92 THE TREATY OF WASHINGTON. 



guage as to render it scarcely intelligible. Mr. Jus 

 tice Blackburn replied, reiterating in temperate lan 

 guage his statement that the Chief Justice had ex 

 pressly assented to the legal doctrine of the charge, 

 and his colleagues, Justices Mellor, Lush, and Han- 

 nen, gave no support to the denial made by the Chief 

 Justice. 



The qualities of character exhibited in this inci 

 dent were the occasion at the time of unfavorable 

 commentary on the part of the British Press and 

 public. 



Sir Alexander Cockburn had seemed, on superfi 

 cial view, a fit person to take part in the important 

 duties committed to the Tribunal of Arbitration. He 

 carried thither the prestige of judicial rank, as the 

 head of one of the most venerable courts of Europe. 

 And he was thorough master of the language in 

 which the discussions of the Tribunal were con 

 ducted. 4 



But, unfortunately, it would seem that neither the 

 original constitution of his mind, nor the studies, pur 

 suits, or habits of his life, had fitted him for calm, im 

 partial, judicial examination of great questions of 

 public law. The same /traits of confused thought, 

 equivocation in matters of law, tendency to declama 

 tory denunciation of adversary opinions, which pro- 

 voked and justified the criticisms of Mr. Finlason, 

 Mr. Gathorne Hardy, and others, and which prompt 

 ed conflict with Mr. Justice Blackburn, reappeared 

 in more vivid colors at Geneva. 



Of the offensive singularities of his deportment as 



