Page images
PDF
EPUB

the 4th, 5th, and 6th articles of the convention, signed by Lord Stanley and yourself, should be approved, that in that case you apprehend no difficulty in bringing the matter to a speedy and satisfactory conclusion. You assure me, further, that at the moment when you shall hear from me by cable you will renew the negotiation, and, if necessary, advise me of its progress by the same mode.

An answer to your cable dispatch which I have thus mentioned was transmitted by telegraph, under the President's direction, on the 20th of December. In that answer I submitted some modification of the sugges tion which you had made, of such a character as to make it at once more definite and more accordant with the views which prevail in this government. No reply to that answer has yet been received by cable or otherwise. On the other hand, Mr. Thornton confidentially informs me that on the 25th of December he received a dispatch from Lord Clarendon, in which he stated that he would, on the next day, transmit to Mr. Thornton, by mail, a power and a draught of a convention which he trusted would be satisfactory to the United States.

I do not doubt that this proceeding on the part of Lord Clarendon is based upon the renewal of the negotiations which you promised, and that in withholding information of it from the cable you have been_governed by prudential considerations, which are easily conceived. I have to thank you for the perseverance and fidelity with which you have attended to the instructions of this department.

We await now the arrival of Lord Clarendon's promised communication, which may be expected during the next week.

I am, sir, your obedient servant,

REVERDY JOHNSON, Esq., &c., &c., &c.

WILLIAM H. SEWARD.

Mr. Johnson to Mr. Seward.

No. 96.]

LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES,
London, January 9, 1869.

SIR: Until I hear from you in answer to my dispatches Nos. 86 and 87, of the dates respectively of the 23d and 24th of December, I can make no further progress with the claims question. If your reply shall substantially comply with the suggestions of Lord Clarendon as to the mode of settling the Alabama claims, I have no doubt that I shall be able to conclude an arrangement which will be satisfactory to the President and yourself and the Senate, at so early a day that the controversy may be finally closed during the present session of Congress.

Awaiting your next dispatches upon the subject, I remain, with high regard, your obedient servant,

Hon. WILLIAM H. SEWARD,

Secretary of State, Washington, D. C.

REVERDY JOHNSON.

Mr. Seward to Mr. Johnson.

[Telegram per cable.]

DEPARTMENT OF STATE,

Washington, January 11, 1869.

Clarendon's draught considered. Article I, sixth line after "Majesty," insert "including the so-called Alabama claims."

Article II, substitute "Nevertheless, if the commissioners or any two of them shall think it desirable that a sovereign or head of a friendly state should be arbitrator or umpire in case of any claims," for the words in six first lines, second paragraph.

Article II, third paragraph, strike out the new italicized provision; superfluous and tends to cavil. Residue of draft convention is satisfactory.

If Clarendon agrees, he ought telegraph Thornton to sign or you sign immediately. Same as to San Juan convention, which is satisfactory. Sign in both cases, or let both matters be sent here, and telegraph so both conventions or agreed copies go to the Senate immediately.

REVERDY JOHNSON, Esq., &c., &c., &c.

WILLIAM H. SEWARD.

No. 59.]

Mr. Seward to Mr. Johnson.

DEPARTMENT OF STATE,

Washington, January 12, 1869.

SIR: Owing to the delay of the steamer, your dispatches of the 23d of December, No. 86, and 24th of December, No. 87, both of which relate to the claims convention, did not reach the department till yesterday, the 11th instant. At the same time Mr. Thornton placed in my hands a copy of a dispatch* which Lord Clarendon addressed to him on the same subject on the 24th of December. The President's directions were immediately taken upon the subject, and the result was announced to you last night by a telegraphic dispatch a copy of which is hereunto appended. For manifest reasons the propositions submitted by me in that cable dispatch were almost entirely unaccompanied by argument or explanation. On the other hand, it is expected and hoped that her Majesty's government will give us their reply by cable before this or any other communication from this department transmitted by the mail can reach your legation. If that expectation shall be realized, what I now write will be useful only for ultimate reference.

We have adopted the draft of convention between Great Britain and the United States of America for the settlement of all outstanding claims, which has been submitted to us in a printed paper by her Majesty's gov ernment, under the date of the 22d of December, with some suggested amendments on our part, which do not materially change the character of that plan, as the plan itself does not in absolutely essential particu lars vary from the project which was submitted by me in my telegraphic dispatch of the 20th of December last.

The first of these amendments consists in inserting in the first article an express recognition of the so-called Alabama claims in the definition of claims which are to be settled by the convention. This amendment simply proposes to guard against a possible ground of cavil, however unreasonable, might be used to excite distrust of the convention.

The second amendment proposed consists in striking out in the second paragraph of article II these words: "If, however, it shall appear to the commissioners, or any two of them, that, from the nature of any particular claim in regard to which they may have been unable to come to a decision, it is desirable that a special arbitrator or umpire shall be named,

*For Lord Clarendon's dispatch of December 24, and its accompaniment the protocol, which is amended by this instruction, see correspondence with British legation in this

series.

For inclosure see dispatch next preceding this.

to whose decision such claim shall be referred," and insert in lieu thereof these words: "Nevertheless, if the commissioners, or any two of them, shall think it desirable that a sovereign or head of a friendly state should be arbitrator or umpire in case of any claim."

Thus amended, the paragraph will read: "Nevertheless, if the commissioners, or any two of them, shall think it desirable that a sovereign or head of a friendly state should be arbitrator or umpire in case of any claim, the commissioners shall report to that effect to their respective governments, who shall thereupon, within six months, agree upon some sovereign or head of a friendly state, who shall be invited to decide upon such claim, and before whom shall be laid the official correspondence which has taken place between the two governments, and the other written documents or statements which may have been presented to the commissioners in respect of such claims."

