38 THE TREATY OF WASHINGTON. 



time, as in the example of the imperfect or quasi war 

 between the United States and France in the closing 

 years of the last century, can it be denied that the 

 injuries done to either nation by such hostilities on 

 the sea involve direct national as well as private 

 injuries? 



On first impression, therefore, it might seem that 

 the British Government and British opinion ran wild 

 in the chase of shadows, and combated a creature of 

 mere imagination in quarreling with this part of the 

 American Case at all, and, still more, in contending 

 that on this account Great Britain could be justified 

 in revoking the arbitration agreed upon, that is, in 

 effect, violating the Treaty. 



The Treaty referred to the- Tribunal of Arbitration, 

 in terms unequivocal, all claims of the United States 

 growing out of the acts committed by certain vessels, 

 and generically Jcnown as &quot;Alabama Claims&quot; It 

 might need to go outside of the Treaty into antece 

 dent or contemporaneous diplomatic correspondence 

 in order to ascertain the meaning of the phrase &quot;Ala* 

 lama Claims ;&quot; but, in so doing, it would incontro- 

 vertibly appear, at every stage of such correspond- 1 

 ence, that national as well as individual claims were \ 

 comprehended, and were all confounded together, and, j 

 indeed, without mention of individual claims, in the; 

 designation of &quot;claims on the part of the United; 

 States.&quot; 



Whether any of the claims so preferred on the part 

 of the United States were for losses indirect or conse 

 quential would be an ordinary question of jurispru- 



