ALABAMA CLAIMS. 101 



to -deliver &quot;a written or printed argument showing 

 the points and referring to the evidence upon which 

 his Government relies.&quot; Do these words imply a 

 weak or imperfect argument ? Do they define the 

 number of pages to be occupied ? Do they require 

 either of the parties to leave out his strong points ? 

 Of course not. And if the Treaty said &quot; summary,&quot; 

 which it does not, who shall say what is a fit sum 

 mary of some twenty volumes of evidence and of legal 

 discussions, such as the two &quot; Cases &quot; and &quot; Counter- 

 Cases&quot; comprehend? The United States had the 

 right to judge for themselves what exhibition of 

 &quot;points&quot; and what &quot;evidence&quot; to submit to the Ar 

 bitrators. 



The British Government must have been dissatis 

 fied with its own argument. That is clear, and is the 

 only sufficient explanation of the earnest and persist 

 ent efforts of Sir Roimdell Palmer to obtain permis 

 sion to reargue the cause. There was no misappre 

 hension on the part of the British Government as to 

 the more or less fullness of argumentation admissible 

 in the so-called &quot;Argument;&quot; for there is notable 

 similitude in this respect on both sides in the intro 

 ductory language of the final &quot;Arguments&quot; of the 

 two Governments. We believed at the time, and all 

 the subsequent occurrences tended to prove, that as 

 the British Government had underestimated the force 

 of our cause until the &quot; Case &quot; came into their hands, 

 so they did not appreciate the amplitude of our law 

 and our evidence until they read our &quot;Argument.&quot; 

 And strange, almost incredible, though it be, the 



