Imágenes de páginas

think fit, may communicate with each engages to recommend the National other respecting the general working of Assembly to give the necessary sanction the present Treaty, and come to an un- for the execution of the present Treaty derstanding by means of a Declaration as soon as possible after an agreement or Protocol with respect to its further between the two Governments shall have duration. Failing such definite under- been arrived at with respect to the ques. standing and subject to the condition in tions which are mentioned in Article XXI., the next Article stated, either Party and which, not having yet been settled, are may, by twelve months previous notice, by the same Article XXI. referred to the which may be given either at any time Commission therein mentioned. after the aforesaid dates respectively, or The ratification of the present Treaty within the twelve months next preceding shall be exchanged at Paris as soon as the same, terminate any of the provisions possible after such sanction shall have been contained in the preceding Artices of the notified to her Majesty's Government; present Treaty, and, until the expiration the Treaty shall come into force imineof any such notice, this present Treaty, diately on the exchange of ratifications; or such part thereof as shall for the time and the Treaty of the 23rd of January, being not be terminated by any similar 1860, the Additional Articles of the 25th notice, shall remain in force.

February, 1869, and 27th June, 1860,

and the Supplementary Conventions of ARTICLE XXIII.

the 12th October and 16th November,

1860, shall be cancelled thereafter, ex. The High Contracting Powers in re

cept in so far as relates to the specific serving to theinselves the power, as set forth

stipulations contained in Article II., and in Article XXII., to terminate any specific

the arrangements with respect to mat

ters reserved to the Commission to be provisions contained in the present Treaty, engage, nevertheless, at all times here

appointed in conformity with Article

XXI. of the present Treaty. after to treat each other in all matters relating to commerce and navigation on

In witness whereof the respective Ple: the footing of the most favoured nation,

nipotentiaries have signed the present and that the termination of any specific

Treaty, and have affixed thereto the

Seals of their arms. provisions of the present Treaty, as stipulated in the preceding Article, shall

Dope at London the Fifth day of be subject to the above condition.

November, in the year of our Lord One thousand eight hundred and seventy-two.


(L, S.) Cu. GAVARD.

(L. S.) J. OZENNE. The President of the French Republic


THE SAN JUAN AWARD. (Translation.)

49th parallel of north latitude to the

middle of the channel which separates WE, WILLIAM, by the Grace of God German Emperor, King of

the continent from Vancouver's Island

shall be further drawn southerly through the Prussia, &c., &c., &c.

middle of the said Channel and of Fuca AFTER examination of the Treaty be. Straits to the Pacitic Ocean, should be run, tween the Governments of her Britannic

as claimed by the Government of her Majesty and that of the United States of

Britannic Majesty, through the Rosario America, dated at Washington, May 6th, Straits or through the Canal of Haro aš 1871, by virtue of which the above

claimed by the Government of the United named Governments have submitted to Our States-in order that We should decide Arbitrator the question at issue between

finally and without appeal which of these them, viz., whether the line of boundary claims is most in accordance with the which, according to the Treaty, dated at

true interpretation of the Treaty of June Washington, June 15th, 1846, after it 15, 1846; had been continued westward along the Have, after taking into consideration

the statement of the experts and jurists

appointed by us to report upon the con1 Sic in original. Query, May 8? tents of the respective case and counter

cases, with their inclosures, given the true interpretation of the Treaty confollowing decision;

cluded between the Government of her The claim of the Government of the Britannic Majesty and that of the United United States—viz., that the line of States of America, dated at Washington, boundary between the dominions of her June 15, 1846. Britannic Majesty and the United States Given under our hand and seal at should be run through the Canal of

Berlin, October 21, 1872. Haro-is most in accordance with the

(Signed) WILLIAM



of copper.

TAE Commissioners appointed for this inquiry (Chairman, Lord Lawrence) issued a Report, in which they came to the following conclusions :

“We express our decided opinion that the state and condition of the Megæra' was such that she ought never to have been selected for the voyage to Australia, and that as a matter of fact she was an unsafe ship when she left Sheerness, and had probably been so for some years. It is right that we should add that Sir Spencer Robinson informed Sir Sydney Dacres that he did not consider her well adapted for this service, and it is much to be regretted that more weight was not attached to his representations, and that, when he expressed an opinion unfavourable to the employment of the ship, Sir Sydney Dacres did not call for and discuss the reason and grounds for that opinion before incurring such a responsibility.

