed to think 
 that England was right in the extreme course she adopted ; but I 
 met comparatively few who could talk with common patience of 
 the Alabama depredations, and I doubt if I met one who would 
 have raised his voice for peace if the President of the United 
 States had decided that redress must be had by war. ' ' Transac- 
 tions of the National Association for the Promotion of Social 
 Science. Edited by G. W. Hastings, LL. D., General Secretary 
 of the Association. London: Longmans, Green, Reader & Dyer, 
 1868, page 174. 
 
 Sumner wrote to Cobden, on March i6th, 1863: "I am 
 anxious, very anxious, on account of the ships building in Eng- 
 land to cruise against our commerce. Cannot something be 
 
 (39)
 
 40 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 
 
 a peaceful settlement. The English Government 
 throughout had assumed an attitude such as to pre- 
 clude, apparently, all hope of an adjustment. 
 
 In 1864, Thomas Balch — a member of the Philadel- 
 phia Bar then residing at Paris, who was present at 
 Cherbourg during the fight between the Kearsarge 
 and the Alabama (June 19th, 1864)^° — proposed, after 
 
 done to stop them ? Our people are becoming more and more 
 excited, and there are many who insist upon war. A very im- 
 portant person said to me yesterday : ' We are now at war with 
 England, but the hostilities are all on her side.' " Charles 
 Sumner, by Moorfield Storey. Boston and New York, 1900, 
 page 243. 
 
 Sumner wrote on August 4th, 1863, to John Bright : "The sec- 
 ond cause of anxiety is in our relations with England. Your gov- 
 ernment recklessly and heartlessly seems bent on war. * * * 
 A leading merchant said to me this morning that he would give 
 fifty thousand dollars for war between England and Russia, that 
 he might turn English doctrines against England. The feeling is 
 very bitter." Charles Sumner, by Moorfield Storey. Boston 
 and New York, 1900, page 246, 
 
 ''"On Thursday, June 30th, 1864, some of the American colony 
 in Paris gave a dinner, at short notice, to Captain Winslow, at 
 Phillippe's on the Rue Montorgueil, at that time the leading res- 
 taurant of Paris. Besides Captain Winslow and a few of his 
 officers, there were present : Mr. Dayton, the American Minister 
 to France, John Bigelow, the American Consul at Paris, Thomas 
 Balch, Mr. Beckwith, John Camac, Mr. Chadwick, G. H. Coster, 
 William L. Dayton, Jr., W. E. Johnston, Mr. Jones, Mr. Lang- 
 don, V. F. Loubat, John Monroe, Mr. Pennington, John Reu- 
 bell, George T. Richards, Joseph Swift, Stewart Thorndike, J. J. 
 Vanderkemp and others.
 
 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 4I 
 
 mature reflection and looking up precedents, to vari- 
 ous continental jurists, that the differences between the 
 
 The dinner that was served to, as one of the participants put 
 it, " Our Hero of the Kearsarge ,'' ^ was as follows : — 
 
 Menu. 
 
 Potage a la Bisque et Consomm^ Quenelles et Laitues. 
 
 Releve. 
 
 Turbot deux sauces. Filets Orly sauce tomates. 
 
 Jambon d'Yorck aux 6pinards. 
 
 Entrees. 
 
 Filet de Boeuf a la jardiniere. Poulardes brais^es truffles. 
 
 Cotelettes d'agneau Maintenon fin. 
 
 Salade a la russe. Mayonnaise de homard. 
 
 Punch a la Polonaise. 
 
 Rot. 
 
 Dindonneau nouveau. Canetons a la rouennaise. 
 
 Entremets. 
 
 Haricots flageollets maitre d' hotel. Pois a la fran^aise. 
 
 Croutes a la parisienne et aux ananas. 
 
 Mac^doine de fruits glacis. 
 
 Dessert, 
 
 Mr. Dayton's letter accepting the invitation of the committee 
 was as follows : — 
 
 " Thursday, A. M., 
 ' ' 6 Rue de Presbourg. 
 "My Dear Sir, — It will give me, as well as my son, much 
 pleasure to join you at dinner at Phillippe's this (Thursday) even- 
 ing at six o'clock. 
 
 "Very truly yours, 
 
 "WILLIAM L. DAYTON. 
 " Thos. Balch, Esq., 
 
 "48 Av: Gabriel."
 
 / 
 
 42 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 
 
 United States and England arising out of the cruise of 
 / \ki^ Alabama and kindred causes, should be argued be- 
 fore an International Court of Arbitration. In Novem- 
 ber, 1864, Mr. Balch, during a visit home, urged upon 
 some of his friends, among them General Nathanial P. 
 Banks, the submission of the Anglo-American differ- 
 ences to such a court.^^ General Banks requested Mr. 
 Balch to see President Lincoln, and arranged an inter- 
 view. The President questioned Mr. Balch, then lately 
 returned from Europe, largely about trans-Atlantic 
 affairs. The President ridiculed the Mexican Empire 
 and said that he considered it "a pasteboard concern 
 on which we won't waste a man nor a dollar. It will 
 soon tumble to pieces and, may be, bring the other 
 down with it." To Mr. Balch's suggestion that the 
 difficulties with England should be argued before a 
 Court of Arbitration, the President said that he thought 
 it might be possible in the future, that it was "a very 
 amiable idea, but not possible just now, as the millen- 
 
 '^^ Inter7iatio7ial Courts of Arbitration, by Thomas Balch, 1874. 
 Reprinted at Philadelphia, 1899. Henry T. Coates & Co., page 
 9, note 6. 
 
 General Nathanial P. Banks, who was elected Governor of 
 Massachusetts in 1857, 1858 and 1859, served three years in the 
 Civil War; in 1864 he was elected to Congress, and except that 
 he failed of re-election in 1872, continued to serve in the lower 
 House until 1877. For a number of years he was chairman of 
 the Committee on Foreign Relations.
 
 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION, 43 
 
 nium is still a long way off." But he added : "There 
 is no possible risk of a quarrel with England, as we 
 have enough on our hands. One quarrel is enough 
 for a nation or a man at a time." As to the proposed 
 Court of Arbitration he said: "Start your idea. It 
 may make its way in time, as it is a good one." On 
 arriving in London, on Christmas Day, 1864, Mr. 
 Balch spoke of it to several friends, but found no 
 one to treat it other than as the conceit of a well- 
 meaning enthusiast, except Richard Cobden.^J. 
 
 ^"At the beginning of January, 1865, Richard Cobden wrote to 
 Mr. Balch :— 
 
 " MiDHURST, 3d January, 1865. 
 
 ** My Dear Mr. Balch: — I was very sorry to miss the op- 
 portunity of seeing you in London. There are very many topics 
 on which I should have liked to have talked with you. * * * I 
 think it depends entirely on the discretion of your own authorities 
 at Washington to remain at peace with all the world until your 
 civil war is ended. I do not say that you have not grievances ; 
 but one quarrel at a time, as Mr. Lincoln says, is enough for a 
 nation or an individual. With the British Government I do not 
 think, on the whole, you have as much to be angry about as to be 
 grateful for what it has refused to do in conjunction with France 
 and other powers. Against individual British shipbuilders and 
 capitalists I admit you have very just grounds of grievance and 
 I have said as much publically. The French Government has no 
 doubt given you just ground of complaint by their occupation of 
 Mexico. But I don't think your Congress shows much wisdom 
 in trying to push Mr. Lincoln into hostilities on that subject at 
 present, and I hope he will give the ' House ' a hint that they 
 may find full employment in domestic affairs, particularly in their
 
 44 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION, 
 
 Finally, Mr. Balch made his plan public in an open 
 letter. More than one editor refused to publish it, 
 
 finances, for the present. The Canadian affair will be peaceably 
 arranged, * * * 
 
 ' ' My wife and daughter join me in kind remembrances to Mrs. 
 Balch and all your circle and I remain, 
 
 ' ' Very truly yours, 
 
 "R. COBDEN," 
 
 Here is an extract from anothet letter of Richard Cobden to 
 Mr. Balch:— 
 
 " MiDHURST, 17th Feb,, 1865. 
 
 ♦ Jf» 3pl w "vr 3|c ^ 
 
 ' ' There never was a more absurd canard than that invented by 
 the Southern sympathizers — that England and France contem- 
 plated an intervention. And there is almost as great absurdity in 
 the programme which the same party has cut out for you when 
 the war ends — viz. , that you are to begin a war with France or 
 England or all the world. Now, I have a very different work in 
 store for you. When the war ceases, you will be like two line-of- 
 battle ships after a desperate struggle ; all hands will be required 
 to clear the wreck, repair damages in hull and rigging, look after 
 the wounded and bury the dead. There will be great suffering 
 among all classes before you return to a normal state of things. 
 You have been in a saturnalia of greenbacks and Government 
 expenditure, which may be likened to the pleasant excitement of 
 alcohol. But peace will be the headache after the debauch, with 
 the unpleasant tavern reckoning." 
 
 Some of the letters that passed between Lord Palmerston and 
 Lord John Russell upon the question of intervention show that 
 they thought of joining Napoleon the Third against the Union. 
 See ante, page 25, note 19. 
 
 'Y\\^ New York Tribune, April 21st, 1865, page 8. Interna- 
 tional Courts of Arbitration, by Thomas Balch. Edition of 1899, 
 page 18, note 14,
 
 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 45 
 
 But Horace Greeley, who feared no unpopularity 
 where a cause was entitled, as he thought, to a hear- 
 ing, gave it a place in the columns of the New York 
 Tribune, May 13th, 1865.^^ The letter was addressed 
 to the able and conscientious correspondent of that 
 journal at Paris, Mr. W. H. Huntington, and was as 
 follows : — 
 
 "ENGLAND AND THE UNITED STATES: 
 ' ' A letter from Thomas Balch. 
 
 "Paris, March 31st, 1865. 
 
 "My Dear Sir, — You asked me to put in writ- 
 ing the observations which I made to you yesterday 
 touching the outstanding questions between England 
 and the United States. I should be sorry to make 
 you read all that you so kindly listened to. It would 
 be to tax you rather too severely. But the current of 
 my remarks was to this effect: 
 
 "I. That both England and the United States pre- 
 ferred claims which, if not judiciously managed, might 
 and perhaps would lead to war. 
 
 33' 
 
 ' This letter will be found in the New York Tribune of May 
 13th, 1865, on the fourth page, in the upper right hand corner. 
 The Tribune of that date can be found in the New York Public 
 Library (Astor, Lenox and Tilden Foundations), in a number 
 of other American libraries, and in the British Museum.
 
 46 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 
 
 "II. That the American claims were chiefly the 
 depredations of the Alabama, whilst it seemed from 
 the tenor of Mr. Layard's recent speech, that the 
 British claims were also such as to rest upon ques- 
 tions of law. Neither set of claims was strictly na- 
 tional ; they were rather those of individuals, mer- 
 chants, shipowners, and others. 
 
 " III. That as to such claims, war was a barbarous 
 manner of enforcing them ; that the most successful 
 war would after all be a most expensive and unsatis- 
 factory process of litigation; and that the civilized 
 and Christian way of ascertaining their validity and 
 extent should be by arbitration. 
 
 'TV. That the best manner of composing such a 
 Court of Arbitration would be, that each party should 
 select some competent jurist, those two to select an 
 umpire. The claims to be presented, proved and 
 argued before this Court, whose decisions should be 
 final and without appeal. 
 
 "V. That such a proposition, proceeding from our 
 Government, would, without doubt, receive the coun- 
 tenance and support of all intelligent Englishmen. It 
 is true that some of the speeches recently made in 
 Parliament about us and Canada are of a nature to 
 discourage such expectations. On the other hand, it
 
 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 47 
 
 must be borne in mind that these gentlemen form a 
 class apart; that it is their political faith to believe and 
 say unseemly things of Republican institutions, of the 
 men, habits of life, and principles of action developed 
 under them. But it was longr agfo that the wisest of 
 men gave us the measure of such people, and the 
 experience of mankind has confirmed his judgment. 
 
 "VI. Such a proposition from our Government 
 would at once quiet all the foolish alarms which have, 
 or appear to have, taken possession of so many persons 
 in England. It would also uphold and strengthen all 
 the advocates of progress. It would give greater force 
 to their arguments in favor of just reforms and liberty ; 
 and this not only in Great Britain, but throughout 
 Europe. The abandonment of the old system of arbi- 
 tration by a reference to a Sovereign, more or less 
 unfit from the very nature of his position, and the 
 introduction of a tribunal, almost republican in its 
 character, whose decisions would have a weight as 
 precedents, an authority heretofore unknown as expo- 
 sitions of international law, would be no trifling events 
 in the march of Democratic Freedom. 
 
 '*VII. Such a proposition would also be in accord 
 with our traditional policy of peace and goodwill 
 towards men.
 
 48 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 
 
 "The most serious objection that has been urged, 
 so far as I have heard, against such a Court of Ar- 
 bitration, is the difficulty of finding gentlemen not 
 already biased by their feelings or in some way 
 committed in their opinions. 
 
 "This objection applies, however, in a measure, to 
 all human tribunals ; it would apply to arbitration by 
 a sovereign, and would leave us no solution other than 
 the dread arbitrament of war. For myself, I cannot 
 believe that there are not to be had in England and 
 America gentlemen of the requisite learning, experi- 
 ence, and impartiality for a position so dignified and 
 useful. At all events, there are many eminent men 
 in Europe in every way qualified for this high duty. I 
 have in my mind's eye a Swiss publicist, who, after 
 having filled the most responsible stations at home, is 
 now worthily representing his people in their most 
 important diplomatic post.^'* The decisions rendered 
 by him and gentlemen like him would be such as two 
 great and free nations could accept with satisfaction. 
 I dare say he has friendly feelings towards the Repub- 
 lic, but he cannot be wanting in like sentiments for the 
 old Champion of Liberty. The preferences of such 
 enlightened statesmen could not possibly be of a char- 
 
 ** This referred to that most worthy, high-minded gentleman, 
 Dr. Kern, formerly President of the Federal Council, but then 
 Minister to France.
 
 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 49 
 
 acter to influence their judgments, and the parties 
 most interested might well be content to abide their 
 award. 
 
 " Believe me, my dear sir, yours sincerely, 
 
 -THOMAS BALCH." ^ 
 
 '^ In 1874, Professor James Lorimer, the Regius Professor of 
 Public Law and of the Law of Nations in the University of Edin- 
 burgh, wrote to Mr. Balch a letter concerning International Arbi- 
 tration, in which he said : — 
 
 ' ' Considering the interest which is everywhere taken in Inter- 
 national Arbitration at present, and more especially with a view 
 to the discussion that will take place at the meeting of the Inter- 
 national Institute at Geneva in October, I think it very desirable 
 that you should republish the letter which you addressed to the 
 ' New York Tribune' in 1865, adding to it such suggestions as 
 your observation of subsequent events may enable you to offer. 
 
 " I do not know to what extent that letter, or anything else 
 you said or did, may have led to the negotiation of the Treaty of 
 Washington, by which the threatened war between our countries 
 is believed by many to have been averted ; but certain it is, that 
 the letter was a very remarkable anticipation of the treaty which 
 was negotiated six years afterward. The tribunal which you 
 suggested almost exactly corresponded to that appointed under 
 Article XII. of the Treaty, and even the great tribunal which sat 
 at Geneva under Article I. was only a fuller realization of your 
 original conception, by a larger infusion of the neutral element 
 than you had contemplated, into the Court. In this respect it 
 certainly was an improvement. But for the presence of the 
 neutral judges it is doubtful if the work would have been brought 
 to a successful issue, and I think it very worthy of consideration 
 whether, on all future occasions, the Commissioners ought not to 
 be appointed exclusively from neutrals." 
 
 See \}a& New York Tribune, April nth, 1874. International
 
 50 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 
 
 The publication of this letter proved that the propo- 
 sition was not popular at that time in the United States. 
 Writing seven years later of this event Mr, Balch said: 
 "At home I was met in a less satisfactory manner. 
 
 Courts of Arbitration by Thomas Balch, 1874. Reprinted at 
 Philadelphia, 1899, Henry T. Coates & Co., page 28. 
 
 In the above letter Professor Lorimer points out how closely 
 Mr. Balch' s suggestion was followedintheTreaty of Washington, 
 as may be seen by a comparison of the letter printed in the 
 Tribune on May 13th, 1865, and Articles XII. and I. of the 
 treaty. 
 
 In Article XII. of the Treaty of Washington (1871), after a 
 statement of some matters other than the Alabama claims that 
 should be referred for settlement to three Commissioners, pro- 
 vision was made for the appointment of the Commissioners in the 
 following manner : ' ' One Commissioner shall be named by the 
 President of the United States, one by Her Britannic Majesty, and 
 a third by the President of the United States and Her Britannic 
 Majesty conjointly ; and in case the third Commissioner shall not 
 have been so named within a period of three months from the date 
 of the exchange of the ratification of this treaty, then the third 
 Commissioner shall be named by the Representative at Washing- 
 ton of His Majesty the King of Spain. In case of the death, 
 absence, or incapacity of any Commissioner, or in the event of any 
 Commissioner omitting or ceasing to act, the vacancy shall be 
 filled in the manner hereinbefore provided for making the original 
 appointment ; the period of three months in case of such substitu- 
 tion being calculated from the date of the happening of the 
 vacancy. ' ' Treaties and Conveyitions conchided betweeii the United 
 States of America and other Powers since fuly 4th, 1776. Depart- 
 ment of State. Washington: Government Printing Office, 1889, 
 page 484. 
 
 In Article I., the Court of Arbitration to consist of five Arbitra- 
 tors to try the ''Alabama Claims " was provided for as follows : —
 
 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 5 I 
 
 The Civil War was near its end, and the passions 
 aroused by it were at their highest. I received more 
 than one angry rebuff, and sometimes the contempt 
 which the idea excited was not always civil. Some 
 good people went so far as to say that I had lived so 
 
 ' ' One [Arbitrator] shall be named by the President of the 
 United States ; one shall be named by Her Britannic Majesty ; 
 His Majesty the King of Italy shall be requested to name one ; 
 the President of the Swiss Confederation shall be requested to 
 name one ; and His Majesty the Emperor of Brazil shall be re- 
 quested to name one. 
 
