ARGUMENT OF CHARLES B. WARREN. 1183 



and myself should unite in a joint publication for the purpose of 

 allaying the present excitement in regard to this subject, Mr. Web- 

 ster has, upon consideration, judged it expedient to abstain for the 

 present from taking this step, as one likely to produce fresh discus- 

 sion on the subject without leading to any definite result. I entirely 

 agree with him in this opinion; the more so that the excitement in 

 question has already very much diminished, and that a very general 

 impression prevails that the question is now under discussion be- 

 tween the two Governments, with a view to its settlement upon a 

 satisfactory basis. My present visit to Mr. Webster has, I believe, 

 tended to strengthen this impression." 



Now, if the Tribunal please, how can the position of Daniel Web- 

 ster in 1852 have made the Government of Great Britain believe 

 that the Government of the United States agreed in its interpreta- 

 tion, when the British Minister in the United States forwarded to 

 the Foreign Office of Great Britain a copy of a letter written by the 

 President of the United States to the Secretary of State, expressing 

 explicitly the position now occupied by the United States before this 

 Tribunal? 



It is also disclosed by another note from Mr. Crampton to the 

 Earl of Malmesbury, which appears in the British Case Appendix, 

 at p. 168, that the British Government was fully advised that the 

 President " did not seem to concur " I am quoting the language of 

 the letter 



" Did not seem to concur in the construction of the convention of 

 1818 as regards the definition of bays, laid down in the opinion of the 

 Advocate General and Attorney General of the 30th of August, 

 1841." 



There, if the Tribunal please, is the British Minister in the United 

 States advising the Foreign Office of the Government of Great 

 Britain that the President of the United States " did not seem to con- 

 cur " in the opinion of the Law Officers of the Crown ; and when one 

 examines the opinion of the Law Officers of the Crown, one is inclined 

 to think that the President of the United States was quite right. 



I take up now, briefly, the nature of the orders issued by the Gov- 

 ernment of Great Britain, when Lord Malmesbury became the Min- 

 ister of Foreign Affairs in 1852, and I intend to quote, very briefly, 

 from the evidence to show that even thon, in 1852, in spite of the 

 scare that had been created by a threat of war-vessels coming over 

 here, the Government of Great Britain had no intention of putting 

 into force any new principle. 



I would refer first to a report of an interview between Mr. Law- 

 rence and Lord Malmesbury, which appears in the Appendix to the 

 United States Case, at p. 522. I will merely cite that letter. 



I cite, also, the note from Lord Malmesbury to Mr. Lawrence, at 

 that time the Minister for the United States in Great, Britain. This 

 92909 S. Doc. 870, 61-3, vol 10 19 



