The conduct of other nations con trasted with that of Great Britain. coals to be furnished at all, that the ship receiving the supply will not run the blockade." When the insurgent iron-clad Stonewall came into Lisbon Harbor in March, 1865, it was ordered to leave in twenty-four hours. The United States bear willing testimony to this honorable conduct of Portugal. The Prussian Government announced that it would not protect its shipping or its subjects who might take letters of marque, share in privateering enterprises, carry merchandise of war, or forward dispatches. The United States have no reason to suppose that the subjects of the King of Prussia departed from the line of duty thus indicated. 3 The Russian Government ordered that even "the flag of men-of-war belonging to the seceded States must not be saluted."4 Spain followed France in the track of England, but care was taken to avoid, in the Royal Proclamation, the use of the word "belligerents." It has been seen with what fidelity and impartiality the authorities at Cardenas carried out the letter and the spirit of this proclamation, when the 1 Mr. Harvey to Mr. Seward, Diplomatic Correspondence, 1864, part 4, page 296. 2 Same to same, Diplomatic Correspondence, 1865, part 3, page 109. • Vol. IV, page 9. s Vol. IV, page 10. 6 Vol. IV, page 9. Florida arrived there from Nassau, in the summer of 1862. The Emperor of Brazil required his subjects to observe a strict neutrality; and his Government informed them what acts of the belligerents would forfeit the right of hospitality. It was ordered that "a belligerent who has once violated neutrality shall not be admitted into the ports of the Empire;" and that "vessels which may attempt to violate neutrality shall be compelled to leave the maritime territory immediately, and they shall be allowed to procure no supplies." These rules were enforced. The Alabama was refused the hospitality of Brazilian ports in consequence of violations of the neutrality which the Emperor had determined to maintain. When the Tuscaloosa came to St. Catharine's from Simon's Bay, in November, 1863, she was refused supplies and ordered to leave, because she was a tender and prize of the Alabama, and was tainted by the acts of that vessel. The commander of the Shenandoah boarded a vessel between Cardiff and Bahia, opened the manifest, and broke the seal of the Brazilian Consul; for this act his vessel, and any vessel which he might command, were excluded from Brazilian ports.1 The Imperial Government, in all these proceedings, appeared desirous 1 Vol. VI, page 588. The conduct of other nations contrasted with that of Great Britain. The conduct of other nations con trasted with that of Great Britain. of asserting its sovereignty, and of maintaining an honest neutrality. Mr. Fish, in one of his first utterances after he became Secretary of State, expressed the sense which the United States entertained of this difference between the conduct of Great Britain and that of other nations. "There were other Powers," he said, "that were contemporaneous with England in similar concessions; but it was in England only that that concession was supplemented by acts causing direct damage to the United States. The President is careful to make this discrimination, because he is anxious, as much as possible, to simplify the case, and to bring into view these subsequent acts, which are so important in determining the question between the two countries."1 Mr. Fish to Mr. Motley, May 15, 1869, Vol. VI, page 4. PART VI. THE TRIBUNAL SHOULD AWARD A SUM IN In the opening conference of the Joint High Commission relating to the Alabama claims, the American Commissioners stated the nature of the demands of the United States. They said that there were "extensive direct losses in the capture and destruction of a large number of vessels with their cargoes, and in the heavy national expenditures in the pursuit of the cruisers, and indirect injury in the transfer of a large part of the American commercial marine to the British flag, in the enhanced payments of insurance, in the prolongation of the war, and in the addition of a large sum to the cost of the war and the suppression of the rebellion." They further said that the amount of the direct losses to individuals "which had thus far been presented, amounted to about fourteen millions of dollars, without interest, which amount was liable to be greatly increased by claims which had not been presented;" and that the direct loss to the Government "in the pursuit of cruisers could easily be ascertained by certificates of Government accounting officers." They added that Rejection of the offer by the "in the hope of an amicable settlement, no estimate was made of the indirect losses, without prejudice, however, to the right of indemnification on their account in the event of no such settlement being made." The British Commissioners declined to make British Commis- the "amicable settlement" which was proposed on sioners. submission by the Treaty. Terms of the the part of the United States. The Joint High Commission then entered into negotiations which resulted in an agreement "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," that all the claims "growing out of the acts committed by the several vessels which have given rise to the claims generically known as the Alabama claims," should be referred to this Tribunal of Arbitration. It was further agreed that this Tribunal, should it find that Great Britain had, by any act or omission, failed to fulfill any of the duties set forth in the rules in the sixth article of the Treaty, or recognized by principles of International Law not inconsistent with such rules, might then "proceed to award a sum in gross to be paid by Great Britain to the United States for all the claims referred to it." Ante, pages 10, 11. |