 ' ' In case of the death, absence, or incapacity to serve of any 
 or either of the said Arbitrators, or, in the event of either of the 
 said Arbitrators omitting or declining or ceasing to act as such, the 
 President of the United States, or Her Britannic Majesty, or His 
 Majesty the King of Italy, or the President of the Swiss Confed- 
 eration, or His Majesty the Emperor of Brazil, as the case may be, 
 may forthwith name another person to act as Arbitrator in the 
 place and stead of the Arbitrator originally named by such head 
 of a State. 
 
 ' ' And in the event of the refusal or omission for two months 
 after receipt of the request from either of the high contracting 
 parties of His Majesty the King of Italy, or the President of the 
 Swiss Confederation, or His Majesty the Emperor of Brazil, to 
 name an Arbitrator either to fill the original appointment or in 
 the place of one who may have died, be absent, or incapacitated, 
 or who may omit, decline or from any cause cease to act as such 
 Arbitrator, His Majesty the King of Sweden and Norway shall be 
 requested to name one or more persons, as the case may be, to 
 act as such Arbitrator or Arbitrators." Treaties and Conventions 
 concluded between the United States of America and other Powers 
 since July 4, 1776. Department of State. Washington : Gov- 
 ernment Printing Office, 1889, page 479.
 
 52 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 
 
 long abroad that I had become 'a Britisher.' 
 
 Not encouraging for my idea of a mild-mannered way 
 of cutting the knot of difficult national questions." 
 Still Mr. Balch did not despair, and continued to work 
 among his friends and acquaintances, both at home 
 and abroad, and soon he found in Professor James 
 Lorimer, of the University of Edinburgh, and Pre- 
 vost-Paradol, of V Academie Fran^aise, two powerful 
 helpers.^^ 
 
 ** James Lorimer, Regius Professor of Public Law and of the 
 Law of Nations in the University of Edinburgh, was born in 
 1818 and died in 1890. He was a founder of V InstitiU de Droit 
 International, and the author of The Institutes of Law as de- 
 termined by the Principles of Nature (1872), The Institutes of 
 the Law of Nations: A Treatise of the fural Relatio7is of 
 Separate Political Communities (1883-84), and several other 
 valuable books on social science and international law. Lucien 
 Anatole Prevost-Paradol, the brilliant author of Ouelques Pages 
 d^ Histoire Conte^nporaine (i 862-1 866) and La France Norivelle 
 (1868), and a member of r Academie Franfaise, was the leading 
 writer in the fournal des Debats against the Empire. In the days 
 of the Imperial censorship, as some one said, "Prevost-Paradol 
 excellait avec J. J. Weiss dans I'art de tout faire entendre sans 
 tout exprimer." Subsequently, when Ollivier assumed the re- 
 sponsibilities of Government under the liberal Empire, Prevost- 
 Paradol accepted the post of Minister to Washington.
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 
 On August 30th, 1865, Earl Russell in a long re- 
 view of the acts and rights of the two Governments 
 in the controversy between them, referred to Mr. 
 Adams's remark upon arbitration in the latter's letter 
 of October 23d, 1863, and said: — 
 
 "In your letter of October 23, 1863, you were 
 pleased to say that the Government of the United 
 States is ready to agree to- any form of arbitration. 
 
 " Her Majesty's Government have thus been led to 
 consider what question could be put to any Sovereign 
 or State to whom this very great power should be 
 assigned. 
 
 " It appears to Her Majesty's Government that 
 there are but two questions by which the claim of 
 compensation could be tested. The one is : Have 
 the British Government acted with due diligence, or, 
 in other words, with good faith and honesty, in the 
 maintenance of the neutrality they proclaimed ? The 
 other is : Have the Law Officers of the Crown prop- 
 erly understood the Foreign Enlistment Act when 
 they declined, in June 1862, to advise the detention 
 and seizure of the * Alabama^ and on other occasions 
 
 (53)
 
 54 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 
 
 when they were asked to detain other ships build- 
 ing or fitting in British ports ? 
 
 " It appears to Her Majesty's Government, that 
 neither of these questions could be put to a foreign 
 Government with any regard to the dignity and char- 
 acter of the British Crown and the British nation. 
 
 "Her Majesty's Government are the sole guardians 
 of their own honor. They cannot admit that they 
 may have acted with bad faith in maintaining the neu- 
 trality they professed. The Law Officers of the Crown 
 must be beld to be better interpreters of a British 
 statute than any foreign Government can be presumed 
 to be. Her Majesty's Government must therefore 
 decline either to make reparation and compensation 
 for the captures made by the 'Alabama,' or to refer 
 the question to any foreign State. 
 
 " Her Majesty's Government conceive that if they 
 were to act otherwise, they would endanger the posi- 
 tion of neutrals in all future wars. 
 
 " Her Majesty's Government are, however, ready 
 to consent to the appointment of a Commission to 
 which shall be referred all claims arising during the 
 late civil war, which the two Powers shall agree to 
 refer to the Commissioners." '^^ 
 
 " The Official Correspondence on the Claims of the United 
 States in respect to the ''Alabama.''' (Published by Ead Rus- 
 sell.) London: Longmans, Green & Co., 1867, page 147.
 
 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 55 
 
 On September 17th, 1865, Francis Lieber, the inter- 
 national law publicist, addressed to Secretary Seward 
 an open letter on arbitration which was printed in the 
 New York Tifnes, of September 2 2d.^^ Mr. Lieber 
 suggested that the questions at issue should be sub- 
 mitted to the law faculty of some continental univer- 
 sity, like Heidelberg or Leyden. His letter was as 
 follows : — 
 
 "INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION. 
 
 "A letter to Hon. William H. Seward, Secretary of State, 
 
 by Francis Lieber. 
 
 "Dear Sir: Permit me to address to you in the 
 form of a letter, some remarks on a subject which de- 
 serves the attention of every American citizen and 
 every lover of right and progress. You, Sir, at the 
 head of our foreign affairs, influencing and guiding, 
 in a great measure, our highest transactions abroad 
 and at home, will, I respectfully trust, pardon me for 
 sending forth this letter with your name as that of 
 its public recipient, since its topic is international 
 arbitration. 
 
 '* There is a copy of the New York Times of September 22nd, 
 1865, in the New York Public Library (Astor, Lenox and Tilden 
 Foundations). For an account of Francis Lieber and his work 
 see Francis Lieber, by Lewis R. Harley, Ph. D. , New York : 
 The Columbia University Press, 1899.
 
 56 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 
 
 " The United States have large claims upon Great 
 Britain for the injur)'^ done them by the armed vessels 
 fitted out against them in English ports contrary to 
 the laws of neutrality. On the other hand it is under- 
 stood that Great Britain exhibits counter claims against 
 the United States. The subject is in every respect, a 
 serious one. How are such claims and counter claims 
 to be settled? 
 
 ''International disputes of a grave character can 
 only be concluded in one of the following four ways : 
 The discussion may be drawn on for so long a time 
 that greater questions arise in the course of events, 
 and the original subject is dropped by its mention be- 
 ing omitted in a new treaty which may be concluded. 
 This has happened, indeed, but such a settlement by 
 default as it were, is not likely to occur again, in mod- 
 ern times, when the parties at issue are large and 
 powerful nations, and the subject in question is of 
 commensurate magnitude. 
 
 " Or, the contending governments may diplomati- 
 cally settle their difficulties and seal the settlement 
 by special treaty. It is not probable either that 
 America and England will arrive at a conclusion of 
 their differences by this means ; certainly not within a 
 reasonably short time. All protraction, however, of 
 international difficulties, especially between great 
 nations destined to have the closest intercourse, is
 
 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 57 
 
 both injurious and dangerous. It interferes with the 
 international spirit of peace, without which a purely 
 formal peace, that is mere non-existence of war, 
 amounts only to international quiescence shorn in a 
 great measure of the best realities of peace. This 
 is especially the case with all those nations who ac- 
 knowledge that the first and perhaps the highest law 
 of modern extending civilization is the commandment 
 that there shall be an increasing and widening family 
 of nations, bound together by the great law of nations. 
 At any rate this communication is written on the sup- 
 position that the present English-American disagree- 
 ment will not be settled by diplomatic transactions, 
 or cannot thus be concluded within any reasonable 
 period of time. 
 
 " The third way of stopping international discussion 
 is war. A discussion may certainly thus be stopped 
 for a time, but neither party can expect the settlement 
 of pecuniary claims by rushing into war, since new 
 claims would necessarily arise, and each belligerent 
 would be obliged to incur expenditures greater than 
 any indemnities claimed of the opponent before the 
 war. Neither ourselves nor the English would expect 
 to indemnify themselves by conquest, which, more- 
 over, is generally a poor indemnification, so far as the 
 settlement of pecuniary claims is concerned. The 
 enormous sums which Napoleon drew by way of
 
 58 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 
 
 'contributions,' from the conquered countries, did 
 not lessen the heavy taxation in France, made neces- 
 sary by his wars. Going to war with England on ac- 
 count of our pecuniary claims would simply amount 
 to the attempt of killing a fly, crawling on a costly 
 piece of sevre, by throwing a stone at the insect, from 
 fear that it may soil the precious vase. 
 
 "There remains, then, arbitration only, as the 
 fourth method of ending international differences. 
 International arbitration, freely resorted to by power- 
 ful governments, conscious of their complete inde- 
 pendence and self-sustaining sovereignty, is one of 
 the foremost characteristics of advancing civilization — 
 of the substitution of reason, fairness and submission 
 to justice, for defying power or revengeful irritation. 
 It belongs to modern, indeed to recent times; yet 
 although it is a noble characteristic of the more recent 
 times, it still bears uncouth features of coarser periods, 
 and demands improvement and development. The 
 law of nations is awaiting them. 
 
 " The administration of all law may be said to 
 originate with arbitration, and all law, as it develops 
 itself further and further, largely returns to courts of 
 arbitration, justly and beautifully called, in French 
 and German, Courts of Peace. The Roman civil law 
 acknowledged arbitration. The courts of arbitration, 
 with elected and non-professional judges, to whom
 
 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 59 
 
 parties voluntarily go to obtain equitable arbitra- 
 ments, with the exclusion of professional counsel, 
 have spread all over Prussia, Denmark, and other 
 countries, settling annually immense amounts in liti- 
 gation. 
 
 •' The ancient Greeks, with their many city-states 
 and confederacies of the same language and religion, 
 and with a similar culture, knew, if not of interna- 
 tional, yet of inter-statal arbitration — temporary com- 
 missions appointed by contending cities, to whose 
 judgment the parties swore to submit. For, it will 
 be hardly necessary to state, that the characteristic 
 feature of these arbitrations is the voluntary sub- 
 mission of the parties to a freely chosen judge, with 
 a binding and solemn promise of the litigants to 
 abide in good faith by his adjudication. 
 
 " That international arbitrament, however, which 
 consists in a sovereign power chosen by two contend- 
 ing equally sovereign powers, or by governments rep- 
 resenting entire nations, rendering judgment, and 
 this judgment being submitted to in good faith by 
 two potent sovereigns — this arbitration belongs to the 
 most recent times, and is considered by international 
 jurists, and by the students of the history of civiliza- 
 tion, one of the encouraging signs of real progress. 
 
 ** So far, however, monarchs have been almost ex- 
 clusively chosen as arbiters, which is inconvenient on
 
 6o THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 
 
 several accounts. It may happen that the parties 
 may be unable to unite in the election of a monarch 
 or government, suiting both alike. The present case 
 between the United States and Great Britain seems 
 a case in point. We would probably select none but 
 the Emperor of Russia, if we were at all willing to 
 submit our case to a European government, and 
 if we were convinced of a sufficient acquaintance 
 with the law of nations as well as with maritime 
 law in the officials of that high military govern- 
 ment ; while Russia, in all probability, would not 
 suit Great Britain. 
 
 "The other and great inconvenience in selecting a 
 monarch as arbiter is the fact that the only one who 
 is publicly known as the judge, is the very one who, 
 in the course of things, does not occupy himself with 
 the case, cannot do so, and is not expected by any 
 one to do so. 
 
 "When an international difficulty is brought before 
 a monarch, or even before the chief representative of 
 a republic, who is now always the chief executive, what 
 is the course which things take ? The Minister of 
 Justice, or some similar high functionary, is directed 
 to take the case in h^-nd ; he appoints some counsel- 
 lor or other officer, possibly a committee, to make a 
 report to him, which he lays before the nominal arbi- 
 ter. Those who really decide the case are unknown.
 
 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 6 1 
 
 or at least bear no public, and feel no last responsi- 
 bility. In many cases of this sort exist the grave 
 inconvenience and serious inconsistency of handing 
 over questions of the highest law and most elevated 
 justice to an executive and not to an authority of judi- 
 cial renown and responsibility. How much easier 
 would be the acquiescence in the judgment; how much 
 more becoming to civilized communities, and how 
 much nobler in every way would be the selection of 
 judges from among jurists of a high reputation for 
 their comprehensive knowledge and unyielding loyalty 
 to justice and jural truth ! There is, probably, no 
 fair-minded Englishman or American who would not 
 submit the whole amount of the claims in question far 
 more readily to a Hugo Grotius, than to the ruler of 
 any empire now existing. Still, it may be observed 
 that there is not always a Hugo Grotius at hand ; nor 
 can individuals, however unsullied in reputation and 
 resolute in speaking out what is right, be expected, 
 in all countries, to be able wholly to separate them- 
 selves from government pressure. It would be diffi- 
 cult, in the present state of our civilization, to make 
 two contending nations agree on a single person, 
 not a monarch, and assign to a living jurist that 
 authority which the Congress of Vienna granted, 
 among others, to Grotius, freely quoted in that great 
 international council. Nor would it be easy to
 
 62 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 
 
 persuade a private individual to serve as umpire, 
 could the contending parties be made to agree as to 
 the desirable international judge ; but could they not 
 be induced to agree to lay the whole subject at issue 
 before the law faculty of some foreign university, if 
 both parties are sincerely disposed to obtain only 
 what is due to them and what is strictly right ? The 
 members of such a faculty are generally men who 
 have already made a name which they hope will go 
 down to posterity in law and its literature ; they know 
 the whole weight and meaning of a grave decision in 
 the highest regions of the law, and would be conscious 
 that in an international case their decision, while 
 probed and scanned by the foremost intellects of their 
 race, would pass over as part and parcel into that law 
 which prevails between independent nations, which is 
 enforced by equity and reason, and is gradually ex- 
 tending even beyond that race which happily created 
 it : for, I am writing this paper, when not only the 
 Turks, Egypt and Persia have given in their adhesion 
 to many of the main points of our law of nations, but 
 when a translation of Wheatons Law of Nations into 
 Chinese has arrived in this country, and is now in the 
 library of your department. 
 
 'Tn the present case it is taken for granted that 
 neither party desires nor hopes to be able to outwit 
 the other. The American and the English nations are
 
 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 63 
 
 too great to descend to diplomatic artifice ; and if 
 there were no objection to such a course or to such 
 attempts, on the ground of international high-mind- 
 edness and equity, prudence and expediency alone 
 would dictate to abandon so unworthy a desire. The 
 American and English are people at once too clear- 
 sighted and too stubborn ; too much on a level of in- 
 tellect and civilization, and they agree too much in 
 their knowledge and conceptions of justice, law and 
 fairness, to hope much from diplomatic cunning or 
 from successful overreaching. But if they really wish 
 to settle their differences on the principles of law, it 
 may be asked whether there is a single English-speak- 
 ing man on this side of the Atlantic, or on the eastern 
 side, who would doubt that such a faculty of law as 
 that of the University of Berlin, with the international 
 jurist Heffter in it ; or if Prussia were considered too 
 much of a great Power, the law faculty of Heidelberg 
 or of Leyden would be a fitter body to decide our 
 differences than any Emperor or any republic, A 
 republic could not decide the case as a republic, but 
 must hand it over to some commission. A law 
 faculty, especially that of a renowned university in a 
 minor State, seems to form a tribunal fitter than any 
 other that can be imagined for many, perhaps most, of 
 the great international cases. It would seem almost 
 made for so high a function, and the selection of a
 
 64 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 
 
 law faculty as a court of international arbitration, 
 would be a measure worthy of being inaugurated by 
 the two freest large nations, and whose governments 
 are to be numbered, in diplomacy, among the least 
 unreasonable and uncandid ones. 
 
 *' Let the United States and Great Britain agree 
 upon the University ; let them obtain the permission 
 of its government to appeal to the law faculty, which 
 would doubtless be readily granted ; let the two 
 powers distinctly settle the remuneration which each 
 in equal shares is to grant to the faculty, excluding 
 all other immediate or prospective presents or dis- 
 tinctions ; let each contending party appoint its com- 
 missioners, as many as each party chooses, and no- 
 body would doubt that a just judgment would be 
 obtained. 
 
 " The compensation out of place, as it would seem 
 in an international case, is nevertheless taken into 
 consideration here, for the reasons that the case at 
 issue would occupy a very large space of time of the 
 high judges ; and in order to forestate every particle 
 of that machinery which consists in part of ribbons 
 and orders, snuff-boxes and titles, presents of money 
 or land, direct or prospective. Not that such judges 
 would be likely to be swayed by means of this kind in 
 their judgment. That tribunal, with nations for its 
 clients, would doubtless be conscious of standing, in
 
 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 65 
 
 turn, before a greater tribunal — before their pro- 
 fession in all history ; but all seeming attempt or faint 
 suspicion of an attempt at lowering so great a court 
 to common diplomacy ought to be kept far away. 
 
 " Great universities have been appealed to in 
 former times, though it was generally in theological 
 matters. Within the different countries, such as 
 France or Germany, they have indeed been appealed 
 to, and still are occasionally so, at least in the last 
 mentioned country, in civil and penal matters. Why 
 should we not seize upon these institutions, them- 
 selves characteristic of our own civilization, in inter- 
 national matters ? The adoption of the proposed 
 plan would be a signal step in the progress of the 
 race. There is no nobler sight than the strong — be 
 they single men or nations — laying down their 
 strength like a sword by their side, saying : ' We 
 will abide by the judgment of the just ; let justice 
 be done.' 
 
