Այս գրքի մասին
Իմ գրադարանը
Books on Google Play
Page.
XIII -NATURE AND AMOUNT OF DAMAGES, &c.-Continued.
Reasons for calling all the claims Alabama Claims.
In April, 1865, the United States renew discussion..
Responsibility of Great Britain re-asserted....
Denial of liability..
190
191
May, 1865, the United States classify claims as
"direct" and
64
indirect," and demand reparation for all....
Great Britain denies liability for indirect and refuses arbitra-
tion for direct claims...
Lord Granville thinks it admits unlimited argument as to the
extent of the Alabama Claims....
193
This Convention not acceptable to the United States..
194
Mr. Johnson informs Lord Clarendon that the United States
have claims of their own on Great Britain...
Sir Edward Thornton advises Lord Clarendon that the Conven-
tion is rejected because it is thought that it does not in-
clude the indirect claims...
Mr. Motley informs Lord Clarendon that the United States do
not abandon the national claims.
195
And that the Johnson-Clarendon Convention did not afford suf-
ficient redress for the national injuries....
The indirect claims as considered by Lord Clarendon..
President's message to Congress December, 1869.......
196
Same in 1870..
In January, 1871, the words "Alabama Claims" were understood
to include all claims of United States against Great Britain,
both national and individual....
Negotiations opened at Washington...
Reasons which induced those negotiations..
Preliminary proposals and correspondence..
197
The proposed commission to treat of the "Alabama Claims”.
United States Commissioners appointed and confirmed on the
correspondence, and their powers limited by it......
"The Alabama Claims," the American Commissioners state their
understanding of the meaning of those words....
They propose a mode of ascertaining the amount of the dam-
ages
Without exception to the definition of the term "Alabama
Claims".
Lord Cairns says the indirect claims included in the Treaty
X
XIII.-NATURE AND AMOUNT OF DAMAGES, &c.-continued.
Conclusions...
205
The American Case stated the claims in the language of the Joint
High Commissioners
Long delay in objecting to it by Great Britain.
206
Supposed concessions to United States in the Treaty.
The Rules..
Rules for measuring damages
Expression of regret..
Fenians..
Conclusions.
Lord Granville's speech....
Explanation of the misunderstanding.
Résumé..
Arbitration takes the place of war
The Tribunal the judge of its own powers.
Pradier Fodéré..
Calvo...
Mr. Montague Bernard..
3. Measure of damages.
Severity to be shown to the wrong-doer in claims founded on torts.
The animus of the wrong-doer au element of damages..
207
208
209
210
211
212
As to property destroyed and injuries inflicted upon citizens of
the United States....
215
As to expenses in pursuit of the cruisers..
216
Alleged condonement by the United States..
218
The arbitration substitutes damages in the place of reparation by
war....
Reply to Arguments in the British Counter Case.
Indemnity should follow injury.
Award of a sum in gross..
It should include interest.
Case of the Canada...
Award under the Treaty of Ghent.
Award under the Jay Treaty.
Contingent reference to assessors.
Claims of private persons.
The indirect claims...
Enhanced rates of insurance
Transfer of United States commerce to British flag.
Prolongation of the war...
Whether too remote for consideration to be determined by the
Tribunal...
The United States do not desire extreme damages.
The jurisdiction of the question belongs to the Tribunal
Without an adjudication upon it there will not be a full settlement
of all differences..
224
Conclusion.........
NOTE A.-OBSERVATIONS ON CERTAIN SPECIAL CRITICISMS IN THE BRITISH
COUNTER CASE ON THE CASE OF THE UNITED STATES...
NOTE B.-EXTRACTS FROM VARIOUS DEBATES IN THE PARLIAMENT OF GREAT
BRITAIN REFERRED TO IN THE FOREGOING ARGUMENT
226
227
228
229
231
NOTE B.-EXTRACTS, &C.-Continued.
1. The Foreign-Enlistment Act of July 3, 1819..
2. Lord Althorp's motion for the repeal of the Foreign-Enlistment
Act...
NOTE C.-MEMORANDUM OF CORRESPONDENCE AND DOCUMENTS RELATING TO
THE AMENDMENT OF THE ENGLISH FOREIGN-ENLISTMENT ACT,
1861-71....
NOTE D.—CONSIDERATION OF THE CLAIMS ARISING IN THE DESTRUCTION OF
VESSELS AND PROPERTY BY THE SEVERAL CRUISERS .
Detailed statements have been presented..
With the evidence furnished by the claimants to support them...
The United States desire an award of a sum in gross on the evi-
dence presented....
234
236
239
242
248
British criticisms on this evidence..
The answer to such criticisms...
Prices obtained under forced sales no criterion.
Injustice of the British estimates of the value of the vessels de-
stroyed....
249
Whaling and fishing vessels..
250
251
252
253
254
Letter of Mr. Crapo..
Property destroyed.
How proved
Oil or fish destroyed on whalers or fishing-vessels.
Personal effects...
Claims of insurance companies..
No double claims supported by the United States..
Charter-parties or freights..
Loss of profits...
A part of the damages in actions in tort.
Breaking up voyages of whaling-vessels..
Claims of the officers and crews..
II.
ARGUMENT OR SUMMARY, SHOWING THE POINTS AND REFERRING TO THE
EVIDENCE RELIED UPON BY THE GOVERNMENT OF HER BRITANNIC
MAJESTY IN ANSWER TO THE CLAIMS OF THE UNITED STATES PRE-
SENTED TO THE TRIBUNAL OF ARBITRATION CONSTITUTED UNDER
ARTICLE I OF THE TREATY CONCLUDED AT WASHINGTON ON THE 8TH
MAY, 1871, BETWEEN HER BRITANNIC MAJESTY AND THE UNITED
STATES OF AMERICA.
