30 THE TREATY OF WASHINGTON. 



respective Arguments in June : so that the Counter- 

 Cases would on each side be response to the previous 

 Cases, and the Arguments to the previous Counter- 

 Cases. 



This course of presentation was in no sort prejudi 

 cial to the United States, as plaintiffs, and was exceed 

 ingly advantageous to Great Britain, as defendant. 



AMERICAN CASE. 



Nevertheless, when our &quot; Case &quot; went in, that is to 

 say, the opening argument for the United States, its 

 true character as such was misapprehended in En 

 gland, where it seemed to be forgotten that the time 

 and place for replying to it w r ere in the British Coun 

 ter-Case, and not in the newspapers of London or in 

 the British Parliament. 



Similar misconception occurred subsequently with 

 regard to the American Argument; the Counsel for 



O O i 



Great Britain thinking that he ought to have the op 

 portunity of replying, as will be explained hereafter, 

 and losing sight of the fact that the British Govern 

 ment had already argued the matter three times in 

 &quot; Case,&quot; &quot; Counter-Case,&quot; and Argument.&quot; 



As to the American Case, it seemed to fall into the 

 adversary s camp like a bomb-shell, which rendered 

 every body dumb for a month, and then produced 

 an explosion of clamor, which did not cease for three 

 or four months, and until the final decision of the 

 Tribunal of Arbitration. 



The leading journals of England, whether daily or / 

 weekly, such as the London Times, Telegraph, and[ 