 " This proposition does not interest my mind by 
 the charms of novelty. I communicated a similar one 
 to a prominent statesman in Congress as far back as 
 the time of the Oregon question, and it was clearly 
 elicited in my mind when the decision of King Will- 
 iam of the Netherlands, concerning the northeastern 
 boundary became known in this country. Circum- 
 stances did not call for a closer consideration, but I
 
 66 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 
 
 now venture to lay it before you, Sir, in a more elab- 
 orate form, and tr)' to attract the attention of the 
 public to it through your eminent name. 
 
 " Whether the two nations to whom the spread of 
 civilization over the globe has been assigned more 
 than to any other people, will accept this way of 
 settling differences in the present case or not, there is 
 no doubt in my mind that the Cis-Caucasian race will 
 rise, at no very distant day, to the selection of such 
 umpires, far more dignified than a crowned arbitrator 
 can be. 
 
 " I have the honor to subscribe myself, with the 
 highest regard, 
 
 " Your very obedient servant, 
 
 "FRANCIS LIEBER. 
 "Washington, D. C, Sept. 17, 1865." 
 
 On September 27th, 1865, five days after the pub- 
 lication of Mr. Lieber 's letter to Secretary Seward, 
 the latter wrote to Mr. Adams : — 
 
 "In a note of yours to Earl Russell, written so long 
 ago as the 23d of October, 1863, in regard to the 
 difficulties in our relations then developed, you 
 remarked as follows : * I am directed to say there is 
 no fair and equitable form of conventional arbitra- 
 ment or reference to which they,' the United States, 
 * will not be willing to submit.'
 
 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION, 67 
 
 " Earl Russell at this late day recalls the friendly 
 remark thus incidentally made by you, and, manifestly 
 treating it in the character of a formal proposition for 
 arbitration still existing, if not newly tendered, states 
 reasons why such a mode of adjustment would not 
 be acceptable to her Britannic Majesty's government. 
 You are authorized, therefore, to say, that whatever 
 may have heretofore been or might now have been 
 thought by us of umpirage between the two powers, 
 no such proposition for arbitration of the existing 
 differences will henceforward be insisted upon or 
 submitted to by this government. 
 
 " In disallowing our assumed proposition for arbi- 
 tration. Earl Russell distinctly declares that Her Maj- 
 esty's government must decline to make reparation 
 or compensation for the captures which were made 
 by the Alabama. 
 
 " Nevertheless, Earl Russell announces that Her 
 Majesty's government are ready to consent to the 
 appointment of a commission, to which should be re- 
 ferred all claims which have arisen during our civil 
 war, and which the two powers should agree to refer 
 to the commission. 
 
 " Earl Russell is understood by us, in submitting 
 this proposition, as implying, that among those claims 
 which Her Britannic Majesty's government would not 
 agree to refer to such a joint commission are the
 
 68 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 
 
 claims heretofore presented in behalf of American 
 citizens or others for redress and reparation in cases 
 of captures and spoliations made by the Alabama, and 
 other vessels of her class, including even the Shenan- 
 doah, now still engaged in the same work of depreda- 
 tion, which piratical vessels, as is alleged by the United 
 States, were fitted out, manned, equipped, and de- 
 spatched by British subjects in British ports." ^^ 
 
 Earl Russell, on October 14th, 1865, in a supple- 
 mentary letter to Mr. Adams, further explained his 
 proposal, in his letter of August 30th preceding, for 
 the appointment of a Commission. The English 
 Foreign Secretary said : — 
 
 "Foreign Office, Oct. 14, 1865. 
 
 " Sir : — I have thought it best to wait for the answer 
 to the reference you have made to your Government 
 before replying to your last letter. 
 
 " But I observe that you have not clearly under- 
 stood my proposal for the appointment of a Com- 
 mission. 
 
 " That proposal is made in the following terms : — 
 
 " ' Her Majesty's Government are ready to consent 
 
 39 , 
 
 ^Papers relating to Foreign Affairs accompanying the Annual 
 Message of the President to the First Session Thirty-ninth Con- 
 gress. Parti. Washington : Government Printing Office, 1866, 
 page 565-
 
 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 69 
 
 to the appointment of a Commission to which shall 
 be referred all claims arising during the late civil 
 war which the two Powers shall agree to refer to 
 the Commissioners.' 
 
 "There are, I conceive, many claims upon which 
 the two Powers would agree that they were fair sub- 
 jects of investigation before Commissioners. 
 
 "But I think you must perceive that, if the United 
 States Government were to propose to refer claims 
 arising out of the captures made by the Alabama and 
 Shena7idoah to the Commissioners, the answer of Her 
 Majesty's Government must be, in consistency with 
 the whole argument I have maintained, in conformity 
 with the views entertained by your Government in 
 former times. 
 
 " I should be obliged, in answer to such a proposal, 
 to say — ' For any acts of Her Majesty's subjects com- 
 mitted out of their jurisdiction, and beyond their con- 
 trol, the Government of her Majesty are not respon- 
 sible.' 
 
 " I should say further, that the appointment of a 
 Commission for such purpose would not be consistent 
 with any practice usual among civilized nations, and 
 that it is a principle well known and well understood 
 that no nation is responsible for the acts of its citizens 
 committed without its jurisdiction, and out of the 
 reach of its control.
 
 70 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 
 
 " I should have cleared up this point before, but I 
 thought that the words ' which the two Powers shall 
 agree to refer to the Commissioners ' would put an 
 end to any doubt upon the subject. I am, &c., 
 
 " RUSSELL."^ 
 
 On October 17th, 1865, Mr. Adams replied to 
 Earl Russell's letters of August 30th and October 
 14th as follows : — 
 
 " Legation of the United States, 
 
 "London, October 17, 1865. 
 
 '* My Lord, — I have the honor to acknowledge 
 the reception of your note of the 14th instant, ex- 
 planatory of some portions of a preceding one dated 
 August 30 last. 
 
 " This has reached me just in season to enable me 
 to dispense with the necessity of soliciting precisely 
 that information. For although the Government 
 which I have the honor to represent had already 
 understood your Lordship's note as substantially in 
 the same sense, it has instructed me to ask the con- 
 firmation of it which has now been supplied. 
 
 40 
 
 The Official Correspondence on the Claims of the United 
 States in respect to the ''Alabama." (Published by Earl Russell.) 
 London: Longmans, Green & Co., 1867, page 165.
 
 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. J I 
 
 " I am now directed to inform your Lordship that 
 the contents of your note of August 30 have re- 
 ceived the most careful consideration. 
 
 " With regard to the reference which you were 
 pleased to make to a friendly remark contained in the 
 note which I had the honor to address to your Lord- 
 ship on October 23, 1863 — apparently considering it 
 in the light of a formal proposal for arbitration — I 
 am now desired, in view of the reasons given by your 
 Lordship why such a mode of adjustment would not 
 be acceptable to Her Majesty's Government, to state 
 that, whatever may have heretofore been, or might 
 now be, thought by the President of umpirage be- 
 tween the two Powers, no proposition of that kind for 
 the settlement of existing differences will hencefor- 
 ward be insisted upon, or submitted on the part of 
 my Government. 
 
 " The proposal of some form of Commission made 
 by your Lordship still remains under consideration. 
 To the end that my Government may be the better 
 enabled to make a satisfactory reply to it, I am still 
 under the necessity of soliciting more information in 
 regard to the precise nature of the claims which Her 
 Majesty's Government is disposed to agree to con- 
 sider. I am instructed to venture so far as to ask the 
 favour of your Lordship to distinguish as well what 
 among the classes of claims it is willing, and what it
 
 72 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 
 
 would not be willing, to refer to the proposed Com- 
 mission. — I pray, &c. 
 
 -CHARLES FRANCIS ADAMS." '•i 
 
 A month later, Mr. Adams declined in behalf of 
 his Government, Earl Russell's proposal to submit 
 some of the claims pressed by each Government 
 against the other to the consideration of a joint 
 commission. Writing to the Earl of Clarendon, 
 Mr. Adams said : — 
 
 '• Legation of the United States, 
 
 •'London, November 21, 1865. 
 
 " My Lord, — I have the honor to inform your 
 Lordship that the notes elicited by the proposal for 
 a Commission to consider certain classes of claims 
 growing out of the late difficulties in the United 
 States, made by your predecessor, the Right Honor- 
 able Earl Russell, in his letter addressed to me on 
 August 30 last, have received the careful considera- 
 tion of my Government. 
 
 "Adhering, as my Government does, to the opinion 
 that the claims it has presented, which his Lordship 
 
 " The Official Correspondence on the Claims of the United 
 States in respect to the ''Alabama^ (Published by Earl Russell.) 
 London : Longmans, Green & Co., page 166.
 
 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. J 2) 
 
 has thought fit at the outset to exclude from consid- 
 eration, are just and reasonable, I am instructed to 
 say that it sees now no occasion for further delay in 
 giving a full answer to his Lordship's proposition, 
 
 " I am directed, therefore, to inform your Lordship 
 that the proposition of Her Majesty's Government 
 for the creating of a joint Commission is respectfully 
 declined. I pray, &c. 
 
 "CHARLES FRANCIS ADAMS." "^ 
 
 *'' The Official Correspondence on the Claims of the United States 
 in respect to the ''Alabama." (Published by Earl Russell.) 
 London : Longmans, Green & Co., page 223.
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 
 There was a growing, uneasy feeling in England 
 that Earl Russell's abrupt and absolute refusal to 
 discuss the question of liability by England for the 
 Alabama claims was a mistake.^^ In this view the 
 English were confirmed by the visit at several of their 
 ports of the double-turretted monitor, Miafitonomoh}^ 
 She crossed the Atlantic without trouble, bearing to 
 Russia on a special mission the Hon. Gustavus Vasa 
 Fox, the Assistant Secretary of the Navy. English 
 naval experts freely acknowledged that there was no 
 ship in the English navy that could compete with the 
 
 *■' This was evidenced in a letter, supposed to be written by Mr. 
 Olyphant, a member of Parliament, who had traveled in the 
 United States in 1865, that appeared in the London Times on 
 August 20th, 1866. It treated of the neutrality laws ; and, after 
 referring to the strong feeling of resentment that existed in the 
 United States against Great Britain on account of the fitting out 
 of the Confederate cruisers in English ports, deplored the rejec- 
 tion by Lord Russell of all attempts to settle the difficulties by 
 arbitration. 
 
 ^*' Narrative of the Mission to Russia, in 1866, of the Hon. 
 Gustavus Vasa Fox. New York : D. Appleton & Company, 
 1873, pages 39, 40, 43. 
 
 (74)
 
 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 75 
 
 Miajitonovioh ; and as there were a number of others 
 Hke her in the United States Navy, Great Britain, at 
 that time, was not mistress of the seas. An article in 
 the London Times, of July 17th, 1866, showed well 
 the impression the Miantonomoh made upon Eng- 
 land : — 
 
 "The royal visitors at Sheerness on Saturday, as 
 well as the numerous pleasure-parties flocking thither 
 on the same errand, saw a very extraordinary, and — 
 we wish we could not feel it — a portentous spectacle. 
 They saw a fabric, something between a ship and a 
 diving-bell — the Romans would have called it a tor- 
 toise — almost invisible, but what there was of it ugly, 
 at once invulnerable and irresistible, that had crossed 
 the Atlantic safely, and was anchored in our waters, 
 with the intention of visiting Russia. Round this 
 fearful invention were moored scores of big ships, not 
 all utter antiquities, but modern, for there were among 
 them steamships, generally screws, and therefore none 
 of them more than twenty years old. These ships 
 form a considerable portion of the navy of this great 
 maritime power, and there was not one of them that 
 the foreisfner could not have sent to the bottom in five 
 minutes, had his errand not been peaceful. There 
 was not one of these big ships that could have 
 avenged the loss of its companion, or saved itself 
 from immediately sharing its fate. In fact, the wolf
 
 76 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 
 
 was in the fold, and the whole flock was at its 
 
 ' ' 4.'S 
 
 mercy. 
 
 The advisability of reopening the subject became 
 by the latter half of 1866 a topic of general discus- 
 sion in the English press ; and the Government — 
 Lord Stanley had succeeded Earl Russell as For- 
 eign Secretary — was understood to favor an amica- 
 ble settlement of the question. The Prime Minis- 
 ter, Earl Derby, gave countenance to such a view 
 in a speech at the Mansion House. ^"^ The Times in 
 several leaders supported the view that Earl Russell 
 had rejected Mr. Adams's demands on rather narrow 
 grounds, and urged that the claims were " not for- 
 gotten by the American people," and that they never 
 would be forgotten until they were submitted to 
 " some impartial adjudication." ^' 
 
 Meanwhile Lord Stanley instructed the British 
 Minister at Washington to propose to the American 
 Government a limited form of arbitration : this dis- 
 
 ** Narrative of the Mission to Russia, in 1866, of the Hon. 
 Gustavus Vasa Fox. New York : D. Appleton & Company, 
 1873, pages 48, 49. 
 
 ** Papers relating to Foreign Affairs, accompanying the Amiual 
 Message of the President to the Second Session, Fortieth Congress. 
 Government Printing Office, 1868, part I., page 25. 
 
 *' The London Times, November 17th, 1866; January 4th, 
 1867.
 
 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. *J*J 
 
 patch, which was as follows, the English Minister, 
 Sir Frederick Bruce, communicated to Mr. Seward 
 on Januar)-' 7th, 1867 : — 
 
 "Foreign Office, November 30, 1866. 
 
 ■^ ^ ^ ^ :{: :{: 
 
 " It is impossible for Her Majesty's present ad- 
 visers to abandon the ground which has been taken 
 by former Governments, so far as to admit the liabil- 
 ity of this country for the claims then and now put for- 
 ward. They do not think that such liability has been 
 established according to international law or usage ; 
 and though sincerely and earnestly desiring a good 
 understanding with the United States, they cannot 
 consent to purchase even the advantage of that good 
 understanding by concessions which would at once 
 involve a censure on their predecessors in power, 
 and be an acknowledgment, in their view uncalled 
 for and unfounded, of wrong-doing on the part of the 
 British Executive and Legislature. But, on the other 
 hand, they are fully alive to the inconvenience which 
 arises from the existence of unsettled claims of this 
 character between two powerful and friendly Govern- 
 ments. They would be glad to settle this question, 
 if they can do so consistently with justice and national 
 self-respect ; and with this view they will not be dis- 
 inclined to adopt the principle of arbitration, provided
 
 78 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 
 
 that a fitting arbitrator can be found, and that an 
 agreement can be come to as to the points to which 
 arbitration shall apply. 
 
 "Of these two conditions, the former need not be 
 at present discussed : the latter is at once the more 
 important and the more pressing. 
 
 "With regard to the ground of complaint on which 
 most stress is laid in Mr. Seward's despatch, viz., the 
 alleged premature recognition of the Confederate 
 States as a belligerent Power, it is clear that no refer- 
 ence to arbitration is possible. The act complained 
 of, while it bears very remotely on the claims now in 
 question, is one as to which every State must be 
 held to be the sole judge of its duty ; and there is, so 
 far as I am aware, no precedent for any Government 
 consenting to submit to the judgment of a foreign 
 Power, or of an international Commission, the ques- 
 tion whether its policy has or has not been suitable 
 to the circumstances in which it was placed. 
 
 "The same objection, however, does not neces- 
 sarily apply to other questions which may be at issue 
 between the two Governments in reference to the 
 late war ; and with regard to these, subject to such 
 reservations as it may hereafter be found necessary to 
 make, I have to instruct you to ascertain from Mr. 
 Seward whether the United States' Government will 
 be prepared to accept the principle of arbitration, as
 
 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 79 
 
 proposed above. Should this offer be agreed to, it 
 will be for Mr. Seward to state what are the precise 
 points which, in his opinion, may be, and ought to be, 
 so dealt with. Any such proposal must necessarily 
 be the subject of deliberate consideration on the part 
 of Her Majesty's Government ; but they will be pre- 
 pared to entertain it in a friendly spirit, and with the 
 sincere desire that its adoption may lead to a renewal 
 of the good understanding formerly existing, and as 
 they hope, hereafter to exist, between Great Britain 
 
 and the United States. 
 
 ** I am, &c., 
 
 " STANLEY." -^ 
 
 January 12th, 1867, Mr. Seward wrote to Mr. 
 Adams that the United States would not object to 
 arbitration if the British Government desired it, but it 
 declined arbitration with the limitations that Lord 
 Stanley imposed.^^ 
 
 At the request of Professor James Lorimer of the 
 University of Edinburgh, Mr. John Westlake — a prom- 
 inent member of the English Bar and the Foreign 
 
 *^A Historical Account of the Neutrality of Great Britain 
 during the Atnerican Civil War by Mountague Bernard. Lon- 
 don : Longmans, Green, Reader & Dyer, 1870, page 483. 
 
 *' Papers relating to Foreign Affairs accompanying the Annual 
 Message of the President to the Second Session, Fortieth Congress. 
 Washington : Government Printing Office, 1868, part L, page 45.
 
 8o THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 
 
 Secretar)^ of the National Association for the Promo- 
 tion of Social Science — had reprinted — March 15th, 
 1867, in Social Science^ the bi-monthly publication of 
 the association — the letter that Mr. Thomas Balch of 
 the Philadelphia Bar, had addressed on March 31st, 
 1865, to the New York Tribune and which was 
 printed in that journal on May 13th following. 
 
 The editor of Social Science placed it under the 
 title, '' England and the United States," and said : 
 " We have been asked to re-publish the following im- 
 portant letter, addressed to the editor of the Nezv 
 York TiHbune." Among the members of the associa- 
 tion in 1867, were the Right Hon. Sir Stafford North- 
 cote, Bart., M. P., one of the negotiators of the Treaty 
 of Washington (1871), Earl Russell, Lord Brougham, 
 John Stuart Mill, M. P., John Laird, M. P. (formerly 
 of Laird Brothers, the builders of the Alada^mi), and 
 many other members of Parliament, David Dudley 
 Pield of the New York Bar, and Baron von Holtzen- 
 dorfif of Berlin. Soon after the republication of the 
 letter in Social Science, a number of continental ju- 
 rists — Edouard Laboulaye, Henry Moreau,^^Friederich 
 
 ^Social Science, March 15th, 1867, pages 201, 202 ; there is a 
 copy in the British Museum. 
 
 " "Paris 9 Oct. 1874. 
 
