ALABAMA CLAIMS. 35 



tance. I allude, of course, to what was frequently / 

 spoken of as the question of &quot; indirect claims.&quot; 



The expression is incorrect, and, if admissible as a 

 popular designation, it must not be permitted to pro 

 duce any misconception of the true question at issue. 

 It would be less inaccurate to speak of them as &quot; claims 

 for indirect or constructive losses or damages,&quot; which 

 is the more common phrase in the diplomatic papers ; 

 and less inaccurate still to say &quot; remote or consequen 

 tial losses and damages.&quot; But, in truth, none of these 

 expressions are correct, and the use of them has done 

 much to obscure the actual point of controversy, and 

 to divert the public mind into devious paths of argu 

 ment or conclusion. 



When, in the instructions to Mr. Motley of Septem 

 ber 25th, 1869, President Grant caused the British 

 Government to be informed, through the Secretary 

 of State, of the nature of the grievances of the United 

 States, he employed the following language : 



&quot; The President is not yet prepared to pronounce on the 

 question of the indemnities which he thinks due by Great 

 Britain to individual citizens of the United States for the de 

 struction of their property by rebel cruisers fitted otft in the 

 ports of Great Britain. 



&quot; Xor is he now prepared to speak of the reparation which 

 he thinks due by the British Government for the larger ac 

 count of the vast national injuries it has inflicted on the United 

 States. 



&quot;Nor does he attempt now to measure the relative effect of 

 the various causes of injury, whether by untimely recognition 

 of belligerency, by suffering the fitting out of rebel cruisers, or 

 by the supply of ships, arms, and munitions of war to the Con 

 federates, or otherwise, in whatsoever manner. 



