250 DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENCE AND FOREIGN RELATIONS. 



emotions, et qui ne soit pas sans quclque heareuse in- 

 fluence sur le maintien de la paix du jnoiide et lea progrea 

 de la civilisation. 



Vos vceux, tres-honores colleguea, s'accorderont eans 

 doute avec lea miena pour que i'easai que Ton va faire 

 serve a ecarter dans 1'avenir tea occasions de luttes sang- 

 lantea et a raffermir 1'empire de la raiaon. 



Dana cette douce previaion, j'aime a rappeler ces pa- 

 roles du heroa de PAmerique, de George Washington : 

 " S'il y a une verite fortement etahlie, c'eat qu'il y a ici- 

 bas un lien indiaaoluble entre lea purea maximea d'une 

 politique honnete ct magnanime et lea solidea recompenses 

 de la prosperite et du bonheur public." * 



Lord Tenterden then stated that Sir Koundell 

 Palmer, her Britannic Majesty's counsel, had pre- 

 pared, for the consideration of the tribunal, a state- 

 ment of certain points of importance, as to which he 

 desires to have an opportunity of submitting to the 

 tribunal further arguments, in answer to those con- 

 tained in the argument of tne United States delivered 

 on the 15th inst., and that Sir Roundell Palmer would 

 now, with the permission of the tribunal, read such 

 statement, of which, with a translation which would 

 be prepared without delay, copies will be delivered 

 to the several arbitrators and to the agent of the Uni- 

 ted States_in the course of the day ; and, as the prep- 

 aration of any further arguments on those, or any 

 other points, will necessarily require some time to bo 

 allowed, he begged respectfully to suggest that the 

 counsel on both sides should be informed of the time 

 which the tribunal will be willing to allow, before 

 requiring their further attendance for the purpose of 

 any arguments. If the interval so granted can be 

 extended to the 1st of August next, it is believed that 

 this will meet the views of the counsel and agents of 

 both parties, and may probably enable the counsel, 

 when again before the tribunal, to discharge their du- 

 ty in a shorter time than might otherwise be requisite. 

 Sir Eoundell Palmer then read a statement. 

 Mr. Bancroft Davis then said that upon being fur- 

 nished with a copy of the paper, now presented on 

 the part of her Britannic Majesty's counsel, he would 

 lay the same before the counsel of the United States, 

 and would present their views to the tribunal after 

 such consultation. 



Count Sclopis then stated that the tribunal had, at 

 the request of the agent of her Britannic Majesty, 

 granted permission to Sir Roundell Palmer to read 

 the statement requesting the tribunal to authorize 

 him to furnish the arbitrators with further arguments 

 on the points therein specified, and that, with refer- 

 ence to this request, Mr. Adams, as one of the arbi- 

 trators, had suggested a preliminary question, viz., 

 whether under the terms of Article V. of the Treaty 

 of Washington, it is competent for the agents or 

 counsel to make requests of this nature, and that the 

 tribunal, after discussion, and having in view the 

 precise terms of the treaty, had decided that the ar- 

 bitrators alone have the right, if they desire further 

 elucidation with regard to any point, to require a 

 written or printed statement or argument, or oral 

 argument by counsel upon it, under the terms of the 

 said article. 



The conference was then adjourned until Friday, 

 the 28th instant, at 11 o'clock A. M. 



FREDERICK SCLOPIS. 



J. C. BANCROFT DAVIS. 



TENTERDEN. 



ALEX. FAVROT, Secretary. 



PROTOCOL VIII. 



Record of the Proceedings of the Tribunal of arbitration 



The conference was held pursuant to adjournment 

 All the arbitrators and the agents of the two gov- 

 ernments were present. 



The protocol of the last conference was read and 



* Diacours prononce !e 30 avril 1789 dans la seance du 

 Senat amencain, lore de la proclamation de Washington 

 a la i>re.sidence, et de John Adams & la vice-presidence 

 des fitats-Urua. 



approved, and was signed by the president and sec- 

 retary of the tribunal and the agents of the two gov- 

 ernments. 



Sir Alexander Cockburn, as one of the arbitrators 

 then proposed to the tribunal to require a written or 

 printed statement or argument by the counsel of the 

 two governments for further elucidation on the fol- 

 lowing points, viz. : 



1. What is the "due diligence" required from a 

 neutral state, according to the general rules of inter- 

 national law, and according to the rules of the sixth 

 article of the Treaty of Washington ? 



2. What were the international obligations of neu- 

 tral states in respect to the construction, sale, and 

 fitting out within neutral territory, of ships intended 

 for warlike use by a belligerent, independently of 

 the municipal legislation of the neutral state, and of 

 the rules laid down by the Treaty of Washington? 



3. What rights are conferred upon a belligerent 

 power by the municipal legislation of a neutral state 

 for the maintenance of its 'neutrality, if such legisla- 

 tion exceeds the limits of the obligations previously 

 imposed upon neutral states by international law ? 



4. Is a neutral state under any international obli- 

 gation to detain in, or exclude from its ports, .vessels 

 fitted out in violation of its neutrality, after such 

 vessels have been commissioned as public ships-of- 

 war by a belligerent power, whether such power bo 

 or be not recognized as a sovereign state ? 



5. Whether her Majesty's proclamation of neutral- 

 ity, recognizing the belligerency of the Confederate 

 States, is in any, and what way, material to the 

 question of the liability of Great Britain for losses 

 sustained by the United States, in consequence of 

 the acts of the vessels referred to in the Treaty of 

 Washington ? 



6. Whether the laws of Great Britain, during the 

 civil war, were, or were not, sufficient, if properly 

 enforced, for the fulfilment of her Britannic Ma- 

 jesty's neutral obligations? 



^ 7. If a vessel, which has been fitted out in viola- 

 tion of the neutrality of a neutral state, has escaped 

 from the neutral territory, through some want of 

 due diligence on the part of the neutral government, 

 ought such neutral state to be held responsible to the 

 other belligerent for captures made by such vessel ? 



If so, to what period does this responsibility ex- 

 tend ? May it be modified or terminated by circum- 

 stances afterward supervening (as, for instance, by 

 assistance afterward rendered to the vessel by an in- 

 dependent power, without which her capacity for 

 warlike purposes would have ceased, or by her en- 

 trance into a port of the belligerent to whom she be- 

 longs), or does it necessarily extend to the end of 

 the war ? 



Furthermore, does this responsibility still exist, 

 when the persons who made such captures were in- 

 surgent citizens of the state, against which they 

 waged war, to whom, upon the conclusion of the 

 war, such illegal acts have been condoned? 



8. If a vessel, which has not been fitted out or 

 armed^ in violation of the neutrality of a neutral 

 state, is afterward permitted to receive supplies of 

 coal and repairs in a neutral port, does the neutral 

 state, in whose port she receives such supplies and 

 repairs, incur on that account a responsibility for her 

 subsequent captures, or any of them ? 

 _ After deliberation a majority of the tribunal de- 

 cided not to require such statement or argument at 

 present. 



The tribunal then decided that, in the course of 

 their discussions and deliberations, the agents should 

 attend ^the conferences, accompanied by the counsel 

 of their respective governments, except in cases 

 when the tribunal should think it advisable to con- 

 duct their discussions and deliberations with closed 

 doors. 



The tribunal then determined to permit publicity 

 to bo given to the statement made by the agent of 

 her Britannic Majesty at the third conference, the 

 declaration of the arbitrators made at the fifth con- 