 "370 rue St. Honor6. 
 " My dear Balch, — Many thanks for your kind souve- 
 nir. I perused with the greatest interest and satisfaction your
 
 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 8 1 
 
 Kapp, von Holtzendorff and others — approved Mr. 
 Balch's proposal to refer the ''Alabama claims" to 
 the decision of an International Court of jurists.^^ Mr. 
 George H. Yeaman, then the United States Min- 
 ister at Copenhagen, also favored the idea.^^ At the 
 
 remarkable pamphlet on biteryiational Courts of Arbitration, and 
 found you have given full evidence of your paternal right on this 
 service which ended so happily both for America and England, 
 the quarrels springing from the Alabama matter and the San 
 Juan Boundaries. I thank you also for having mentioned my 
 name in such an honorable company, with the publicists who 
 have illustrated the dark points of International Law. 
 
 «li> it^ kl« *\f «1^ ^l' vX* ^1^ 
 
 *j» *y« ^j» *i* ^jH *[> *j* •"^ 
 
 "HENRY MOREAU, 
 
 "Avocat a la cour d^ Appeiy 
 
 This letter of Henry Moreau is written in English. Monsieur 
 Moreau was a distinguished member of the Paris Bar, of the 
 Society de la Legislation Comparee, and the author of La Poli- 
 tique Frangaise en Amerique, 1 861-1864 (Paris, 1864). 
 
 ^'^International Coia'ts of Arbitration. Edition of 1899, 
 page 15. 
 
 ^ Mr. Yeaman sent the following letter to Mr. Balch : — 
 
 "Legation of the United States, 
 
 "Copenhagen, 26 March, 1867. 
 
 " Dear Sir : — I have read with much interest your letter of 
 the 13 May, 1865, to the Editor of the New York Tribune, and 
 now republished in the ' Social Science ' for this month, which 
 you have kindly sent me. In that letter you propound what 
 seems to you the best method of amicably settling the pending 
 controversies between the United States and Great Britain. 
 
 " Omitting all discussion of the propriety and feasibility of now
 
 82 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 
 
 eleventh annual meeting of the Association, that was 
 held at Belfast in September, 1867, one of the subjects 
 discussed was : " Is it desirable to establish a general 
 system of International Arbitration, and if so on what 
 principle should it be organized?" Mr. Field presided 
 
 referring the matters in dispute to arbitration, the mode you ad- 
 vocate, I only desire to express my decided approbation of your 
 suggestion as to the mode of selecting and organizing tribunals of 
 arbitration, in cases where the powers interested agree to a refer- 
 ence. That the tribunal or arbiter shall not be the executive head 
 of a government, but a small number of jurists of acknowledged 
 character and learning. 
 
 ' ' I have never believed in the durability and efficacy of any 
 of the schemes for an international tribunal to settle all disputes 
 and prevent all wars. Whether it is well or unfortunate, it is 
 quite clear that in the present stage of the development and 
 practice of political science, there can be no reference but by 
 agreement, and the agreement must be had in each case as it 
 arises, and the tribunal or arbiter must be selected for the occa- 
 sion. 
 
 ' ' While this remains the only practicable mode of securing the 
 benefits of a reference, every sound reason is against the ordinary 
 plan of selecting a crowned, or other executive head of a govern- 
 ment, and sustains the plan of selecting a tribunal composed of 
 those who make the understanding and the elucidation of law, in 
 its largest sense as the science of justice, the study of their lives. 
 
 " It is no disparagement of those generally found at the heads 
 of the executive governments of the civilized world, to say that 
 they are not generally those best acquainted with jurisprudence ; 
 and that every government, of whatever form, nearly always con- 
 tains within its limits, a number of jurists more learned in their 
 profession and better qualified by their habits of thought to con- 
 duct such an investigation than the executive head of that govern-
 
 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 83 
 
 over the debate of this question. Lord Hobart and 
 David Ross of the British Bar read papers; a number 
 of members joined in a general discussion of the sub- 
 ject ; and Mr. Field at the close summed up the de- 
 bate. In speaking" of the possibilities of finding arbiters 
 
 ment. Neither is it any impeachment of their probity or their 
 desire to render a just judgment to say that executive rulers, are, 
 from their position, more apt to be influenced by motives of 
 policy, or of personal or political partiality, than a court of inter- 
 national jurists would be ; while some, who might render real 
 service in that capacity, would occasionally decline to act on ac- 
 count of the delicate embarrassment in which any action might 
 involve them. And those who consent to act, no doubt often re- 
 fer the case, for investigation and advice, to a subject of their own 
 selection, one unknown to the parties, at least not agreed upon 
 by them ; and though the award may come formally as from the 
 crown, it is really the opinion of some person not embraced in the 
 reference and who neither incurs blame nor makes reputation by 
 his judgment. Thus the parties are put in the position of abiding 
 by the award of one selected for them by another ; they know not 
 what influenced the selection, and however learned the advisor may 
 be, the parties have not had the advantage of a consultation and 
 comparison of views. These objections manifestly do not apply 
 to the case of an umpire selected in advance by referees in view 
 of the possibility of their own disagreement. 
 
 ' ' Thus the advantages of learning, and of freedom from all 
 improper influences are on the side of a select committee or board 
 of jurists. From their breasts selfishness, jealousy, partiality 
 and refined poHcy, as applied to the matter before them, are 
 all excluded. They work out their conclusions in the light of 
 usage, precedent, right reason, natural right, science. What of 
 ambition they may have is constrained to be innocent and lauda- 
 ble, for it can only be gratified by building a reputation, which, in
 
 84 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 
 
 Other than crowned heads or executives of Republics, 
 he referred to the proposals of Mr. Balch and Mr. 
 Lieber. Mr. Field said : "I think we may say that it 
 is agreed on all hands that it is desirable there should 
 be a system of arbitration, and if a system of arbitra- 
 tion, a general one, by which, I suppose, is meant that 
 
 their vocation, can have no other foundation than justice and 
 truth. The judgments of such tribunals would be sought for and 
 recognized as the highest evidence of what the law is ; and they 
 would develop, polish, and make symmetrical the law of nations, 
 as the judgments of Hardwick, Eldon, and Mansfield have done 
 the law of England, and as the judgments of Kent, Marshall and 
 Story have done the law in the United States. 
 
 ' ' I have been much impressed with your observation that this 
 ' would be no trifling event in the march of Democratic Freedom.' 
 It would accelerate and illustrate the progress of democratic free- 
 dom, a freedom that is far more secure against license than any 
 scheme of personal government or irresponsible power can be, 
 because it would be a tribute to the domination of mind, intelli- 
 gence, reason, science, over accident, force and tradition in the 
 affairs of men. The struggle for that domination is the begin- 
 ning, and its full consummation is the highest and fairest fruit of 
 democracy. If that element in government has been the most 
 rare and the least successful, it is because that while appearing to 
 be the most simple, it is really the most difficult, and it is the 
 most difficult because the conditions of its success are the highest 
 and the least frequent among men. 
 
 "Very respectfully, 
 
 ' ' Your obedient servant 
 
 GEO. H. YEAMAN. 
 
 " Thomas Balch, Esq., 
 "Paris."
 
 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 85 
 
 it should be agreed among civilized nations that war 
 should not take place between them until they had 
 offered to submit the matter in disagreement to an 
 impartial arbiter. Then it is said, however, how is an 
 impartial arbiter to be found? I will say that it seems 
 to me we are not confined in that to princes or gov- 
 ernments. In this very matter of the Alabama, it has 
 been suggested that, if arbitration is agreed upon, the 
 question should be referred to the arbitration of the 
 most eminent jurists in the German universities,^ as 
 persons having the requisite knowledge, as having by 
 their position no cause for partiality, and as having 
 characters to maintain, which will be guarantee for the 
 efforts they will make to give a just decision. It has 
 also been suggested that in the dispute between Eng- 
 land and America relative to the Alabama, the Gov- 
 ernment of Switzerland should be arbiter.^^ I am 
 confident impartial persons can be found somewhere 
 in the world to decide between two nations." ^*^ 
 
 The English press gave the subject more and more 
 attention. At the end of January, 1868, Mr. Westlake 
 
 "See page 63. 
 ^^See page 48. 
 
 **For the discussion, including the remarks of Mr, Field, see 
 Transactions of the National Association for the Promotion of 
 Social Science. Belfast Meeting, 1867. Edited by G. W. 
 Hastings, LL. D., London, 1868, pages 254-259.
 
 86 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 
 
 wrote a long letter upon "the Alabama Claims" to 
 the Editor of the London Daily News ;" it was pub- 
 lished in that paper on January 24th, and was as 
 follows : — 
 
 '* The Alabama Claims. 
 
 " To the Editor of the Daily Netvs. 
 
 " Sir — Will you allow me a few words about the 
 Alabama Claims ? Whether the principle of arbitra- 
 tion should have been admitted is, perhaps, not quite 
 so clear as its advocates suppose, but, since our 
 Foreign Secretary has admitted it, I apprehend that 
 both the honor and the interests of the country re- 
 quire that such admission should not be practically 
 withdrawn, through a difference about the form of the 
 issues, which I believe might be easily settled, if 
 some misapprehension that still seems to exist about 
 them were removed. 
 
 "In whatever form the reference be made, the 
 points for the arbiter to consider, if he is to give a 
 just deliverance, are these : — 
 
 "I. Is England liable to the United States in 
 damages for the sailing of the Alabama from the 
 Mersey ? 
 
 "2. Are those countries which received the Ala- 
 
 57 
 
 The London Daily News, Friday, January 24th, 1868, page 
 5, columns 2 and 3 : there is a copy in the British Museum.
 
 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 87 
 
 bama in their ports liable to the United States in 
 damages for so doing? 
 
 "3. If the general answer to the second question 
 should be in the negative, then does it make any dif- 
 ference in the case of England that the expedition of 
 the Alabama from Liverpool was an offense against 
 England on the part of the so-called Confederate 
 States? That is, was it competent to England, as 
 against the United States, to condone that offense, 
 instead of avenging it by arresting the Alabama? 
 
 "4. If any of the above questions should be an- 
 swered in favor of the claimants, then to assess the 
 damages payable by England, having a special refer- 
 ence to the second question, and to the facts as to the 
 ports in which the Alabam.a was received. 
 
 " Now, it is supposed that, while upon the second 
 question, the arbitrator would have to decide on the 
 propriety of the Queen's proclamation, by which the 
 fact of a war existing in America was recognized ; and 
 it is said to be derogatory that we should submit the 
 policy of this country to any such decision. I will first 
 observe that it is not the propriety in policy of the 
 Queen's proclamation, but its justifiableness in law, 
 that can even indirectly come in question ; and if it 
 is derogatory to refer that point, then it must also 
 be derogatory to refer the justifiableness in law of 
 those acts of omission through which the British
 
 88 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 
 
 government is charged with having rendered the 
 Alabama s escape from the Mersey possible. But, 
 further, the proclamation can, upon the second ques- 
 tion, in no way come before the arbitrator at all, not- 
 withstanding that his decision may indirectly show 
 what he would have thought of it, if it had been 
 before him. For the deliverance must be, whether 
 England is liable in damages for receiving the Ala- 
 bama in British ports ; and one must be ignorant of 
 the first elements of law to suppose that if England 
 would have been so liable independently of the proc- 
 lamation, we can escape such liability by means of 
 the proclamation, a purely British act to which the 
 United States were not a party. The law officer, 
 secretary of state, or minister, who may be charged 
 with preparing the British case to be laid before the 
 arbitrator, will have to show a similar state of facts to 
 that which, on this side of the Atlantic, has always 
 been deemed to justify the proclamation. I say a 
 similar, not the same, because he will have this ad- 
 vantage — that he need not confine himself to the 
 facts which existed at the date when this proclamation 
 was issued ; but may include those which existed at 
 the time when the Alabama was received in British 
 ports. It will also be open to him to use all those 
 arguments which, with regard to the proclamation, 
 have been drawn from the blockade. He may show
 
 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 89 
 
 that the United States had captured neutral vessels 
 beyond a marine league from shore, or within that 
 distance from the coast of which they were not in 
 possession, and had also announced that they were 
 prepared to make such captures, and had by such 
 announcement interfered with neutral commerce to a 
 greater extent than even by the captures themselves ; 
 and he may argue that, as such captures are per- 
 mitted only by the laws of war, the United States are 
 estopped from denying that the Alabama was a law- 
 ful belligerent. In short, the business of our repre- 
 sentative, so far as concerns the second question, will 
 be to show that the Alabama bore a lawful belligerent 
 commission, justifying her reception in neutral ports ; 
 or, if not, that at least the United States are estopped 
 from saying that she did not. And if he refers for 
 this purpose to the Queen's proclamation, not only 
 will he absurdly pretend to bind the claimants by that 
 to which they were not a party, but he will abandon 
 the impregnable ground on which a proclamation 
 itself has always been justified — namely, that it treated 
 the Confederates as the belligerents which they were, 
 but neither did nor could make them belligerents. As 
 to any chance which there may be of the proclamation 
 being drawn into question on the first head, as having 
 incited to the building and sending out of the Alabama, 
 I think we may safely leave that pretention to the
 
 90 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 
 
 summary justice which any honest arbitrator, — and if 
 we do not believe him honest, we shall not accept 
 him — will do upon it if it should be put forward. It 
 would be beneath us to stipulate the exclusion of such 
 a plea ; besides that, if any one really believes there 
 is a point in it, we could no more claim to exclude it 
 than any other point. 
 
 "I have already alluded to the question whether the 
 principle of arbitration should have been admitted in 
 this case : the considerations which arise on that point 
 can be appreciated now the issues have been placed 
 distinctly before the reader. International arbitration 
 is of great value in disputes of fact, as in boundary 
 cases ; sometimes also in those cases from which un- 
 fortunately far the larger number of wars arise, that 
 do not turn on international law at all ; but on what 
 some nation deems to be necessary for its honor or 
 security. It is of use, again, where claims, of which 
 the principle is admitted, are extravagant in amount, 
 or are pushed with unnecessary harshness. But it is 
 a long step to take from those cases, to admit that 
 arbitration is the true remedy in disputes as to inter- 
 national law. The law declared on such a reference 
 would be open to all the objections which lie to judge- 
 made law in municipal jurisprudence, with the ad- 
 ditional one of the difficulty in finding a good arbitra- 
 tor. For instance, if the dispute relates to maritime
 
 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. QI 
 
 law an inland power will not fully appreciate its prac- 
 tical bearings, and a maritime power will probably, 
 without actual dishonesty, be influenced by its own 
 interests, which can hardly fail to be affected by the 
 question one way or the other. It were much to be 
 desired that disputes about international law should 
 be referred to congresses of the great powers, who 
 might decide them in a legislative rather than a judi- 
 cial manner. 
 
 "The first question in the present case — that of the 
 liability of a nation to pay damages for an escape like 
 the Alabama s from the Mersey — is a difficult and not 
 unimportant legal one. Supposing the arbitrator to 
 be of opinion that the designs of the British govern- 
 ment were perfectly fair, and its conduct on the whole 
 successful in preventing the escape of cruisers, so that 
 no casus belli existed, he will then have to say whether 
 the obligation of a nation with regard to the neutrality 
 of its soil amounts to an absolute insurance of such 
 neutrality, so that damages may be claimed for a 
 breach, even though the case be such as would not 
 justify a war, if damages were offered. If this question 
 were now raised for the first time it would be much 
 easier to answer it in the affirmative than it is under 
 the actual circumstances — that the United States them- 
 selves repudiated such an obligation when claimed 
 against them by Portugal, in respect of the captures
 
 92 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 
 
 made during the South American civil war, by cruisers 
 which sailed from their ports. For the point to be re- 
 ferred to an arbitrator instead of being declared or en- 
 acted in Congress, is the same thing as if a colony, 
 instead of deciding in legislative assembly whether 
 Lord Campbell's Act, whereby the liabilities of rail- 
 way companies were so greatly increased, should be 
 adopted, were, after the occurrence of numerous ac- 
 cidents, suddenly to refer the question of its adoption 
 to the decision of an arbitrator on the next accident. 
 The third question is also a legal one of novelty and 
 difficulty, and may turn out to be the most important 
 in the reference. But in the present case it appears 
 to me to be now too late to put forward these con- 
 siderations, though note may be taken of them for 
 the future. A reference of the Alabama claims was 
 refused by Earl Russell, on grounds which can 
 hardly be deemed satisfactory, and has since been 
 conceded in substance by Lord Stanley. It is not 
 likely that the reference of legal questions to an arbi- 
 trator, wrong as it may be in principle, will in the 
 actual instance lead to great mischief. The issues 
 are not really difficult to settle, and involve nothing 
 derogatory to England. The proclamation about 
 which so much has been said is not directly involved, 
 while an indirect judgment on it is so necessarily in- 
 volved in the question of the Alaba^na s commission,
 
 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 93 
 
 as justifying her reception in British ports, that it can- 
 not be evaded if the claims are to be referred at all. 
 The only practical questions, then, which appear to 
 me to remain, are those of settling the form of the 
 reference and choosing the arbitrator; and to these I 
 earnestly desire that both governments should address 
 themselves with all candor and sincerity. Let the 
 issues be clear, precise, and appropriate, so the deliv- 
 erance of them will most tend to take out the sting 
 from the feelings of both sides, and to leave interna- 
 tional law, and the habits of conducting international 
 relations, in a better plight and condition than that in 
 which they were found. 
 
 "I am, &c., 
 
 -JOHN WESTLAKE.^« 
 "Lincoln's-Inn, Jan. 23." 
 
 ^John Westlake, Q. C, since 1888 Professor of International 
 Law in Cambridge University, published in 1858 A Treatise on 
 Private International Law, or the Conflict of Laws, which he 
 rewrote entirely in 1880; in 1894 he published Chapters on the 
 Principles of International Law. He was the Foreign Secretary 
 of the National Association for the Promotion of Social Science, 
 and President of its Jurisprudence Department at the Birmingham 
 meeting in 1884. He is a member, and was President at the 
 Cambridge meeting in 1895, of V Institut de Droit International.
 
 CHAPTER V. 
 
