Page images

dantly in the appropriate place and time, that is, in the successive Cases and Arguments of the two Gov. ernments.

CASE OF THE “FLORIDA" DECIDED. The Arbitrators then met on the 17th, and proceeded to take up the case of the Florida.

On motion of Sir Alexander Cockburn, it was ordered by the Tribunal that the provisional opinions or statements to be read by the Arbitrators should be printed, and distributed to the Arbitrators and to the Agents and Counsel of the two Governments.

Mr. Stæmpfli's opinion or statement had been read already, and was in print.

After some incidental discussion among the Arbitrators, Sir A. Cockburn began the reading of his opinion on the case of the Florida.

The Tribunal met again on the 19th, and Sir Alex. ander Cockburn proceeded to read another portion of his opinion in the case of the Florida.

Then, after some debate, caused by irregularities of speech or conduct on the part of Sir Alexander, Mr. Adams proceeded to read the commencement of his opinion in the matter of the Florida.

On the 22d, the case of the Florida was concluded. Sir Alexander Cockburn and Mr. Adams completed the reading of their opinions, and the Baron d'Itajubá and Count Sclopis both read theirs. The result was to convict Great Britain of culpable want of due diligence in the matter of the Florida by the concurrent provisional opinions of four of the Arbitra

tors, with a dissenting opinion from the British Arbitrator.

The Florida, it will be remembered, was a steam gun-boat, built at Liverpool by Miller & Sons, on contract with the Confederate agent Bullock, for the warlike use of the Confederates. Miller & Sons falsely pretended that she was being built for the Italian Government by arrangement with Messrs. Thomas & Brothers of Liverpool and Palermo, one of whom expressly and fraudulently confirmed the false representation of Miller & Sons. The British Gov: ernment, although repeatedly warned of the illegal character of this vessel by the diplomatic and con. sular authorities of the United States, shut its eyes to the transparent falsehood and fraud of Miller & Sons and of Thomas, and took no proper and sufficient measures to investigate her character and to prevent the violation of the laws of the kingdom. She sailed from Liverpool without obstruction, cleared by the name of Oreto, unarmed, it is true, but accompanied by another vessel containing her armament, called the Bahama.

The Oreto next makes her appearance at Nassau, where she proceeded further to equip and arm as a man-of-war. The naval authorities at Nassau were unanimous in denouncing her illegal character, but the civil authorities, perverted by their sympathies, could with difficulty be persuaded to act against her. When they did act, she was acquitted by the local Admiralty Court, in the teeth of the facts and the law, either corruptly, or with inexplicable ignorance

of their duty on the part of the Court and of the attorney representing the Government. No appeal was taken by the Government.

The Oreto then threw off all pretensions of innocence; she openly completed her equipment, armament, and crew, partly at one place and partly at another, under the eye of the colonial authorities; and proceeded to cruise and to make prizes as an avowed man-of-war by the name of Florida. Meanwhile, with the illegality of her operations in England, and also in the Bahama Islands, now notorious and admitted, she continued to come and go in British ports, and to obtain supplies there as her base of operations, without interference on the part of the British Government.

On these facts, the three neutral Arbitrators and Mr. Adams convicted the British Government of want of due diligence, and of disregard otherwise of the Rules of the Treaty, notwithstanding that the Florida had entered and remained some time in the Confederate port of Mobile.

Their several opinions were precise, definite, clear, and with positive conclusion, as to all the material points of the case, in favor of the United States.

Sir Alexander Cockburn's adverse opinion was a verbose special plea,—which, while admitting all the material facts charged, and conceding the palpable fraud practiced by Miller & Sons and Thomas,—the original guilt of the vessel,—the absurdity of the action of the Admiralty Court of Nassau,—the illegal equipments at Nassau and elsewhere in British ports, -and the continued use of British ports as a base of

operations,—could not discover in these incidents any negligence or any violation of neutrality on the part of the British Government. Sir Alexander chose not to remember that the affair of the Oreto or Florida was, from the beginning to the end, according to the confession of Lord John Russell himself, a scandal and a reproach to the laws of Great Britain, and stilll more, we may add, a scandal and a reproach to certain of the British Ministers, of whose honor Sir Alex. ander assumes to be the special champion.

When Count Sclopis had concluded the reading of his opinion, Sir Alexander Cockburn renewed his motion for the hearing of Counsel; but was again overruled by the Tribunal, which assigned for its next Conference the consideration of the case of the Alabama. .


The Tribunal met again on the 25th; and the Baron d'Itajubá then made a precise and formal proposition, calling on the Counsel of Great Britain for a written or printed Statement or Argument in elucidation of three questions of law, namely:

"1. The question of due diligence treated in a general manner.

“2. The effect of commissions possessed by Confederate vessels of war which had entered into British ports.

'3. The supplies of coal furnished to Confederate vessels in British ports." And with liberty to the Counsel of the United States to reply either orally or in writing as the case may

be. This proposition was adopted by the Tribunal.

In so far as regards the first point, the call for Argument was obviously induced by a desire to put an end to the unseemly importunities of Sir Alexander Cockburn; for the Arbitrators had in effect again and again declared that in their judgment there was no occasion for elucidation or further discussion of the general question of due diligence; that the Tribunal did not desire any theoretical discussions of abstract questions; and that the practical question of due diligence had been already discussed to satiety in the several Cases and Arguments filed by the respective Governments. We shall perceive in the sequel how well-founded were the objections of the Tri. bunal in this respect; and how devoid of any useful object or purpose had been the ill-digested calls of Sir Alexander Cockburn.

To the other questions propounded by the Baron d'Itajubá, no objection could be made: they were fit subjects of the “elucidation" contemplated by the Treaty.

CASE OF THE “ALABAMA” DECIDED. The Arbitrators then proceeded to read alphabetically their opinions in the case of the Alabama,—that is to say, Mr. Adams, Sir Alexander Cockburn, Count Sclopis, and Mr. Stæmpfli read argumentative statements at length, and the Baron d'Itajubá expressed his concurrence in the statement made by Sir Alexander Cockburn.

In this case the Arbitrators were unanimously of opinion, — the British Arbitrator equally with his

« PreviousContinue »