“When the Megæra' left Sheerness her ports were leaky, some being decayed, and others worn out by long service. She was also overladen with reference to the comfort of the officers and men on board, bearing in mind more particularly the nature and length of the voyage and the numbers she carried.

“We consider that the Admiralty were justified in ordering the “Megæra' to continue her voyage after she had put into Queenstown, the Admiral on the station having declared that she was fit to proceed. The defects which were then reported were not of a character to affect her seaworthiness, and were such as were remedied without docking her.

“The defects in the ship's bull, at the time when she was beached at St. Paul's, were local. Theileak itself was an oblong aperture about two inches in length by one and a half in breadth. The plates for a space of five or six feet in the vicinity of the leak were more or less corroded, and dangerously weak over an extent of from two to three fect. In several of the

ship’s frames also in the same part the floor plates were more or less eaten by corrosion. These circumstances raised a feeling of insecurity in the minds of the officers as to the soundness of her bottom. It was this which induced Captain Thrupp and the officers he consulted to decide upon running the vessel ashore.

“ The cause of the leak and of the de. fective condition of the plates in its vicinity was the continued corrosive action of bilge water on unprotected iron. The loss of the ship is in our judgment to be attributed to the want of adequate protection to the inner service of those plates. The corrosive action had in our opinion been at work for some years, and was not appreciably, if at all, accelerated by gal. vanic action, occasioned by the presence

“The plates in the vicinity of the water. line of the . Megæra' were ascertained in 1866 to be very thin ; but it must be borne in mind that it is not to the weakness of these plates that the loss of the ship is in any way attributable. This circumstance, however, ought to have led to a thorough and complete examination of the whole of the plating. The sound condition of the plates was not to be satisfactorily ascertained by mere boring from the outside, which was the only process adopted subsequently to the above discovery; such a boring, limited as it was to a mere puncture of the inner surface of the iron could not afford any indication of the condition of the interior face of the plates.

“ It is a matter of doubt whether the plates ought at that time to have been doubled or replaced, but it is certain that their comparative weakness should never have been lost sight of, and should have been constantly brought to the notice of the dockyard officials, and that their soundness should have been carefully tested before the vessel was despatched to Australia. “ Nevertheless, after 1864 the Megæra'


was never sufficiently examined. Every an examination of the outside, and their official at the time of examination con- report was accepted without challenge by fined his attention to the exterior, and to the Controller. such parts of her interior as were readily “We have shown that Sir Spencer accessible, and relying, it would seem, as Robinson was responsible for the applicato her interior, upon the supposed lasting tion of Spence's cement to the Megæra,' qualities of cement, omitted to make the and for its having been subsequently necessary examination, though it is ob- suffered to remain there without examivious that whether her age, her extended nation, though ascertained to be a failure service at sea, or the period which had in other instances. From the day it was passed since the repairs in 1864, be con- put into her, until the day she was beached sidered, such precautions should have at St. Paul's, no one ever thought of the been observed. It has been proved to matter ; although it is impossible to supour satisfaction that there were parts of pose, judging from the effect of bilge the interior which could only be examined water on it, as reported in the cases of by opening up the ship to an extent which the "Sharpshooter and the Northumwas never done ; anything short of this berland,' that it could have afforded any prevented the real state of these parts lasting protection to the plates of the from being ascertained. It is in evidence bottom of the ship. that at the termination of a ship's com- “No advantage was taken by the Conmission, which usually lasts four years, troller of the opportunity of fully ascersuch an examination should be made as taining her condition during the fire would thoroughly satisfy the authorities months she lay unemployed at Sheerness, as to the state of the ship, so as to make although so many questions had been it clear whether further examination or raised and doubts entertained with referrepairs are necessary. But counting from ence to it; nor did he, when informed by February 1865, the time when the 'Megæ- Sir S. Dacres of his intention to send the ra' left Devouport Dockyard, until Feb- • Megæra' to Australia, recall to his mind ruary 1871, when she sailed from Sheer- that doubts had existed for years as to ness, six years had elapsed since she was the general character of the ship. Hence thoroughly overhauled. It was owing to it follows, in our opinion, that the Cou. this that the corrosive action was allowed troller is mainly responsible for the misto go on until it resulted in the loss of fortune which befell the vessel. The the vessel.

arguments which he has adduced in ex“We will now proceed to state upon planation of this neglect are not, in our whom, in our opinion, rests the responsi- judgment, satisfactory. We say this with *bility for the mismanagement which al- much regret, for there can be no question lowed the vessel to remain so long in an of the zeal and ability of this officer; and unsafe condition.

it is difficult, we think, to have taken “ We are of opinion that responsibility part in this inquiry without forming a high rests on Sir Spencer Robinson, who was appreciation of his merits as a devoted Controller from 1861 to 1871.

public servant. “Ist. Practically he had the power of “We also consider that neither Mr. controlling the operations carried on in Reed nor Mr. Barnaby is free from reher Majesty's dockyards, the superinten- sponsibility, the former in not, when an. dents and dockyard officers being subject dertaking in 1866 to make an examinato his orders.

tion, making it a complete one, the latter “2nd. The Constructor's department in not calling the attention of Lord John was also under his direction.