 On the 6th of March, 1868, there was a debate 
 in the House of Commons on the Alabama claims. 
 Mr. Shaw-Lefevre (Liberal), who during the Civil 
 War sympathized with the Union cause, moved 
 an address calling for the publication of papers 
 relating to the Alabama claims. The Foreign Sec- 
 retary, Lord Stanley, Mr. W. E. Forster, Mr. 
 Mill and most of the members who spoke, fa- 
 vored, at the same time that they insisted on the 
 safeguarding of the rights of England, the adop- 
 tion of a conciliatory policy towards the United 
 States.^'-* 
 
 In June, 1868, President Johnson appointed Mr. 
 Reverdy Johnson, of Maryland, to succeed Mr. Adams 
 who had resigned in December, 1867, but had con- 
 tinued until May, 1868, at the post he had filled 
 with such marked ability and success, and main- 
 tained during the course of difficult negotiations 
 the high diplomatic traditions left him by an hon- 
 ored sire and grandsire. Mr. Johnson arrived in 
 
 ^'The London Times, March 7th, 1868, page 6. 
 
 (94)
 
 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 95 
 
 England with instructions to seek for an amicable 
 arrangement of several vexatious questions, such 
 as naturalization and the San Juan water boundary, 
 then existing between the two countries. He ne- 
 gotiated for many months with Lord Stanley and 
 his successor in the Foreign Office, Lord Claren- 
 don. At length, on January 14th, 1869, the John- 
 son-Clarendon convention providing for the settlement 
 of the Alabama claims was signed. It provided that a 
 commission of four members should sit at Washington, 
 that each power should name two commissioners, that 
 all the claims of subjects of either country against the 
 other nation should be submitted to the four commis- 
 sioners ; and that if in any case the commissioners 
 failed to come to an agreement, they should choose 
 an umpire, but if they did not agree in their selection, 
 then each side should name an umpire, and then from 
 these two persons an umpire should be chosen for 
 each particular case in which the commissioners failed 
 to agree. 
 
 When the convention came up for ratification in the 
 United States, it met with strong opposition. Charles 
 Sumner, Senator from Massachusetts, the Chairman 
 of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, delivered, in ex- 
 ecutive session, on April 13th, 1869, a strong speech 
 against ratifying the convention. Senator Sumner 
 first of all said, that the Committee would not hesitate
 
 96 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 
 
 to advise the Senate to reject the treaty and then he 
 went on to say : — ^ 
 
 " A treaty which, instead of removing an existing 
 grievance, leaves it for heart-burning and rancor, can- 
 not be considered a settlement of pending questions 
 between two nations. It may seem to settle them, but 
 does not. It is nothingr but a snare. And such is 
 the character of the treaty now before us. The mas- 
 sive grievance under which our country suffered for 
 years is left untouched ; the painful sense of wrong 
 planted in the national heart is allowed to remain. 
 For all this there is not one word of regret or even of 
 recognition ; nor is there any semblance of compensa- 
 tion. It cannot be for the interest of either party 
 that such a treaty should be ratified. It cannot pro- 
 mote the interest of the United States, for we natur- 
 ally seek justice as the foundation of a good under- 
 standing with Great Britain ; nor can it promote the 
 interest of Great Britain, which must also seek a real 
 settlement of all pending questions. Surely I do not 
 err when I say that a wise statesmanship, whether on 
 
 ®° Appendix to the Congressional Globe : Containing Speeches, 
 Important State Papers and the Laws of the First Session, Forty - 
 first Congress. City of Washington : Office of the Congressional 
 Globe, 1869, pages 21-26, passim. 
 
 Speech of Hon. Charles Sumner on the fohnso7i- Clarendon 
 Treaty for the Settlement of Claims. , Delivered in the U. S. 
 Senate. Boston, 1870.
 
 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 97 
 
 our side or on the other side, must apply itself to find 
 the real root of evil, and then, with courage tempered 
 by candor and moderation, see that it is extirpated. 
 This is for the interest of both parties, and anything 
 short of it is a failure. 
 
 H: 4: H: 4: ^ ^ 
 
 "If we look at the negotiation, which immediately 
 preceded the treaty, we find little to commend. You 
 have it on your table. I think I am not mistaken 
 when I say, that it shows a haste which finds few pre- 
 cedents in diplomacy, but which is explained by the 
 anxiety to reach a conclusion before the advent of a 
 new Administration. Mr. Seward and Mr. Reverdy 
 Johnson both unite in this unprecedented activity, 
 using the Atlantic cable freely. I should not object to 
 haste or to the freest use of the cable, if the result 
 were such as could be approved; but, considering the 
 character of the transaction, and how completely the 
 treaty conceals the main cause of offence, it seems as 
 if the honorable negotiators were engaged in huddling 
 something out of sight. 
 
 "The treaty has for its model the Claims Conven- 
 tion of 1853. To take such a Convention as a model 
 was a strange mistake. This Convention was for the 
 settlement of outstanding claims of American citizens 
 on Great Britain, and of British subjects on the 
 United States, which had arisen since the treaty of
 
 98 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 
 
 Ghent in 18 15. It concerned individuals onl)' and 
 not the nation. It was not in any respect poHtical ; 
 nor was it to remove any sense of national wrong. 
 To take such a Convention as the model for a treaty, 
 which was to determine a national grievance of tran- 
 scendent importance in the relations of two countries, 
 marked on the threshold an insensibility to the true 
 nature of the difference to be settled. At once it 
 belittled the work to be done. 
 
 "An inspection of the treaty shows how from be- 
 ginning to end it is merely for the settlement of indi- 
 vidual claims on both sides, putting both batches on 
 an equality — so that the sufferers by the misconduct of 
 England may be counterbalanced by British blockade- 
 runners. It opens with a preamble, which, instead of 
 announcing the unprecedented question between the 
 two countries, simply refers to individual claims which 
 have arisen since 1853 — which was the last time of 
 settlement — some of which are still pending and re- 
 main unsettled. Who would believe that, under these 
 words of common-place, was concealed the unsettled 
 difference which has already so deeply stirred the 
 American people, and is destined until finally ad- 
 justed to occupy the attention of the civilized world ? 
 
 "The provisions of the treaty are for the trial of 
 these cases. A commission is constituted, which is
 
 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 99 
 
 empowered to choose an arbitrator ; but, in the event 
 of a failure to agree, the arbitrator shall be deter- 
 mined 'by lot' out of two persons named by each 
 side. Even if this aleatory proceeding were a proper 
 device in the umpirage of private claims, it is strangely 
 inconsistent with the solemnity which belongs to the 
 present question.^^ The moral sense is disturbed by 
 such a process at any stage of the trial ; nor is it sat- 
 isfied by the subsequent provision for the selection of 
 a sovereign or head of a friendly State as arbitrator. 
 
 " The treaty not merely makes no provision for the 
 determination of the great question, but it seems to 
 provide expressly that it shall never hereafter be pre- 
 sented." 
 
 Then Summer went on to state the case against 
 England. He showed how the Civil War began, how 
 
 "Sumner wrote on January 13th, 1867, to George Bemis : — 
 ' ' There are difficulties in the way of finding an arbitrator. 
 What power would dare to decide against England ? What 
 power would dare to decide against the United States ? Whom 
 will England accept that we will accept? On another occasion 
 Lord Lyons told me that England would accept Switzerland, and 
 I drew up and reported a resolution authorizing the submission. 
 But the war soon diverted attention, and that resolution was 
 never acted on. It was on the San Juan difficulty ; but there Eng- 
 land was anxious simply for a settlement. What say you to a 
 commission of wise men ? Who shall they be ? Will the country 
 be contented with such a submission ? Seward thinks not. ' ' 
 Memoir and Letters of Charles Sumner, by Edward L. Pierce. 
 Boston, 1893. Volume IV., page 312.
 
 lOO THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 
 
 England in hot haste recognized the Confederate 
 States as belHgerents, and how the Alabama was built 
 and put to sea. He continued : — 
 
 "The case is not yet complete. The Alabama, 
 whose building was in defiance of law, international 
 and municipal, whose escape was 'a scandal and re- 
 proach,'^" and whose enlistment of her crew was a fit 
 sequel to the rest, after being supplied with an arma- 
 ment and with a rebel commander, entered upon her 
 career of piracy. Mark now a new stage of com- 
 plicity. Constantly the pirate ship was within reach 
 of British cruisers, and from time to time within the 
 shelter of British ports. For six days unmolested 
 she enjoyed the pleasant hospitality of Kingston, in 
 Jamaica, obtaining freely the coal and other supplies 
 so necessary to her vocation. But no British cruiser, 
 no British magistrate ever arrested the offending ship, 
 
 *^ In a letter to Lord Lyons, dated March 27th, 1863, Earl 
 Russell, in relating a conversation he had with Mr. Adams, wrote 
 among other things : — 
 
 ' ' I said that the Cabinet were of opinion that the law [the 
 English municipal law] was sufficient ; but that legal evidence 
 could not always be procured. That the British Government 
 had done everything in its power to execute the law ; but I 
 admitted that the cases of the Alabama and Oreto were a scandal, 
 and, in some degree, a reproach to our laws." 
 
 The Official Correspo?ide?ice 07i the Claims of the United States 
 in respect to the 'Alabama.^ (Published by Earl Russell). Lon- 
 don : Longmans, Green & Co., 1867, page 67.
 
 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. TO I 
 
 whose voyage was a continuing 'scandal and reproach' 
 to the British Government. 
 
 " The excuse for this strange license is a curious 
 technicality, as if a technicality could avail in this case 
 at any stage. Borrowing a phrase from that master 
 of Admiralty jurisprudence, Sir William Scott, it is 
 said that the ship 'deposited' her original sin at the 
 conclusion of her voyage, so that afterwards she was 
 blameless. But the Alabama never concluded her 
 voyage until she sank under the guns of the Kear- 
 sarge, because she never had a port of her own. She 
 was no better than the Flying Dutchman and so long 
 as she sailed was liable for that original sin, which had 
 impregnated every plank with an indelible dye. No 
 British cruiser could allow her to proceed, no British 
 port could give her shelter, without renewing the com- 
 plicity of England. 
 
 "The Alabama case begins with a fatal concession, 
 by which the rebels were enabled to build ships in 
 England, and then to sail them, without being liable 
 as pirates ; it next shows itself in the building of the 
 ship, in the armament, and in the escape, with so much 
 of negligence on the part of the British Government 
 as to constitute sufferance, if not connivance; and then, 
 again, the case reappears in the welcome and hospi- 
 tality accorded by British cruisers, and by the magis- 
 trates of British ports, to the pirate ship, when her
 
 I02 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 
 
 evasion from British jurisdiction was well known. 
 Thus, at three different stages, the British Govern- 
 ment is compromised : first, in the concession of ocean 
 belligerency, on which all depended ; secondly, in the 
 negligence which allowed the evasion of the ship, in 
 order to enter upon the hostile expedition for which 
 she was built, manned, armed, and equipped; and 
 thirdly, in the open complicity, which, after this evasion, 
 gave her welcome hospitality and supplies in British 
 ports. Thus her depredations and burnings, making 
 the ocean blaze, all proceeded from England, which 
 by three different acts lighted the torch. To England 
 must be traced, also, all the wide-spread consequences 
 which ensued. 
 
 "I take the case of the Alabama, because it is the 
 best known, and because the building, equipment, and 
 escape of this ship were under circumstances most ob- 
 noxious to judgment ; but it will not be forgotten, that 
 there were consort ships, built under the shelter of 
 that fatal proclamation, issued in such an eclipse of 
 just principles, and, like the ships it unloosed, ' rigged 
 with curses dark.' One after the other, ships were 
 built ; one after the other, they escaped on their 
 errand; and, one after the other, they enjoyed the 
 immunities of British ports. Audacity reached its 
 height when iron-clad rams were built, and the per- 
 versity of the British Government became still more
 
 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. IO3 
 
 conspicuous by its long refusal to arrest these de- 
 structive engines of war, destined to be employed 
 against the United States. This protracted hesitation, 
 where the consequences were so menacing, is a part 
 of the case. 
 
 " It is plain that the ships were built under the safe- 
 guard of this ill-omened proclamation ; which stole 
 forth from the British shores, and afterward enjoyed 
 the immunities of British ports, were not only British 
 in origin, but British in equipment, British in arma- 
 ment, and British in crews. They were British in 
 every respect, except in their commanders, who were 
 rebel, and one of these, as his ship was sinking, owed 
 his safety to a British yacht, symbolizing the omni- 
 present support of England. British sympathies were 
 active in their behalf. The cheers of a British pas- 
 senger ship crossing the path of the Alabama en- 
 couraged the work of piracy, and the cheers of the 
 House of Commons encouraged the builder of the 
 Alabatna, while he defended what he had done and 
 exclaimed, in taunt to him who is now an illustrious 
 member of the British cabinet, John Bright, that he 
 ' would rather be handed down to posterity as the 
 builder of a dozen Alabamas, than be the author of 
 the speeches of that gentleman ' crying up ' the insti- 
 tutions of the United States, which the builder of the 
 Alabama, rising with his theme, denounced ' as of no
 
 I04 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION, 
 
 value whatever and as reducing the very name of 
 liberty to an utter absurdity,' while the cheers of the 
 House of Commons echoed back his words. Thus 
 from beginning to end, from the fatal proclamation to 
 the rejoicing of the accidental ship, and the rejoicing 
 of the House of Commons, was this hostile expedi- 
 tion protected and encouraged by England. The 
 same spirit, which dictated the swift concession of 
 belligerency, with all its deadly incidents, ruled the 
 hour, entering into and possessing every pirate 
 ship," 
 
 Then Senator Sumner spoke of the reparation due 
 from England to the United States, He estimated the 
 losses that the Confederate cruisers inflicted on the 
 tonnage of the United States at about $15,000,000. 
 Next he went on to describe the "national claims" 
 or " indirect claims ;" and said : — 
 
 'T refer, of course, to the national losses caused by 
 the prolongation of the war and traceable directly to 
 England. Pardon me if I confess the regret with 
 which I touch this prodigious item ; for I know well 
 the depth of feeling which it is calculated to stir. But 
 I cannot hesitate. It belongs to the case. No candid 
 person, who studies this eventful period, can doubt 
 that the Rebellion was originally encouraged by hope 
 of support from England ; that it was strengthened at 
 once by the concession of belligerent rights on the
 
 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. IO5 
 
 ocean ; that it was fed to the end by British supplies ; 
 that it was encouraged by every well-stored British 
 ship that was able to defy our blockade ; that it was 
 quickened into renewed life with every report from the 
 British pirates, flaming anew with every burning ship ; 
 nor can it be doubted that without British interven- 
 tion the Rebellion would have soon succumbed under 
 the well-directed efforts of the National Government. 
 Not weeks or months, but years were added in this 
 way to our war, so full of the most costly sacrifice. The 
 subsidies which in other times England contributed to 
 continental wars were less effective than the aid and 
 comfort which she contributed to the Rebellion. It 
 cannot be said too often that the naval base of the 
 Rebellion was not in America, but in England. The 
 blockade-runners and the pirate ships were all Eng- 
 lish. * * * Mr. Cobden boldly said in the House 
 of Commons that England made war from her shores 
 on the United States, 'with an amount of damage to 
 that country greater than in many ordinary wars.' 
 According to this testimony, the conduct of England 
 was war; but it must not be forgotten that this war 
 was carried on at our sole costs. The United States 
 paid for a war waged by England upon the National 
 Unity." 
 
 After referring to " the multitudinous blockade- 
 runners" that issued from English ports and stating
 
 I06 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 
 
 the rule of damages in the case, Senator Sumner sum- 
 marized the case against England thus : — 
 
 "Applying this rule to the present case, the way is 
 clear. Every British pirate was 2i. public nuisance, in- 
 volving the British Government, which must respond 
 in damages, not only to the individuals who have suf- 
 fered but also to the National Government, acting as 
 paterfamilias for the common good of all the people. 
 
 " Thus by an analogy of the Common Law, in the 
 case of a public nuisance, also by the strict rule of the 
 Roman Law, which enters so largely into International 
 Law, and even by the rule of the Common Law relat- 
 ing to damages, all losses, whether individual or 
 national, are the just subjects of claim. It is not I 
 who say this ; it is the law. The colossal sum-total 
 may be seen, not only in the losses of individuals, but 
 in those national losses, caused by the destruction of 
 our commerce, the prolongation of the war, and the 
 expense of the blockade, all of which may be traced 
 directly to England; 
 
 ' illud ab uno 
 ' Corpore, et ex unapendebat origine bellum.' 
 
 Three times is this liability fixed ; first, by the con- 
 cession of ocean belligerency, opening to the rebels 
 ship-yards, foundries, and manufactories, and giving to 
 them a flag on the ocean ; secondly, by the organiza-
 
 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. IO7 
 
 tlon of hostile expeditions, which, by admissions in 
 ParHament, were nothing less than piratical war on 
 the United States with England as the naval base ; 
 and, thirdly, by welcome, hospitality, and supplies ex- 
 tended to these pirate ships in ports of the British 
 empire. Show either of these and the liability of 
 England is complete. Show the three and this Power 
 is bound by a triple cord.'" 
 
 63 
 
 ®^ Moorfield Storey, for many years closely connected with Sen- 
 ator Sumner, says of this speech : — 
 
 "Notwithstanding its few pacific words the speech seemed 
 hardly calculated to promote a settlement. England had re- 
 luctantly consented to arbitrate, and now her most conspicuous 
 friend among American statesmen replied that her concession 
 was idle, and that the claims of the United States exceeded in 
 character and magnitude anything that her statesmen had 
 imagined possible. In it Sumner took no new position ; his 
 opinions had already been stated fully, and in fact our govern- 
 ment had taken the same ground ; but the English had not re- 
 alized what we meant. As Sumner wrote to Lieber somewhat 
 later : ' I have made no demand, not a word of apology, not 
 a dollar ! nor have I menaced, suggested, or thought of war. 
 * * * My object was simply to expose our wrongs as plainly, 
 but as gently, as possible. * * * To my mind our first duty 
 is to make England see what she has done to us.' 
 
 ' ' Sumner accomplished this object completely. He instructed 
 England, and he satisfied America. 
 
