64 THE TREATY OF WASHINGTON. 



&quot; Such indirect claims as those for national losses stated in 

 the Case presented on the part of the Government of the United 

 States . . . should not be admitted in principle as growing out 

 of the acts committed by particular vessels, alleged to have 

 been enabled to commit depredations on the shipping of a bel 

 ligerent by reason of such want of due diligence in the per 

 formance of neutral obligations as that which is imputed by the 

 United States to Great Britain :&quot; 



which proposed agreement the preamble proceeds to 

 state, in the form of t\vo separate declarations, one 

 by Great Britain and one by the United States, 

 each of them intelligible only by reference to pre 

 vious parts of the preamble : the whole to the con 

 clusion that the President shall make no claim, on 

 the part of the United States, in respect of the indi 

 rect claims as aforesaid, before the Tribunal of Arbi 

 tration at Geneva. 



The Senate, thinking that the recitals in the pre 

 amble were not sufficiently explicit to furnish to the 

 United States satisfactory basis of transaction, pro 

 posed the following substitute : 



&quot;Whereas both Governments adopt for the future the prin 

 ciple that claims for remote or indirect losses should not be 

 admitted as the result of failure to observe neutral obligations, 

 so far as to declare that it will hereafter guide the conduct of 

 both Governments in their relations with each other. Now, 

 therefore,&quot; etc. 



But the Senate s redaction of the article rendered 

 its meaning too clear to be agreeable to the British 



o o 



Government, which, as ,was shrewdly said of it in 

 Paris at the time, doubted whether release from claim 

 of reparation for the present wrong done by Great 