The reasons for this proposed amendment are that the phraseology, being more general, is less open to adverse criticism, insomuch as the amendment avoids all allusion to claims of any special or distinct class, and avoids the description of the arbitrator or umpire, when he is the sovereign or head of a friendly state, as a special arbitrator or umpire. Lord Clarendon's argument against the provision which I have heretofore proposed for an alternative designation of the arbitrator or umpire, in case the two governments shall fail to agree within six months, is not satisfactory; because, without some such provision, the convention may possibly fail of effect after its ratification. On the other hand, we deem the convention, in the form which we have now accepted it, more satisfactory than an entire failure of the negotiation.

The only further amendment which we have proposed is to strike out Lord Clarendon's new proposition at the close of the third paragraph of article II, which is contained in the words, "The decision of the arbitrator or umpire on any particular claim so referred to him shall rule any other claims of the same class."

This provision is deemed superfluous because there can be no reasonable ground to apprehend that an umpire who should have fairly and fully considered and decided a claim upon its merits, would make a contrary decision upon another claim of precisely the same character and merits. The provision would open the ground for cavil that one claim might be prejudiced by previous decision of the umpire made upon another claim materially dissimilar in character and merits.

I trust it is hardly necessary to say, at this late stage of the negotiation, that in my opinion the success of the convention depends not exclusively upon the nature of its provisions, but depends very much also upon the tone, temper, and spirit which pervade it.

The project which Lord Clarendon has submitted, of alterations and additions to convert the protocol on the subject of the San Juan question into a treaty, has been considered and is accepted.

In case of Lord Clarendon's agreement to our present propositions on the claims convention, you are then authorized to sign the two conventions, and announce that fact to me by telegraph, or to assure Lord Clarendon that they will be promptly signed here if instructions shall be given to Mr. Thornton for that purpose. Our object is to submit these two conventions, either the originals or copies, together with the naturalization protocol, to the Senate of the United States as soon as the two forms shall be completed, and all at one and the same time.

I am, sir, your obedient servant,

REVERDY JOHNSON, Esq., &c., &c., &c.

WILLIAM H. SEWARD.

[blocks in formation]

No. 98.]

Mr. Johnson to Mr. Seward.

LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES,
London, January 13, 1869.

SIR: My reply by cable to your cable dispatch of the 11th instant, (which you have no doubt received,) advised you that I thought that Lord Clarendon would agree to the amendments to the claims convention which you suggest. This impression is now strengthened by his having sent to me a draught of the convention with such amendments inserted.

But as the prime minister is not in London, and his lordship can only finally act upon the subject after consultation with him, the negotiation must await that event. He tells me, however, that this will only cause a delay of a day or two, and that he hopes to be able to close the matter in time to transmit the convention by the mail of Saturday next, the 16th instant.

I have the honor to remain, with high regard, your obedient servant, REVERDY JOHNSON.

[blocks in formation]

Give us at once dates of both conventions signed, so that we may complete copies for the Senate.

REVERDY JOHNSON, Esq., &c., &c., &c.

WILLIAM H. SEWARD.

Mr. Johnson to Mr. Seward.

[Telegram per cable.]

graph.

LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES,
London, January 15, 1869.

Both conventions signed yesterday, 14th instant. When ratified, tele

Hon. WILLIAM H. SEWARD,

Secretary of State, Washington, D. C.

REVERDY JOHNSON.

RHODES

HOUSE

No. 100.]

Mr. Johnson to Mr. Seward.

*OXFORD*

LIBRARY

LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES,
London, January 15, 1869.

SIR: My cable dispatches of yesterday and to-day have advised you that Lord Clarendon and myself have signed a convention for the settlement by arbitration of the northwest boundary controversy, and another for the adjustment by commission and arbitration of the claims controversy, especially including the class known as the Alabama claims. They were both signed at the foreign office yesterday, the 14th instant, between two and three o'clock p. in. I forward them with this dispatch.

The first differs only from the protocol on the same subject, of the 17th of October last, and the supplement of the 10th of November, in the insertion of such provisions as became necessary by their conversion into a convention.

This conversion was done by me under the authority of your cable dispatches of the 20th of December and 11th of January last. The provisions referred to are such as have been incorporated in all previous conventions of the same kind. The only alteration that I insisted upon in the draught to which your dispatch of the 11th of January refers, was to strike out the word "either" in the 6th article, so as to prevent the arbitrator from considering the question submitted to him in the presence of the agent of one of the governments whilst the agent of the other was absent. The reason for this change you will readily appreciate. But for it the arbitrator might act upon statements or arguments presented by one of the agents, not only without an opportunity being offered to the other to reply, but without his knowing what they were. When I explained to Lord Clarendon that this might be its operation, he readily assented to my suggestion; and the change, as you will see, was made.

In regard to the claims convention, all that is necessary for me to state is that it accords exactly with the instructions contained in your cable dispatch of the 11th of January. That my reading of that dispatch was correct I was confirmed in by a dispatch from Mr. Thornton, of the same date, which his lordship was kind enough to let me see.

As this convention does not at all differ from the convention of the 8th of February, 1853, except that it particularly mentions the Alabama class of claims as included within its provisions, I take for granted that it will meet the approval of the President and the Senate.

The operation of the convention of the 8th of February, 1853, was a just and satisfactory adjustment of all the then existing claims which

« ՆախորդըՇարունակել »