 >^ v^ slf \^ *J^ ^U «1^ 
 
 *J» 1* 'T* ■'•* 'T* *T* '^ 
 
 ' ' Two years later Sir Stafford Northcote wrote to Mr. Sumner, 
 after reading the speech again : ' Though I must own your 
 speech was somewhat sharp, I verily believe that it taught us a
 
 I08 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 
 
 The Senate refused, with only one dissenting vote, 
 to ratify the treaty. In communicating in a dispatch 
 of April 19th, 1869, to Mr. Reverdy Johnson the re- 
 jection of the treaty, Hamilton Fish, the new Secretary 
 of State, wrote that President Grant was not without 
 hope that the two countries might yet find an amicable 
 and satisfactory means of adjusting the controversy. 
 When Mr. Johnson communicated this to Lord Clar- 
 endon, the latter said that Her Majesty's Government 
 desired that all difficulties between the two nations 
 should be settled honorably, and that the relations 
 between the two countries might be most friendly and 
 amicable.^ 
 
 In May 1 869, Mr. Thomas Balch, who had returned 
 home for a time, discussed at Washington, with 
 Senator Sumner^ and also with Secretary Fish and 
 
 valuable lesson in that respect, and that we may say of it, fidelia 
 vulnera aviantis.^ 
 
 " Mr. Sumner's course was justified by the event, and the 
 words, which seemed likely to prevent an adjustment, paved the 
 way to a real settlement as he intended." Charles Sumner, by 
 Moorfield Storey. Boston and New York, 1900, pages 367, 368. 
 
 ^Correspondence concerning Claims Against Great Britain. 
 Volume III. Washington: Government Printing Office, 1870, 
 pages 786, 787. 
 
 ®^ Senator Sumner and Mr. Balch were personal friends for 
 many years, and the following letters throw light on Senator 
 Sumner's views upon the Alabama question and English opinion, 
 after the rejection of the Johnson-Clarendon Convention.
 
 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. IO9 
 
 President Grant,^*" the possibilities of settling the Ala- 
 bama controversy in a peaceable manner, and urged 
 upon all three the submission of the whole question 
 to the decision of a Court of Arbitration composed 
 
 "Washington, 
 
 "24th May, '69. 
 " Dear Mr. Balch, 
 
 " I have read these enclosures with interest. I remember Mr. 
 B.'s father — as 'lead Beaumont,' and was familiar at the time 
 with his most expensive party contest. 
 
 ' ' The view of yr. correspondent is sensible. I now under- 
 stand what D' Israeli meant when he called 'that wild 
 
 man.' But all England seems to be ' wild.' 
 
 ' ' Sincerely yours, 
 
 "CHARLES SUMNER." 
 
 Washington, 
 
 " ist June, '69. 
 
 ' ' Thanks for this letter, which shows returning reason in Eng- 
 land. Is it not strange, the scene of the last month? Will 
 Englishmen ever do me justice ? 
 
 "Ever Yours, 
 
 "CHARLES SUMNER." 
 
 "Washington, 
 
 "6th June, '69. 
 " My Dear Mr. Balch, 
 
 ' ' Calm the English and teach them to be just. Us veuleut 
 Hre litres et ne savejit pas ttre justes. These were the words of 
 old Sieyes. 
 
 "Think of their press attacking a speech for weeks which it 
 
 66 
 
 Manuscript notes of Mr. Balch.
 
 no THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 
 
 exclusively of jurists ; he deprecated also any further 
 attempt to press the question of the recognition in 
 the Oueen's Proclamation of the Confederate States 
 as belligerents.^' 
 
 never laid before its readers. Of course, every article was a mis- 
 representation. « ' Yours sincerely, 
 
 "CHARLES SUMNER." 
 
 "Washington, 
 
 " nth June, '69. 
 "Dear Mr. Balch, 
 
 ******* 
 
 ' ' Was there ever such a foolish six weeks as England has 
 passed misrepresenting a speech which their press did not publish ! 
 Their case is not improved. Sooner or later they will be obliged 
 to listen. " Sincerely yours, 
 
 "CHARLES SUMNER." 
 
 "Washington, 
 
 " 15th June, '69. 
 " Dear Mr. Balch, 
 
 "The Seward dispatch is well known. It is one of those 
 early docts. which show that he did not understand the case any 
 more than the English understand it now. Was England ever 
 
 before so false and mean ? The mean are always false. 
 
 ******* 
 
 ' ' Faithfully yours, 
 
 "CHARLES SUMNER. 
 
 ' ' One of my correspondents says that Sir Henry B. [probably 
 Sir Henry Bulwer] is the only Englishman who has kept his 
 temper and is fair minded now." 
 
 *'The following extract is taken from notes written in 1872 by 
 Mr. Balch upon the Alabama question: — 
 
 ' ' In Mauran vs. the Insurance Company, we had ourselves
 
 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. I I I 
 
 In the spring of 1869, John Lothrop Motley, the 
 eminent historian, succeeded Mr. Johnson as Minister 
 to England. Mr. Fish in his instructions to Mr. 
 Motley sought to keep three objects in view : — First, 
 to show that the rejection of the Johnson-Clarendon 
 Convention for the settlement of claims, was not an 
 unfriendly act ; second, to propose a suspension of 
 discussion until public feeling had grown more calm ; 
 
 recognized the Belligerent Status of the South, four days after 
 the Queen's Proclamation. Apart from this decision I was and 
 am among the American lawyers who maintain that the alleged 
 offense in the Queen's Proclamation was not an offense by Inter- 
 national Law ; and, accordingly, in my interviews with Mr. Sum- 
 ner and others during my visit in Washington, I deprecated any 
 further attempt to moot this point." 
 
 Compare " Mauran vs. Insurance Company," 6 Wallace's 
 United States Supreme Court Reports, pages i, 2, 13 et seq. : 
 " Fifield vs. Insurance Company," 47 Peimsylvania State, page 
 166 : " Charles E. Dole and another vs. The New England Mutual 
 Marine Insurance Company," "The same vs. The Equitable 
 Safety Insurance Company," 6 Allen (Massachusetts), page 373 : 
 and Comnientaire sur les Elements du Droit International et sur 
 V Histoire des Progres du Droit des Gens de Henry VVheato7i, 
 by William Beach Lawrence; Leipzig: F. A. Brockhaus, 1868. 
 Volume I., pages 184, 185. 
 
 See also, by George Bemis, Esq., Hasty Recognition, pub- 
 lished at Boston, May 30th, 1865: British Neidrality — Hasty 
 Recognition of Rebel Belligerency and Oiir Right to Co77tplain 
 of it; from the New York Times, March i6th, 1868. Re- 
 printed in Correspondence concer7iing Claims Against Great 
 Britain. Volume IV. Washington : Government Printing Office, 
 1869, pages 12-46.
 
 112 ' THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 
 
 and third, to make it clear that the United States did 
 not base its claims for dauiages against England on the 
 latter s recognition of the Confederate States as bel- 
 ligerents^ Mr. Fish instructed Mr. Modey after the 
 latter's arrival in London to inform Lord Clarendon 
 that any future negotiations concerning the Alabama 
 claims would be conducted at Washington. Sir John 
 Rose, a member of the Canadian Ministry, arrived in 
 
 •*Mr. Fish in his instructions to Mr. Motley on May 15th, 
 1869, wrote: — 
 
 ' ' The President recognizes the right of every power, when a 
 civil conflict has arisen within another State, and has attained a 
 sufficient complexity, magnitude and completeness, to define its 
 own relations and those of its citizens and subjects toward the 
 parties to the conflict, so far as their rights and interests are 
 necessarily affected by the conflict. 
 
 ' ' The necessity and the propriety of the original concession of 
 belligerency by Great Britain at the time it was made have been 
 contested and are not admitted. They certainly are question- 
 able, but the President regards that concession as a part of the 
 case only so far as it shows the beginning and the animus of that 
 course of conduct which resulted so disastrously to the United 
 States. It is important, in that it foreshadows subsequent events. 
 
 " There were other powers that were contemporaneous with 
 England in similar concession, but it was in England only that 
 the concession was supplemented by acts causing direct damage 
 to the United States. The President is careful to make this dis- 
 crimination, because he is anxious as much as possible to simplify 
 the case, and to bring into view these subsequent acts, which are so 
 important to determining the question between the two countries." 
 Correspondence conceryiing Claims Against Great Britain. 
 Volume VI. Washington: Government Printing Office, 1871, 
 pages 3, 4.
 
 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. II 3 
 
 the summer of 1869, ostensibly to arrange some 
 commercial matters, but really to sound the United 
 States Government upon the possibility of settling 
 the Alabama claims. ^^ Mr. Fish told Sir John Rose 
 that some time must elapse to allow the irritation 
 that Senator Sumner's speech had caused in Eng- 
 land to quiet down, and "that when the excitement 
 subsided the appointment as special envoy of some 
 man of high rank, authorized to express some kind 
 word of regret, would pave the way for a settlement ; 
 and he outlined to Sir John the exact scheme for set- 
 tlement which was adopted a year and a half later." 
 President Grant in his message to Congress, De- 
 cember 5th, 1870, spoke with regret of the failure of 
 the two Governments to come to some understanding 
 on the subject. Early in January, 1871, Sir John Rose 
 again visited Washington on a confidential mission. '^° 
 
 ®' Mr. Fish and the Alabama Claims. A Chapter in Diplo- 
 matic History, by J. C. Bancroft Davis. Boston and New York, 
 1893, pages 44-46. 
 
 The celebrated international jurist, Dr. Bluntschli, professor at 
 Heidelberg, reviewed in 1870 for La Revue de Droit international 
 et de legislation com,paree (Bruxelles) the Alabama question in an 
 article entitled, Opinioii impartiale sur la Questio7i de V Alabama 
 et sur la Maniere de la Rhoudre. 
 
 " Mr. Fish and the Alabama Claims. A Chapter in Diplo- 
 matic History, by J. C. Bancroft Davis. Boston and New York, 
 1893, pages 59-64. Memoir and Letters of Charles Sumner, by 
 Edward L. Pierce. Boston, 1893. Volume IV., page 467.
 
 114 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 
 
 After twenty months of intermittent secret negotia- 
 tions, an accord was finally reached, which found formal 
 expression in four notes that passed between Sir Ed- 
 ward Thornton, the English Minister at Washington, 
 and Secretary Fish/^ In a note of January 26th, 187 1, 
 Sir Edward Thornton proposed to Mr. Fish the ap- 
 pointment of a Joint High Commission to settle the 
 northeast fisheries and any other outstanding differ- 
 ences between the two countries. Four days later 
 Secretary Fish wrote to Sir Edward, that the President 
 approved of the proposal, but it was essential to in- 
 clude the Alabama claims in the suggested settlement. 
 Two days later, the English Minister replied that his 
 Government would be pleased to have the Alabaiiia 
 claims submitted to the same Joint High Commission, 
 provided that all other claims by British and American 
 citizens arising from the acts of the Civil War were 
 similarly referred. On the 3d of February, Secretary 
 Fish wrote to the English Minister, that the President 
 assented to the proposal to refer to the same Com- 
 mission all claims of citizens of either nation growing- 
 out of acts committed during the Civil War. 
 
 " The National and Private ''Alabama Claims'' and their 
 "■final and amicable settlement,'' by Charles C, Beaman, Jr. 
 Printed by W. H. Moore, Washington, D. C, 1871, pages 
 308-310. Correspondence co7icerning Claims Against Great 
 Britain. Volume VI. Washington : Government Printing 
 Office, 1 87 1, pages 15-18.
 
 CHAPTER VI. 
 
 The Joint High Commission was organized at Wash- 
 ington on February 27th, 1871.''^ The representatives 
 of the United States were Hamilton Fish, Secretary 
 of State, Mr. Justice Nelson of the Supreme Court, 
 General Robert C. Schenck, just appointed Minister 
 to England, Ebenezer Rockwood Hoar, of Massachu- 
 setts, and George H. Williams, of Oregon. The 
 representatives of Great Britain were Earl de Grey 
 and Ripon, a member of the English Cabinet, Sir 
 Stafford Henry Northcote, of Her Majesty's opposi- 
 tion. Sir Edward Thornton, Minister at Washington, 
 Professor Mountague Bernard of Oxford University, 
 and Sir John A. Macdonald, the Premier of Canada. 
 Finally, after many and long deliberations, the Com- 
 missioners agreed upon and signed on the 8th of 
 May, 1 87 1, the treaty that became known by the name 
 of the city, where they negotiated — the Treaty of 
 Washington. 
 
 " Papers relating to the Treaty of Washington. Volume I. 
 Geneva Ar'bitration. Washington : Government Printing Office, 
 1872, page 9 et seq. Mr. Fish and the Alabama Claims. A 
 Chapter in Diplomatic History, by J. C. Bancroft Davis. Boston 
 and New York, 1892, page 70 et seq. 
 
 (115)
 
 Il6 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION, 
 
 The treaty consisted of a preamble and forty-three 
 articles. The preamble and the first eleven articles 
 related to the Alabama claims. The next six articles, 
 from twelve to seventeen, both included, referred to 
 claims of citizens of the United States against Eng- 
 land and of claims of British subjects against the 
 United States arising from acts committed against 
 the person or property of such individuals during the 
 course of the Civil War. Then the succeeding arti- 
 cles beginning with the eighteenth and ending with 
 the thirty-third, provided for the settlement of the 
 North Atlantic fisheries; the navigation of the St. 
 Lawrence, the Yukon and other rivers, of Lake Michi- 
 gan, and of certain canals ; for a system of bonded 
 transit; for certain features of the coasting trade; 
 and for the exemption from duty of lumber cut in 
 United States territory along the St. John River and 
 floated down to the sea. The remaining articles, 
 except the last, that related to the exchange of ratifi- 
 cation, arranged for the submission to the arbitration 
 of the Emperor of Germany of the San Juan water 
 boundary between the Territory of Washington and 
 British Columbia. 
 
 The provisions of the treaty relating to the Ala- 
 bama claims met in substance the requirements laid 
 down by Senator Sumner in his speech in opposi- 
 tion to the Johnson-Clarendon Convention.
 
 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. I I 7 
 
 The first article referred to the power that the Eng- 
 lish Government had granted to its commissioners 
 " to express, in a friendly spirit, the regret felt by 
 Her Majesty's Government for the escape of the 
 Alabama and other vessels from British ports, and 
 for the depredations committed by those vessels." 
 
 Then, further, instead of leaving the choice of an 
 arbitrator to the chance of lot, the same article pro- 
 vided for the constitution of a Court of Arbitration 
 to hear and try the case, in the following manner : — 
 
 " Now, in order to remove and adjust all complaints 
 and claims on the part of the United States, and to 
 provide for the speedy settlement of such claims, 
 which are not admitted by Her Britannic Majest^^'s 
 Government, the High Contracting Parties agree that 
 all the said claims, growing out of acts committed by 
 the aforesaid vessels, and generically known as the 
 ' Alabama Claims,' shall be referred to a Tribunal of 
 Arbitration, to be composed of five Arbitrators, to be 
 appointed in the following manner, that is to say : 
 One shall be named by the President of the United 
 States ; one shall be named by Her Britannic Majesty; 
 His Majesty the King of Italy shall be requested to 
 name one ; the President of the Swiss Confederation 
 shall be requested to name one ; and His Majesty the 
 Emperor of Brazil shall be requested to name one. 
 
 " In case of the death, absence, or incapacity to
 
 Il8 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 
 
 serve of any or either of the said Arbitrators, or in 
 the event of either of the said Arbitrators omitting or 
 dedining or ceasing to act as such, the President of 
 the United States, or Her Britannic Majesty, or His 
 Majesty the King of Italy, or the President of the 
 Swiss Confederation, or His Majesty the Emperor of 
 Brazil, as the case may be, may forthwith name another 
 person to act as Arbitrator in the place and stead of 
 the Arbitrator originally named by such Head of a 
 State. 
 
 "And in the event of the refusal or omission for 
 two months after receipt of the request from either of 
 the High Contracting Parties of His Majesty the King 
 of Italy, or the President of the Swiss Confederation, 
 or His Majesty the Emperor of Brazil, to name an 
 Arbitrator either to fill the original appointment or in 
 the place of one who may have died, be absent, or in- 
 capacitated, or who may omit, decline, or from any 
 cause cease to act as such Arbitrator, His Majesty the 
 King of Sweden and Norway shall be requested to 
 name one or more persons, as the case may be, to 
 act as such Arbitrator or Arbitrators."'^ 
 
 The next four articles provided for the meeting of 
 the Court at Geneva, for the limit of time and manner 
 
 ''^Papers relating to the Treaty of Washington. Volume I. 
 Geneva Arbitration. Washington : Government Printing Office 
 1872, page 12.
 
 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. II9 
 
 of preparing the cases and counter cases, and the pres- 
 entation of arguments on each side. 
 
 In the sixth article the two powers agreed upon 
 three rules that should apply to the case. The three 
 rules were as follows : 
 
 " A neutral Government is bound — 
 
 " First, to use due diligence to prevent the fitting 
 out, arming, or equipping, within its jurisdiction, of 
 any vessel which it has reasonable ground to believe 
 is intended to cruise or to carry on war against a 
 Power with which it is at Peace ; and also to use like 
 diligence to prevent the departure from its jurisdiction 
 of any vessel intended to cruise or carry on war as 
 above, such vessel having been specially adapted, in 
 whole or in part, within such jurisdiction to warlike use. 
 
 '* Secondly, not to permit or suffer either belliger- 
 ent to make use of its ports or waters as the base of 
 naval operations against the other, or for the purpose 
 of the renewal or augmentation of military supplies or 
 arms, or the recruitment of men. 
 
 " Thirdly, to exercise due diligence in its own ports 
 and waters, and, as to all persons within its jurisdic- 
 tion, to prevent any violation of the foregoing obliga- 
 tions and duties." ^^ 
 
 These rules were followed with a declaration in the 
 
 ^^ Papers relating to the Treaty of Washington. Volume I. 
 Geneva Arbitration. Washington : Government Printing Office, 
 1872, pages 14, 207 et seq.
 
 I20 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 
 
 same article by the English Government that it did 
 not assent to the " rules as a statement of the princi- 
 ples of International Law which were in force at the 
 time " the Alaba7na claims arose, but in order to 
 strengthen "the friendly relations between the two 
 countries, * * * the Arbitrators should assume 
 that Her Majesty's Government had undertaken to 
 act upon the principles set forth " in the rules. 
 
