but the Tribunal decided not at present to require such arguments.

Whether the motion of Sir Alexander Cockburn was prompted by Sir Roundell Palmer, in order to afford to the latter the desired opportunity to criti cise the American "Argument,"-or whether it was a spontaneous one arising from the former's not hav ing studied the case, and his consequent ignorance of the fact that most of the questions proposed had already been amply and sufficiently discussed by both Governments, does not distinctly appear. Proba bly both motives co-operated to induce the motion. Subsequent incidents throw some light on this point. Meanwhile it was plain to infer from the observations of the other Arbitrators, and from their deci sion, that they were better informed on the subject than Sir Alexander Cockburn.

RULES CONCERNING THE CONFERENCES OF THE TRIBUNAL.

The Tribunal next decided that the Agents should attend all the discussions and deliberations of the Conferences, accompanied by the Counsel, except in case where the Tribunal should think it advisable to conduct their discussions and deliberations with closed doors. The practical effect of this resolution, when connected with a resolution adopted at a subsequent meeting in regard to the course of proceeding, was to enable and require the Agents and Counsel to assist at the judicial consultations of the Tribunal: it being understood, of course, that none others should be pres ent save the representatives of the two Governments.

The Tribunal then authorized publicity to be given to its declaration and to the declarations of the two Governments, relative to the national claims of the United States: after which it adjourned to the 15th of July.

Heretofore, either by intimation to the Secretary, and to the Agents and Counsel, or by formal resolu tion, the Tribunal had signified its desire that the proceedings should not be committed to publicity, unless by the will of the respective Governments. Of course, reporters for the Press, and other persons not officially connected with the Arbitration, were excluded from the sittings of the Tribunal. This reserve or secrecy of proceeding was inconvenient to the many respectable representatives of the Press of London and New York, persons of consideration, who had come to Geneva for the purpose of satisfying the public curiosity of the United States and of England regarding the acts of the Tribunal; but was dictated, it would seem, rather by considerations of delicacy toward the two Governments, than by any reluctance on the part of the Arbitrators to have their action. made known day by day to the world. It was a tribunal of peculiar constitution and character; its members were responsible in some sense each to his own Government, and also to the opinion, at least, of the litigant Governments; its proceedings were not purely judicial, but in a certain degree diplomatic; and a large part of the proceedings were in the nature not so much of action as of judicial consultation, which it might well seem unfit to communicate to the

general public as they occurred, although perfectly fit to be thus communicated to the respective Govern

ments.

The Tribunal reassembled on the 15th of July. Down to this time all the proceedings of the Arbitra tors were in their nature public acts, or they have been made public through the respective Govern. ments. All such acts were recorded in the protocols.

Hereafter, we shall have, in addition to the acts of the Tribunal recorded in protocols, a series of pro visional opinions, which were also printed and distributed for should have been] according to express order of the Tribunal. These opinions of the Arbi trators, as well as their official acts, have already been made public by both Governments.

But, incidentally to such acts and opinions, there was much oral debate from time to time at the suc cessive Conferences of the Tribunal. At these de bates, the Agents and Counsel of both Governments were required to assist, by resolution of the Tribunal. Assisting, we necessarily heard what was said by the respective Arbitrators. We were expected to hear, it is presumable, and also to understand: otherwise, why required to attend?

Are these debates, which occurred in the presence of so many persons, Agents, Counsel, and others, to be regarded as confidential and unfit to be disclosed now? Forget them, we can not, even if copious notes of the most important debates did not exist to aid and cor rect mere memory. Is it, then, improper to speak of them? I think not. I conceive that any of us, who

possess knowledge of those debates, have perfect right to refer to them on all fit occasions.

I propose, however, on the present occasion, to ex ercise this right sparingly, and that only in two relations, namely, first, very briefly, where such reference involves mere formality, and is almost inseparable from acts recorded in the protocols; and, secondly, with a little more fullness at the close, and with some retrospection, for the purpose of explaining the final act of the British Arbitrator.

DISCUSSIONS OF THE TRIBUNAL.

At the meeting of the 15th, discussion arose immediately as to the method and order of proceeding to be adopted in the consideration of the subjects refer red to the Tribunal.

Mr. Strempfli then suggested that in his opinion the proper course was to take up the case of some vessel, as expressly required by the Treaty, and consider whether on that vessel Great Britain was responsible to the United States. IIe had directed his own inquiries in this way, and in this way had arrived at satisfactory conclusions. His plan had been to select a vessel, to abstract the facts proved regarding her, —and then to apply to the facts the special rules of the Treaty.

Debate on this proposition ensued between Sir Alexander Cockburn, on the one hand, and the rest of the Arbitrators on the other hand; the former de siring to have preliminary consideration of "princi ples," that is, of abstract questions of law, and the lat

ter insisting that the true and logical course was that of the Treaty, namely, to take up a case, to examine the facts, and to discuss and apply the law to the facts thus ascertained, as proposed by Mr. Stampfli.

Finally it was concluded, on the proposition of Count Sclopis, to follow substantially the programme of Mr. Stampfli, that is, to take up the inculpated ves sels, seriatim, each Arbitrator to express an opinion in writing thereon, of such tenor as he should see fit, but these opinions to be provisional only for the pres ent, and not to conclude the Arbitrator, or to prevent his modifying such opinion, on arriving at the point of participation in the final decision of the Tribunal.

On the 16th, consideration of the programme of Mr. Stampfli was resumed. It consisted of the fol lowing heads, which deserve to be set forth here, in order to show how thoroughly the subject had been examined and digested by Mr. Stampfli.

"(A.) Indications générales:

1. Question à decider.

2. Délimitation des faits.
3. Principes généraux.

"(B.) Décision relative à chacun des croiseurs.
Observations préliminaires:

1. Le Sumter.

(a) Faits.

(b) Considérants.

(c) Jugement."

[Follow the names of the other vessels, with similar sub-division of heads of inquiry.]

"(C.) Détermination du Tribunal d'adjuger une somme en bloc. “(D.) Examen des éléments pour fixer une somme en bloc. "(E.) Conclusion et adjudication définitive d'une somme en bloc."