Hay to the weakness of the ship's plating “ It was for the Controller to take caro when asked as to her condition in 1871. that the organization of his department “ We think also that blame attaches to was such that all the duties connected Mr. H. Morgan, of the Chief Constructor's with it were efficiently performed. The Department, because, when he received attention of the Sheerness officers was the report of the Sheerness officers in never called to the report of 1866 on the April, 1870, containing the observation • Megæra,' and the reports of subsequent that the bottom was stated to be very years on the ship seem never to have been thin in many places, he neglected to scrutinized with the necessary care nor inform them of ihe previous reports, and examined with reference to the informa- of the known thinness of her plates. tion regarding her, which was then ob- "We are of opinion that Captain Luard tained, and even when, in 1870, the car. incurred a grave responsibility in sending penter of the ship had called the attention to the Admiralty,without further examinaof the dockyard officers to the alleged tion of the ship or any knowledge of her thinness of the plates at the bottom of previous history, the telegram of the 13th the vessel, they satisfied themselves with of August, 1870. But for this she would have been placed in the 4th Division and defects or accidents which may occur at thoroughly examined, when in all proba- sea, or to adopt the best methods for rebility her defects would have been dis- pairing them. covered. We say this with regret, for it “On the question of the general reis clear that the error into which he fell sponsibility of dockyard officers it is arose from zeal in the public service, he doubtful what are the precise rules in having no suspicion of the real state of force. They all unite in declaring that the case. We think also that he is re- their duties are limited to the examination sponsible, together with the dockyard and remedy of reported defects and of officers, for the defective condition of the such other defects as may become apports when the • Megæra' left Sheerness. parent in carrying this duty into exe

"We further cousider that Mr. William cution ; and these views are supported Ladd, the Master Shipwright, and Mr. by the evidence of their immediate W. H. Henwood, the Assistant Master naval superiors, who hold or have held Shipwright at Woolwich from 1866 to 1869, the post of dockyard superintendents. and Mr. A. B. Sturdee, the Master On the other hand, the Admiralty officers Shipwright, and Mr. William Mitchell, urge the very opposite statements, and the Assistant Master Shipwright at point to the Circular Orders in existence Sheerness from 1869 to 1871, are severally and to the impossibility of their being deserving of censure for not having dis- able to ascertain whether the dockyard covered either the unprotected condition officers have done or have not done their or the inaccessible position of the plates duty in examining ships. It is clear to in the part where the leak was afterwards us that while the intentions of the discovered ; and for never making a Admiralty were to enforce adherence to thorough examination of the interior, these circulars, nevertheless their orders although both at Woolwich and Sheerness have always been understood and obeyed there were ample opportunities of so by the dockyard officials in the limited doing. Nor do we think that the Super. sense above referred to. But it appears intendents at those yards were free from to us that it would be quite possible to blame in not seeing that these duties were mature a system whereby the respective efficiently carried out.

duties of all these officers could be defined “We consider that Mr. Ladd and Mr. and checked, so as to render it very Henwood are further to blame for having difficult for any serious mistakes to occur, neglected to institute an examination of and that without such a system, responthe Megæra's' plates in the interior in sibility in practice becoines little better December, 1867, though they were then than nominal. expressly directed by the Controller of “We think that a complete survey the Navy to report whether she was in should be made of every iron ship at want of repair.

suitable intervals. But the circumstance “Mr. Sturdee and Mr. Mitchell are that such survey had been made should also especially deserving of censure, not release a superintendent of a dockbecause, when informed by the carpenter yard from the duty of at all times making of the Megæra,' when she was in their sure that a vessel has left his charge in hands in April, 1870, that the bottom was good order. stated to be very thin in many places, “We feel compelled to add that we they took no steps whatever to ascertain have formed, however unwillingly, an whether that was true or not,

unfavourable opinion as to the mode in “ The engineers and carpenters of the which the administration of her Majesty's Megæra ' in ber several commissions are dockyards is generally conducted. The in some degree to blame for not having important work of the survey of vessels called attention to the circumstance that seems often to have been done in an inparts of the ship were closed up and complete and unsatisfactory manner. Offi. inaccessible even to view.