 The other five articles — from seven to eleven both 
 inclusive — related to the manner of rendering the 
 decision, the part each nation should bear of the ex- 
 penses of the Court, that a majority of the Court 
 should decide, and that the decision should be final. 
 
 These eleven articles secured a decision upon all 
 claims national as well as individual growing out of 
 the acts committed by the Confederate cruisers, and 
 " generically known as the Alabama claims." The 
 United States Senate confirmed the treaty. May 24th, 
 Senator Sumner voting for it. 
 
 In England there were signs of relief that a plan 
 for the settlement of the Anglo-American differences 
 at length was agreed upon : but there was also some 
 criticism of the treaty. Earl Russell attacked it in 
 the House of Lords, June 12th, 1871. The three 
 rules were criticised severely : it was said that they 
 would prevent neutral traders from selling arms and 
 munition of war in the ordinary course of commerce.
 
 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 121 
 
 The United States chose for their agent Mr. J. C. 
 Bancroft Davis, to whom they entrusted the preparation 
 of their case : for their counsel they appointed Will- 
 iam M. Evarts, Caleb Gushing, and Morris R. Waite, 
 afterwards Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. 
 
 Great Britain entrusted the preparation of her case 
 to the Lord Chancellor, with the assistance of Lord 
 Tenderden and Professor Bernard : she named Sir 
 Roundell Palmer as her counsel. 
 
 In accordance with the provisions in Article I. for 
 the appointment of the members of the Tribunal, the 
 President of the United States named as arbitrator 
 Charles Francis Adams, who during the long course 
 of the war and for more than two years after repre- 
 sented and defended American interests with such rare 
 courtesy and ability ; the Queen of England chose 
 Sir Alexander Cockburn, Lord Chief Justice of Eng- 
 land ; the King of Italy appointed Count Frederic 
 Sclopis, a distinguished judge and lawyer of European 
 reputation ; the President of the Swiss Confederation 
 chose Monsieur Jacques Staempfli of Berne, who had 
 served three times as President of the Confederation ; 
 and the Emperor of Brazil named Marcos Antonio 
 d'Araujo, Baron d'ltayuba, Brazilian Minister at 
 Paris. '^^ 
 
 '* The Treaty of Washington, its Negotiation, Execution, and the 
 Discussioyi relatirig thereto, by Caleb Gushing. New York : 1873, 
 pages 26, 78-94.
 
 CHAPTER VII. 
 
 On December 15th, 1871, in the "Salle des Con- 
 ferences " at the Hotel de Ville of Geneva, the Court 
 met and organized with Count Sclopis as president.'^^ 
 After a speech of Count Sclopis, opening the pro- 
 ceedings, the agents of the two litigant nations pre- 
 sented the case of their respective countries to the 
 Court. The Tribunal then " directed that the re- 
 spective counter cases, additional documents " et 
 cetera should be presented on or before the 15th of 
 April following. On December i6th the Court met 
 and adjourned until June 15th, 1872." 
 
 When the contents of the American Case became 
 known, the English press commented at first severely 
 on the chapter on "unfriendliness"; gradually, how- 
 ever, the English journals dropped their attacks on 
 that part of the case to criticise the " indirect claims" 
 
 "^^ Papers relating to the Treaty of Washington. Volume IV. 
 Geneva Arbitration. Washington : Government Printing Office, 
 1872, page 14. The Treaty of Washington^ its Negotiation, 
 Execution, and the Discussion relating thereto, by Caleb Gushing, 
 New York : 1873, page 74 et seq. 
 
 " Papers relating to the Treaty of Washington. Volume IV. 
 Gejieva Arbitration. Washington : Government Printing Office, 
 1872, page 16. 
 
 (122)
 
 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. I 23 
 
 that the United States put forward.^*' In January, 
 1872, the comments on that subject became in some 
 cases severe, and the Enghsh papers generally said 
 that something must be done to guard England 
 against any possibilities of being called upon to pay 
 damages for the indirect claims. 
 
 The Queen, in her speech to Parliament on the 6th 
 of February said : 
 
 " The arbitrators appointed pursuant to the Treaty 
 of Washington, for the purpose of amicably settling 
 certain claims known as the Alabama claims, have 
 held their first meeting at Geneva. 
 
 " Cases have been laid before the arbitrators on 
 behalf of each party to the treaty. In the Case so 
 submitted on behalf of the United States, large claims 
 have been included which are understood on my part 
 not to be within the province of the arbitrators. On 
 
 " The claims as stated by the American Commissioners were 
 classified as follows : 
 
 " I . The claims for direct losses growing out of the destruction 
 of vessels and their cargoes by the insurgent cruisers. 
 
 " 2. The national expenditures in the pursuit of those cruisers. 
 
 ' ' 3. The loss in the transfer of the American commercial 
 marine to the British flag. 
 
 ' ' 4. The enhanced payments of insurance. 
 
 "5. The prolongation of the war and the addition of a large 
 sum to the cost of the war and the suppression of the rebellion." 
 
 Papers relati7ig to the Treaty of Washington. Volume I. 
 Geneva Arbitration. Washington ; Government Printing Office, 
 page 185. lb., Volume IV., pages 4, 5.
 
 124 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 
 
 this subject I have caused a friendly communication 
 to be made to the Government of the United States." 
 
 When the Treat)^ of Washington was completed, 
 the American Commissioners thought it distinctly 
 provided, and the English Commissioners thought it 
 as distinctly did not provide, to refer the " indirect 
 claims " to a Court of Arbitration.'^ 
 
 When the two Governments understood that they 
 held different views on that point, their respective 
 agents conferred and discussed frequently the sub- 
 ject with the object of avoiding a clash upon that ques- 
 tion, and the consequent failure of the arbitration. A 
 satisfactory settlement of the differences was most 
 difficult. When the Tribunal reconvened, on June 
 15th, Lord Tenderden, instead of delivering the 
 printed argument of England, asked the Court to 
 adjourn for eight months. ^° The same day, Mr. Davis 
 
 '* Life, Letters and Diaries of Sir Stafford Northcote, First 
 Earl of Iddesleigh, by Andrew Lang. Edinburgh and London, 
 1890, vol. IL, pages 5-13, passim. Mr. Fish and the Ala- 
 bama Claims. A Chapter i7i Diplomatic History, by J. C. 
 Bancroft Davis. Boston and New York, 1893, pages 74-82, 
 89-96. Papers relati7ig to the Treaty of Washington. Volume 
 IL Geneva Arbitration. Washington : Government Printing 
 Office, 1S72. Pages 434, 593-604. Charles Sumner, by Moor- 
 field Storey. Boston and New York, 1900, pages 368, 369. 
 
 ^Papers relating to the Treaty of Washington. Volume IV. 
 Geneva Arbitration. Washington : Government Printing Office, 
 1872, pages 6, 17, 18.
 
 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. I 25 
 
 and Lord Tenderden had an interview, and then, after 
 many pourparlci's during the next few days, between 
 Mr. Davis and Mr. Adams and the American coun- 
 sel on the one side, and Lord Tenderden and Sir 
 Roundell Palmer on the other side, the two agents 
 came to an agreement. ^^ On June 19th, Count 
 Sclopis, as head of the Tribunal, embodied it in 
 formal words. He said, on behalf of all the mem- 
 bers of the Court, that, without expressing any 
 opinion on the point in difference as to the meaning 
 of the treaty, the Court thought, individually and 
 collectively, that the " indirect claims " did not con- 
 stitute, upon the principles of International Law 
 applicable to such cases, good grounds for an award 
 of damages between nations, and, upon such princi- 
 ples, the Tribunal, even if there were no disagreement 
 between the two litigant governments as to the com- 
 petency of the Court to decide thereon, would exclude 
 them altogether in making its award. ^^ This announce- 
 
 ^^ Papers relating to the Treaty of Washington. Volume IV. 
 Geneva Arbitration. Washington : Government Printing Office, 
 1872, pages 6, 19. Mr. Fish and the Alabama Claims. A Chap- 
 ter in Diplomatic History, by J. C. Bancroft Davis. Boston and 
 New York, 1893, pages 98-102. Charles Francis Adams, by his 
 son, Charles Francis Adams. Boston, 1900, pages 394, 395, 
 
 ^'^The Treaty of WcLshington, its Negotiation, Execution, and the 
 Discussion relating thereto, by Caleb Gushing. New York : 1873, 
 page 69 et seq.
 
 126 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 
 
 ment practically ended the subject; for at the next 
 meeting of the Tribunal, a few days later, Mr. Davis 
 informed the Court that, inasmuch as it was of the 
 opinion that it did not have jurisdiction to try the 
 " indirect claims," his Government had empowered 
 him to say that it would not press those claims further, 
 or urge them as a consideration in any award that the 
 Court might decree.^'^ Two days afterwards, Lord 
 Tenderden, in behalf of Great Britain, said that in 
 consequence of the decision of the Court that it had 
 not jurisdiction to try the "indirect claims" and the 
 statement of the American agent on the subject, his 
 Government had instructed him to request leave to 
 withdraw the application for an adjournment and to 
 present the British printed argument. This request 
 was readily granted, and the case proceeded.^ 
 
 Then, after holding many sittings to hear the argu- 
 ment of counsel, the Court rendered its decision on 
 September 14th, 1872. As to the Alabama the Tri- 
 bunal was unanimous that England had failed to ful- 
 fill the duties prescribed by the first and the third of 
 
 ^^Papers relating to the Treaty of Washington. Volume IV. 
 Geneva Arbitration. Washington: Government Printing Office, 
 1872, page 21. 
 
 ^Papers relating to the Treaty of Washington. Volume IV. 
 Geneva Arbitration. Washington : Government Printing Office, 
 1872, page 21.
 
 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. I 27 
 
 the three rules established by the Treaty of Washing- 
 ton. In the case of the Oreto, the Court held, Sir 
 Alexander Cockburn dissenting, that Great Britain 
 had failed to perform the duties prescribed by the 
 three rules. As to the Shenandoah, the Court de- 
 cided by three votes to two. Sir Alexander Cock- 
 burn and Viscount d'ltajuba dissenting, that Eng- 
 land had failed to fulfill her duties according to the 
 three rules in the case of that vessel, "from and 
 after her entry into Hobson's Bay," and that Great 
 Britain was responsible, therefore, for the acts of the 
 Shenaiidoah after her departure from Melbourne on 
 February i8th, 1865.^ 
 
 As to the Tuscaloosa, the Clarence, the Tacony, 
 and the Archer, tenders either of the Alabama or the 
 Florida, the Court was unanimous that such auxiliary 
 vessels "must necessarily follow the lot of their prin- 
 cipals." Concerning the Georgia, the Sumter, the 
 Nashville, the Tallahassee, and the Chickamauga, the 
 Tribunal was unanimously of the opinion that Eng- 
 land was not responsible. And the Court held. Sir 
 Alexander Cockburn dissenting, that Great Britain 
 
 85 , 
 
 ^Papers relating to the Treaty of Washington. Volume IV. 
 Geneva Arbitration. Washington : Government Printing Office, 
 1872, page 8 et seq., i^-\Z passim, 4.get seg., 230-544. 
 
 The Treaty of Washington, its Negotiation, Execution, and the 
 Discussion relatiiig thereto, by Caleb Gushing. New York : 1873, 
 pages 126-149.
 
 128 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 
 
 was liable to the United States in damages for the 
 losses inflicted upon the latter's commerce by the 
 Confederate cruisers built in England to the amount 
 of fifteen million five hundred thousand dollars 
 (}ji 1 5,500,000), payable in gold. Sir Alexander Cock- 
 burn filed a separate opinion stating his reasons for 
 disagreeing from the judgment of the majority of 
 the Court, 
 
 Thus, after many anxious years, when at times the 
 feelings on both sides of the Atlantic ran high, a burn- 
 ing question of difference between two powerful na- 
 tions — that, had it continued to smoulder, would cer- 
 tainly have imbittered their relations and might very 
 likely have led to war between them — was eliminated, 
 through a course of action alike honorable to both 
 sides, in a peaceful manner from the sphere of their 
 every-day relations.
 
 APPENDIX.
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 DECISION AND AWARD. 
 
 Made by the tribunal of arbitration constituted by virtue of the first 
 article of the treaty concluded at Washington the 8th of May, 
 iSji, betweeii the United States of Atnerica and Her Majesty the 
 Queen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland. 
 
 The United States of America and Her Britannic 
 Majesty having agreed by Article I. of the treaty con- 
 Recital of eluded and signed at Washington the 
 ZtreaTof «* of May, 1 87., to refer all the 
 Washington, claims "generically known as the Ala- 
 bama claims " to a tribunal of arbitration to be com- 
 posed of five arbitrators named : 
 
 One by the President of the United States, 
 One by Her Britannic Majesty, 
 One by His Majesty the King of Italy, 
 One by the President of the Swiss Confederation, 
 One by His Majesty the Emperor of Brazil ; 
 And the President of the United States, Her 
 Appointment Britannic Majesty, His Majesty the 
 ofarbitrators. j^j^^^ ^^f j^^j^^ ^.^^ President of the Swiss 
 
 Confederation, and His Majesty the Emperor of 
 
 (131)
 
 132 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 
 
 Brazil having respectively named their arbitrators, 
 to wit : 
 
 The President of the United States, Charles Francis 
 Adams, esquire ; 
 
 Her Britannic Majesty, Sir Alexander James Ed- 
 mund Cockburn, baronet, a member of Her Majesty's 
 privy council, lord chief justice of England ; 
 
 His Majesty the King of Italy, His Excellency 
 Count Frederic Sclopis, of Salerano, a knight of the 
 Order of the Annunciata, minister of state, senator 
 of the Kingdom of Italy ; 
 
 The President of the Swiss Confederation, M. 
 Jacques Staempfli ; 
 
 His Majesty the Emperor of Brazil, his Excellency 
 Marcos Antonio d'Araujo, Viscount d'ltajuba, a 
 grandee of the Empire of Brazil, member of the 
 council of H. M. the Emperor of Brazil, and his 
 envoy extraordinary and minister plenipotentiary in 
 France. 
 
 And the five arbitrators above named having as- 
 Organization sembled at Geneva (in Switzerland) in 
 of tribunal. ^^^ ^f t^g chambers of the Hotel de Ville 
 on the 15th of December, 1871, in conformity with 
 the terms of the second article of the Treaty of Wash- 
 ington, of the 8th of May of that year, and having 
 proceeded to the inspection and verification of their 
 respective powers, which were found duly authenti-
 
 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 1 33 
 
 cated, the tribunal of arbitration was declared duly 
 organized. 
 
 The agents named by each of the high contract- 
 ing parties, by virtue of the same Article II., to 
 wit : 
 
 For the United States of America, John C. Ban- 
 croft Davis, esquire ; 
 
 And for Her Britannic Majesty, Charles Stuart 
 Aubrey, Lord Tenderden, a peer of the United King- 
 dom, companion of the Most Honorable Order of the 
 Bath, assistant under-secretary of state for foreign 
 affairs ; 
 
 Whose powers were found likewise duly authenti- 
 Delivery of cated, then delivered to each of the arbi- 
 cases. trators the printed case prepared by each 
 
 of the two parties, accompanied by the documents, 
 the official correspondence, and other evidence on 
 which each relied, in conformity with the terms of the 
 third article of the said treaty. 
 
 In virtue of the decision made by the tribunal at 
 Delivery of ^^^ ^^^^ session, the counter-case and addi- 
 counter-cases. tJonal documents, correspondence, and 
 evidence referred to in Article IV. of the said treaty 
 were delivered by the respective agents of the two 
 parties to the secretary of the tribunal on the 15th of 
 April, 1872, at the chamber of conference, at the 
 Hotel de Ville of Geneva.
 
 134 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 
 
 The tribunal, in accordance with the vote of ad- 
 Delivery of journment passed at their second session, 
 arguments. hej^j q^ the 1 6th of December, 1871, re- 
 assembled at Geneva on the 15th of June, 1872 ; and 
 the agent of each of the parties duly delivered to each 
 of the arbitrators, and to the agent of the other party, 
 the printed argument referred to in Article V. of the 
 said treaty. 
 