The Sumter, Nashville, Tallahassee, Chickamauga, and Retribution.
263
General principles of International Law in force when the facts occurred.
British law and powers of the Executive in Great Britain
269
Facts which must be proved before an award can be made against Great
Britain
XII
ARGUMENT OF SUMMARY, &c.-Continued.
The Shenandoah
282
Conclusion as to the Florida, Alabama, Georgia, and Shenandoah
283
General course pursued by the British Government in regard to the represen-
tations made by Mr. Adams..
Charge that the armament of certain vessels was procured from Great Britain
Charge that the crews of certain vessels were partly composed of British
subjects...
238
Review of the grounds on which the claims of the United States rest. Character of the claims of the United States..
Charge as to Confederate Agencies in Great Britain for war purposes.
Complaint that Confederate cruisers visiting British ports were not seized
and detained..........
Complaint as to hospitalities accorded to Confederate cruisers in British
ports
290
295
303
304
Observations on the principle and measure of compensation.
Conclusion....
307
ANNEX A. COMMUNICATIONS BETWEEN THE BRITISH AND AMERICAN GOV-
ERNMENTS DURING THE CIVIL WAR, WITH REFERENCE TO THE STATE OF
THE NEUTRALITY LAWS OF GREAT BRITAIN..
309
ANNEX B. FRENCH TRANSLATION OF THE THREE RULES IN ARTICLE VI
OF THE TREATY OF WASHINGTON.............
313
ANNEX C. REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE APPOINTED BY THE BOARD OF
TRADE..
Table No. 1. Showing progressive increase in the amount of claims
for losses incurred through the respective cruisers as stated at dif-
ferent periods...
Table No. 2. Showing the result of the corrections and re-appropria-
tions of the claims and the corresponding allowances in summa-
ries Nos. 1, 2, and 3, of First Report, in accordance with remarks
in present Report....
339
340
341
342
343
Table No. 3. Showing, under respective divisions of classes, interest,
and cruisers, the claims advanced under the Revised Statement,
together with the allowances to meet them
346
Table No. 4. Showing the vessels captured by the Alabama, the valu-
ation the captors placed on each vessel, the allowance deemed ad-
equate for each, &c..
ANNEX D. FURTHER NOTE ON THE CLAIM PRESENTED BY THE GOVERN-
MENT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR EXPENDITURE ALLEGED TO HAVE
BEEN INCURRED IN THE PURSUIT AND CAPTURE OF CONFEDERATE CRUIS-
ERS. EFFORTS MADE TO CAPTURE CONFEDERATE CRUISERS.
Inadequacy and want of concert of United States naval force abroad, &c
Errors in the synopsis of orders
359
360
III.
SUPPLEMENTARY STATEMENTS OR ARGUMENTS MADE BY THE RE-
SPECTIVE AGENTS OR COUNSEL SUBSEQUENTLY TO FILING THE
ARGUMENTS ACCORDING TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE TREATY.
I-STATEMENT OF SIR ROUNDELL PALMER, MADE AT THE SEVENTH CON-
FERENCE, ON THE 27TH JUNE, 1872..
375
Points upon which he desires further argument..
II. REPLY OF THE COUNSEL OF THE UNITED STATES IN RESPONSE TO THE
FOREGOING STATEMENT OF SIR ROUNDELL PALMER..
376
Reasons why further argument should not be ordered at this stage of
the proceedings
III. ARGUMENT OF SIR ROUNDELL PALMER ON THE QUESTION OF "DUE
DILIGENCE." "THE EFFECT OF COMMISSIONS UPON THE INSURGENT
CRUISERS," AND "THE SUPPLIES OF COAL TO SUCH CRUISERS IN BRITISH
PORTS".
1. On the question of Due Diligence generally considered
On the sources of the obligation...
Rules and principles of International Law,
Express or implied engagements of Great Britain.
Effect of prohibitory municipal laws
The three Rules of the Treaty of Washington.
General principles for finding what diligence is due.
The maxims cited by the United States from Sir R. Phillemore
For what purposes Great Britain refers to her municipal laws..
Doctrine of Tetens
Influence upon the question of diligence of the different forms
of National Governments
385
387
388
389
390
393
394
Objections to any theory of the diligence due from neutral Gov-
ernments which involves a universal hypothesis of arbitrary
power
Argument of the United States as to the necessity of a reliance
on prerogative.....
395
Argument as to prerogative powers belonging to the British
Crown
True doctrine as to powers of the Crown...
American view of an a priori obligation
397
398
The British Crown has power to use the forces of the realm to
stop acts of war within British territority
399
The assertion that Great Britain relies on punitive and not
preventive law disproved....
400
Preventive power of British law explained
The doubtful points as to the construction of the British For-
eign-Enlistment Act never affected the diligence of the British
Government....
401
Baron Bramwell's view of the international as distinct from
municipal obligation agreed with that of the American Attor-
ney-General in 1841....
402
On the arguments as to due diligence derived by the United
States from foreign laws...
On the comparison made by the United States between their
own laws and British laws...
405
Examination of the preventive powers of the American Govern-
ment under their acts of Congress for the preservation of neu-
trality.
Testimonies of Mr. Bemis and Mr. Seward on this subject........
Argument from the Foreign-Enlistment Act of 1870..
Illustrations of the doctrine of due diligence from the history
of the United States...
Arguments of the United States from suggested defects in the
administrative machinery of British law, and from the evi-
dence required by the British Government
Inconsistency of the Rules of the Treaty with the requirement
of diligence to prevent where there were not reasonable
grounds of belief.
The British Government took active and spontaneous measures
to acquire all proper information and to prevent breaches of
the law...
409
410
412