cers too often appear to us to bave done “ Captain Thrupp also appears blame- no more than each of them thought it able for not taking care that the cargo was absolutely necessary to do ; following wns properly stowed before leaving Sheer- a blind routine in the discharge of their Dess.

duties, and acting almost as if it were “ We are of opinion that it was an un- their main object to avoid responsibility. fortunate circumstance that Sir Sydney As regards the Admiralty, we have Dacres should have placed officers in endeavoured to restrict our inquiry to charge of the Megæra,' very few of matters which immediately bore on the whom had ever sailed in iron vessels, as loss of the Megæra;' but owing to wit. it must be difficult, for those who are not nesses often travelling into points which familiar with their construction, to form seemed to affect their own character, and a sound opinion as to the character of which it was difficult to check, we have been led to exceed such limits. We do sbe was selected for the voyage to Austranot consider that there is any evidence lia, was to be found therein. Such a to show that the Admiralty ever cut down record was worse than useless; it was an estimate from a feeling of parsimony, simply misleading. When estimates for or sacrificed efficiency from a desire to the repair of ships are received at the reduce expenditure. We do not believe Admiralty, judging from this case, they that in any case connected with the are disposed of without sufficient referMegæra' the reduction of an estimate ence to previous reports and former outcontributed to her loss. We consider, how- lays. Reports from dockyards seem to ever, that it would have been sound be received with too much reliance on economy to have got rid of the vessel their correctness. It is with difficulty long ago, as being an expensive ship to that the details of the actual work permaintain, and of comparatively little formed under each estimate can be traced. value for any service.

Nothing like complete statements of the “We feel bound also to state that, in work done in each instance to a ship the course of the inquiry, it has been appear to be furnished. No one seems clearly shown to us that the system of to have known or to have recollected in administration at the Admiralty is defec- 1870 and 1871 that the “Megæra' had tive in some important points. Its secre- never been thoroughly overhauled since tariat arrangements are insufficient, and 1864; that she had been once declared its mode of registration of correspondence only fit for 18 or 24 months' service in defective. It is an extraordinary circum- her then existing condition, and on two stance indicative of this that when Sir subsequent occasions fit for 12 months' Spencer Robinson asked for the report service only; that when pronounced equal which Mr. Reed was supposed to have to the voyage to Australia more than six made in 1866 on the thinness of the iron

years had passed, and that before she plates of the Megæra' that reference could have returned to England seven did not lead to the production of the years at least would have elapsed since report of the dockyard officers of the she had been properly examined and same year to a similar effect. A very really made efficient for sea service. little reflection ought to have led the clerk “We have come to the above conclu. intrusted with the search to endeavour to sions after careful and full consideration. ascertain and to produce any documents It is with reluctance and pain that we of the period which bore on the subject express unfavourable opinions with re. under inquiry. The explanation of Mr. spect to the conduct of officers and the Claude Clifton in this matter is very management of a great department. But unsatisfactory.

in doing so we have acted on a strong “ The checks by which responsibility is sense of duty, and of the imperative obto be enforced, judging by the case of ligations which have been placed on us by the. Megæra,' appear to be practically your Majesty. almost nominal.* There was, indeed, a “ LAWRENCE. (L.s.) ship's book for the ‘Megæra ;' but neither “ A. BREWSTER. the circumstance that she was coated

M. SEYMOUR. with an experimental cement, nor the FRED. ARROW. nature of the different surveys which had H. C. ROTHERY. from time to time been held on her, nor, THOMAS CHAPMAN. indeed, a word whereby a suspicion would “GEORGE P. BIDDER, Secretary. arise as to her real condition at the time “6th March, 1872."

[ocr errors]


The following is the text of the
Award :-

“Her Britannic Majesty and the United States of America having agreed by Article I. of the Treaty coucluded and signed at Washington the 8th of May, 1871, to refer all the claims 'generically known as the “ Alabama " claims' to a Tribunal of Arbitration to be composed of five Arbitrators named :-One by, her Britannic

Majesty, one by the President of the United States, 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 her Britan. nic Majesty, the President of the United States, his Majesty the King of Italy, the President of the Swiss Confederation, and his Majesty the Emperor of Brazil, hav. ing respectively named their Arbitrators,

« AnteriorContinuar »