 The tribunal having since fully taken into their con- 
 Deliberations sideration the treaty, and also the cases, 
 of tribunal. counter-cases, documents, evidence, and 
 arguments, and likewise all other communications 
 made to them by the two parties during the progress 
 of their sittings, and having impartially and carefully 
 examined the same, 
 
 Award. Has arrived at the decision embodied in 
 the present award : 
 
 Whereas, having regard to the Vlth and Vllth 
 articles of the said treaty, the arbitrators are bound 
 under the terms of the said Vlth article, "in decid- 
 ing the matters submitted to them, to be governed 
 by the three rules therein specified and by such prin- 
 ciples of international law, not inconsistent therewith, 
 as the arbitrators shall determine to have been ap- 
 plicable to the case ;"
 
 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 135 
 
 And WHEREAS the "due diligence" referred to in 
 
 Definition of ^^^ ^^^^ ^"^ ^^^^^ ^^ ^^^ ^^^^ ^"^^^ Ought 
 
 due diligence, to be exercised by neutral governments 
 in exact proportion to the risks to which either 
 of the belligerents may be exposed, from a fail- 
 ure to fulfill the obligations of neutrality on their 
 part ; 
 
 And whereas the circumstances out of which the 
 facts constituting the subject-matter of the present 
 controversy arose were of a nature to call for the ex- 
 ercise on the part of Her Britannic Majesty's govern- 
 ment of all possible solicitude for the observance of 
 the rights and the duties involved in the proclamation 
 of neutrality issued by Her Majesty on the 13th day 
 of May, 1861 ; 
 
 And whereas the effects of a violation of neutrality 
 Effect of a committed by means of the construction, 
 commission, equipment, and armament of a vessel are 
 not done away with by any commission which the 
 government of the belligerent power, benefited 
 by the violation of neutrality, may afterwards have 
 granted to that vessel ; and the ultimate step, 
 by which the offense is completed, cannot be 
 admissible as a ground for the absolution of 
 the offender, nor can the consummation of his 
 fraud become the means of establishing his inno- 
 cence ;
 
 136 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 
 
 And whereas the privilege of exterritoriality ac- 
 corded to vessels of war has been admitted 
 
 Exterritorial- 
 ity of vessels into the law of nations, not as an absolute 
 
 ^ ^^^' right, but solely as a proceeding founded 
 
 on the principle of courtesy and mutual deference 
 
 between different nations, and therefore can never be 
 
 appealed to for the protection of acts done in violation 
 
 of neutrality ; 
 
 And whereas the absence of a previous notice can- 
 Effect of want "^^ ^^ regarded as a failure in any consid- 
 of notice. eration required by the law of nations, in 
 those cases in which a vessel carries with it its own 
 condemnation ; 
 
 And whereas, in order to impart to any supplies 
 
 c, ,• f of coal a character inconsistent with the 
 Supplies of 
 
 coal. second rule, prohibiting the use of neutral 
 
 ports or waters, as a base of naval operations for 
 a belligerent, it is necessary that the said supplies 
 should be connected with special circumstances of 
 time, of persons, or of place, which may combine to 
 give them such character ; 
 
 And whereas, with respect to the vessel called the 
 Alabama, it clearly results from all the 
 
 Responsibility 
 
 for acts of the facts relative to the construction of the ship 
 a ama. ^^ ^^^^ designated by the number "290" in 
 the port of Liverpool, and its equipment and arma- 
 ment in the vicinity of Terceira through the agency
 
 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 1 37 
 
 of the vessels called the Agrippina and the Bahama^ 
 dispatched from Great Britain to that end, that the 
 British government failed to use due diligence in the 
 performance of its neutral obligations; and especially 
 that it omitted, notwithstanding the warnings and 
 official representations made by the diplomatic 
 agents of the United States during the construction 
 of the said number " 290," to take in due time any 
 effective measures of prevention, and that those 
 orders which it did give at last, for the detention of 
 the vessel, were issued so late that their execution 
 was not practicable ; 
 
 And WHEREAS, after the escape of that vessel, the 
 measures taken for its pursuit and arrest were so im- 
 perfect as to lead to no result, and therefore cannot 
 be considered sufficient to release Great Britain from 
 the responsibility already incurred ; 
 
 And WHEREAS, in despite of the violations of the 
 neutrahty of Great Britain committed by the "290," 
 this same vessel, later known as the Confederate 
 cruiser Alabama, was on several occasions freely 
 admitted into the ports of colonies of Great Britain, 
 instead of being proceeded against as it ought to have 
 been in any and every port within British jurisdiction 
 in which it might have been found ; 
 
 And WHEREAS the government of Her Britannic 
 Majesty cannot justify itself for a failure in due dili-
 
 138 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 
 
 gence on the plea of insufficiency of the legal means 
 of action which it possessed : 
 
 Four of the arbitrators, for the reasons above 
 assigned, and the fifth for reasons separately assigned 
 by him, 
 
 Are of opinion — 
 
 That Great Britain has in this case failed, by omis- 
 sion, to fulfill the duties prescribed in the first and 
 the third of the rules established by the Vlth article 
 of the Treaty of Washington. 
 
 And WHEREAS, with respect to the vessel called 
 
 the Florida, it results from all the facts relative 
 
 And of the ^^ ^^ construction of the Oreto in 
 
 Florida, the port of Liverpool, and to its issue 
 therefrom, which facts failed to induce the author- 
 ities in Great Britain to resort to measures ade- 
 quate to prevent the violation of the neutrality 
 of that nation, notwithstanding the warnings and re- 
 peated representations of the agents of the United 
 States, that Her Majesty's government has failed 
 to use due diligence to fulfill the duties of neu- 
 trality ; 
 
 And WHEREAS it likewise results from all the facts 
 relative to the stay of the Oreto at Nassau, to her 
 issue from that port, to her enlistment of men, to her 
 supplies, and to her armament, with the co-operation 
 of the British vessel Prince Alfred, at Green Bay,
 
 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. I 39 
 
 that there was negligence on the part of the British 
 colonial authorities ; 
 
 And whereas, notwithstanding the violation of the 
 neutrality of Great Britain committed by the Oreto, 
 this same vessel, later known as the Confederate 
 cruiser Florida, was nevertheless on several occasions 
 freely admitted into the ports of British colonies ; 
 
 And whereas the judicial acquittal of the Oreto 
 at Nassau cannot relieve Great Britain from the re- 
 sponsibility incurred by her under the principles of 
 international law ; nor can the fact of the entry of 
 the Florida into the Confederate port of Mobile, and 
 of its stay there during four months, extinguish the 
 responsibility previously to that time incurred by 
 Great Britain : 
 
 For these reasons, 
 
 The tribunal, by a majority of four voices to one, 
 is of opinion — 
 
 That Great Britain has in this case failed, by 
 omission, to fulfill the duties prescribed in the first, 
 in the second, and in the third of the rules estab- 
 lished by Article VI. of the Treaty of Washington. 
 
 And whereas, with respect to the vessel called 
 And of the the She7ia7idoah, it results from all the 
 
 Shenandoah r . i^*^^ij ^ r t 
 
 after leavins: *^^^^ relative to the departure from Lon- 
 Melbourne. don of the merchant-vessel the Sea King, 
 and to the transformation of that ship into a con-
 
 140 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 
 
 federate cruiser under the name of the Shenandoah, 
 near the island of Madeira, that the government of 
 Her Britannic Majesty is not chargeable with any 
 failure, down to that date, in the use of due dili- 
 gence to fulfill the duties of neutrality ; 
 
 But WHEREAS it results from all the facts con- 
 nected with the stay of the Shenandoah at Mel- 
 bourne, and especially with the augmentation which 
 the British government itself admits to have been 
 clandestinely effected of her force, by the enlistment 
 of men within that port, that there was negligence 
 on the part of the authorities at that place : 
 
 For these reasons. 
 
 The tribunal is unanimously of opinion — 
 
 That Great Britain has not failed, by any act or 
 omission, "to fulfill any of the duties prescribed by 
 the three rules of Article VI. in the Treaty of Wash- 
 ington, or by the principles of international law not 
 inconsistent therewith," in respect to the vessel 
 called the Sheitandoah, during the period of time an- 
 terior to her entry into the port of Melbourne ; 
 
 And, by a majority of three to two voices, the tri- 
 bunal decides that Great Britain has failed, by omis- 
 sion, to fulfill the duties prescribed by the second and 
 third of the rules aforesaid, in the case of this same 
 vessel, from and after her entry into Hobson's Bay, 
 and is therefore responsible for all acts committed by
 
 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. I4I 
 
 that vessel after her departure from Melbourne, on 
 the 1 8th day of February, 1865. 
 
 And so far as relates to the vessels called — 
 And of the "^^^ Tuscaloosa, {t&nd^r to t\\Q Alabama,) 
 
 Tuscaloosa, The Clarence, 
 
 Clarence, 
 
 Tacony, and The Tacony, and 
 
 Archer. . -j^j^^ Archer, (tenders to the Florida,) 
 
 The tribunal is unanimously of opinion — 
 That such tenders or auxiliary vessels, being prop- 
 erly regarded as accessories, must necessarily follow 
 the lot of their principals, and be submitted to the 
 same decision which applies to them respectively. 
 And so far as relates to the vessel called Retribution^ 
 The tribunal, by a majority of three to two voices, 
 is of opinion — 
 No responsi- That Great Britain has not failed by 
 
 Retribution ^ ^"Y ^^^ ^^ omission to fulfil any of the 
 
 Georgia, duties prescribed by the three rules of 
 
 Nashville, Article VI. in the Treaty of Washington, 
 
 Tallahassee, ^j. |^ ^^ principles of international law 
 
 or Chtcka- ./ i i 
 
 mauga. not inconsistent therewith. 
 
 And so far as relates to the vessels called — 
 
 The Georgia, 
 
 The Suinter, 
 
 The Nashville, 
 
 The Tallahassee, and 
 
 The Chickamauga, respectively,
 
 14- THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 
 
 The tribunal is unanimously of opinion — 
 That Great Britain has not failed, by any act or 
 omission, to fulfill any of the duties prescribed by the 
 three rules of Article VI. in the Treaty of Washington, 
 or by the principles of international law not incon- 
 sistent therewith. 
 
 And so far as relates to the vessels called — 
 The Sallie, The Sallie, 
 
 J'^e^rsonDavu. jhe Jefferson Davis, 
 
 Boston, and The Mtisic, 
 
 V. H.Joy not -y^, t^ , , 
 
 taken into con- ^ ^e Boston, and 
 sideration. The V. H. Joy, respectively. 
 
 The tribunal is unanimously of opinion — 
 That they ought to be excluded from consideration 
 for want of evidence. 
 
 And WHEREAS, so far as relates to the particulars of 
 the indemnity claimed by the United States, the costs 
 Claims for ^^ pursuit of the Confederate cruisers 
 
 cost of pursuit are not, in the judgment of the tribunal, 
 
 not allowed. , ,. , • i , i ^ , 
 
 properly distmguishable from the gen- 
 eral expenses of the war carried on by the United 
 States : 
 
 The tribunal is, therefore, of opinion, by a major- 
 ity of three to two voices — 
 
 That there is no ground for awarding to the 
 United States any sum by way of indemnity under 
 this head.
 
 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. I43 
 
 And WHEREAS prospective earnings cannot properly 
 . , , be made the subject of compensation, in- 
 
 And for pros- ■^ 
 
 pective asmuch as they depend in their nature 
 
 earnings. upon future and uncertain contingencies : 
 
 The tribunal is unanimously of opinion — 
 
 That there is no ground for awarding to the United 
 States any sum by way of indemnity under this head. 
 
 And whereas, in order to arrive at an equitable 
 Net freights compensation for the damages which have 
 only allowed, been sustained, it is necessary to set 
 aside all double claims for the same losses, and all 
 claims for " gross freights," so far as they exceed 
 " net freights ;" 
 
 And whereas, it is just and reasonable to allow in- 
 terest at a reasonable rate ; 
 
 And whereas, in accordance with the spirit and 
 letter of the Treaty of Washington, it is preferable to 
 adopt the form of adjudication of a sum in gross, 
 rather than to refer the subject of compensation for 
 further discussion and deliberation to a board of as- 
 sessors, as provided by Article X. of the said treaty : 
 
 The tribunal, making use of the authority conferred 
 
 upon it by Article VII. of the said treaty, 
 $15,500,000 . . . 
 
 compensation by a majority of four voices to one, awards 
 
 to the United States a sum of ^15,500,000 
 
 in gold, as the indemnity to be paid by Great Britain 
 
 to the United States, for the satisfaction of all the
 
 144 THE ALABAMA ARBITRATION. 
 
 claims referred to the consideration of the tribunal, 
 conformably to the provisions contained in Article VII. 
 of the aforesaid treaty. 
 
 And, in accordance with the terms of Article XI. 
 
 The payment ^^ ^^^ ^^^^ treaty, the tribunal declares 
 to be a bar. |-]^^|- a ^\\ ^^i^ claims referred to in the 
 
 treaty as submitted to the tribunal are hereby fully, 
 perfectly, and finally settled." 
 
 Furthermore it declares, that *' each and every one 
 of the said claims, whether the same may or may not 
 have been presented to the notice of, or made, pre- 
 ferred, or laid before the tribunal, shall henceforth be 
 considered and treated as finally settled, barred, and 
 inadmissible." 
 
 In testimony whereof this present decision and 
 award has been made in duplicate, and signed by the 
 arbitrators who have given their assent thereto, the 
 whole being in exact conformity with the provisions 
 of Article VII. of the said Treaty of Washington. 
 
 Made and concluded at the Hotel de Ville of 
 Geneva, in Switzerland, the 14th day of the month of 
 September, in the year of our Lord one thousand 
 eight hundred and seventy-two. 
 
 CHARLES FRANCIS ADAMS. 
 FREDERIC SCLOPIS. 
 STAEMPFLI. 
 VICOMTE d'ITAJUBA.
 
 INDEX
 
 INDEX. 
 
 PAGE 
 
 Adams, Charles Francis 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 
 
 14, 15, 21, 35, 53, 66, 68, 70, 72, 73, 79, 81, 94, 121, 125 
 Alabama, The 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 
 
 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 22, 23, 36, 39, 40, 46, 54, 67, 68, 
 69, 74, 80, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 92, 94, 95, 100, loi, 
 102, 103, no, 112, 113, 114, 116, 117, 120, 123, 126, 127 
 
 Alexander Nevski, The 32 
 
 Alexander the Second 29, 30 
 
 Alexis, Grand Duke 29, 31 
 
 Balch, Thomas 40, 42, 43, 
 
 44. 49. 50. 52, 80, 81, 84, 108, 109, no 
 
 Banks, General N. P 42 
 
 Baring, Thomas 12 
 
 Bemis, George 99, in 
 
 Bernard, Professor Mountague 115, 121 
 
 Bright, John 32, 103 
 
 Bruce, Sir Frederick 77 
 
 Bullock, Captain James D 3, 5 
 
 Cape Town 9 
 
 Clarendon, Lord 95, 108, 112 
 
 Cobden, Richard 35. 36, 37. 38, 39. 43. 44. io5 
 
 Cockburn, Sir Alexander 121, 127, 128 
 
 Collier, Mr 6 
 
 Curtin, Governor Andrew G 28, 29, 30, 31 
 
 Gushing, Caleb 121 
 
 Dallas, Mr 2 
 
 Daily News, the London 86 
 
 Dayton, William L 40, 41 
 
 Davis, J. C. Bancroft 121, 124, 125, 126 
 
 Derby, Earl 76 
 
 Dudley, Mr 5, 6 
 
 (147)
 
 148 INDEX. 
 
 PAGE 
 
 Evarts, William M 121 
 
 Field, David Dudley 80, 82, 83, 84 
 
 Fish, Hamilton 108, iii, 112, 113, 114, 115 
 
 Florida, The 3, 4, 127 
 
 Forster, William E 94 
 
 Fox, Hon. Gustavus Vasa 74 
 
 Eraser, Trenholm & Company 3'i4 
 
 Georgia, The 11, 12, 13 
 
 Gettysburg 6 
 
 Gortschakoff, Prince 29, 30 
 
 Grant, General 7. 108, 109, 113 
 
 Greeley, Horace 45 
 
 Grey and Ripon, Earl de 115 
 
 Hammond, Mr 23 
 
 Hatteras, The 10 
 
 Hoar, Ebenezer Rockwood 115 
 
 Hobart, Lord 83 
 
 Holmes, Dr. Edmund W 9 
 
 Holtzendorff, von 80, 81 
 
 d'ltajuba. Baron 121, 127 
 
 Jefferson, Thomas 23 
 
 Jonathan to John ^ i 
 
 Johnson, Reverdy 94. 97- 108, iii 
 
 Kapp, Friederich 81 
 
 Kearsarge, The 8, 40, 41 
 
 Laboulaye, Edouard 80 
 
 Laird, John 28, 36, 80 
 
 Lairds, Messrs 5-7
 
 INDEX. 
 
 149 
 
 PAGE 
 
 Lawrence, William Beach y. 1 1 1 
 
 Lessovsky, Admiral . . 26, 27, 32, 33, 34 
 
 Lieber, Francis 55, 66, 84, 107 
 
 Lincoln, President i, 28, 34, 42, 43 
 
 Lorimer, Professor James 49, 50, 52, 79 
 
 Lowell, James Russell 11 
 
 Macdonald, Sir John A 115 
 
 Meade, General 6 
 
 Melbourne 14 
 
 Mexican Expedition 35, 42 
 
 Miantonomoh, The (monitor) 74, 75 
 
 Moreau, Henry 32, 80, 81 
 
 Motley, J. L 1 11, 112 
 
 Napoleon the Third 30, 31, 35 
 
 Nelson, Mr. Justice 115 
 
 Northcote, Sir Stafford So, 107, 115 
 
 Oreto, The {The Florida) 3, 4, 15, 100 
 
 Osliaba, The 32 
 
 Palmer, Sir Roundell 36, 121, 125 
 
 Palmerston, Lord 25, 26, 30, 35, 36 
 
 Peirce, George 28, 31 
 
 Peresvet, The 32 
 
 Popoff, Admiral 25 
 
 Pr6vost-Paradol 35. 38, 52 
 
 Ripon, Earl de Grey and 115 
 
 Rose, Sir John 112, 113 
 
 Ross, David 39. 83 
 
 Russell, Earl . 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 14, 15, 21, 24, 25, 26, 
 
 30. 35. 36, 53. 66, 67, 68, 70, 72, 74, 76, 80, 92, 100, 120 
 Russian fleet 24, 30, 33, 38
 
 150 INDEX. 
 
 PACK 
 
 Sea Bride, The 9 
 
 Schenck, General 115 
 
 Sclopis, Count Frederic 121, 122 
 
 Semmes, Captain 2, 4, 10 
 
 Seward, Secretary 34, 55, 66, 77, 78, 79, 97 
 
 Shaw-Lefevre, Mr 94 
 
 Shenandoah, The {The Sea King) ... 11, 14, 68, 69, 127 
 
 Singapore 9 
 
 Social Science 80 
 
 Staempfli, Jacques 121 
 
 Stanley, Lord 76, 79. 94, 95 
 
 Sumner, Charles 32, 35, 36, 
 
 37, 95, 99, 104, 106, 107, 108, 109, no 
 
 Sumter, Fort i 
 
 Sumter, The 2 
 
 Tenderden, Lord 121, 124, 125 
 
 Thornton, Sir Edward 114, 115 
 
 Three Rules, the 116 
 
 Trent, The 39 
 
 Tribune, the New York 45, 80 
 
 Variag, The 32 
 
 Vicksburg 7 
 
 Vitiaz, The 32 
 
 Wachusett, The 4 
 
 Waite, Morris R 121 
 
 Warrior, The 8 
 
 Westlake, John 79, 85, 93 
 
 Williams, George H 115 
 
 Winslow, Captain 40 
 
 Yeaman, George H 81, 84 
 
 "290" {The Alabama) 5, 6, 7, 16, 17
 
 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY 
 
 Los Angeles 
 This book is DUE on the last date stamped below. 
 
 rormL9-2ow-7,'63(D8616s8)444 
 
 i
 
 UC SOUTHERN REGIONAL LIBRARY FACILITY 
 
 AA 000 517 542 7 
 
 ^