34 Tin: THI-.ATY OF WASHINGTON'. 



at Gi'iicvn, nnd wlio, it was dearly seen, would l^e tlie 

 eflectivc judges iu the cause, were not likely to share 

 the English opinion of tlic common law of England. 

 And these thi'ee Arbitrators were persons outside of 

 the range of the o])servation, knowledge, or apprecia- 

 tion of most Englishmen, who felt undefined distrust 

 of men whom they did not and could not know as 

 they knew Englishmen and Americans. Nay, En- 

 glishmen were lieard to say, in conversation, that they 

 would juvfer a tribunal made up of Englishmen and 

 Ain'.'rieans. We shall fully comprehend how strong 

 this sentimeni Avas among average Englishmen, when 

 we rememlver that ex])ression was given to it in the 

 House of Lords by tin; Mar([uess of vSalisbury, who, 

 uotwithstandinLT his lii'di intelliLCence, and tlie cos- 

 mopolitan experience which men of his raidv possess, 

 could ehai'acterize as 'tinliuurn, and, therefore, as ob- 

 jectionable, an actual Embassador in France, an cx- 

 President of Swit/.erland, and a Senator and ex-Min- 

 ister of Italy with fame as a jurist and historian per- 

 vading Europe. It was a sentiment which Sir Alex- 

 ander Cockburn betrayed in his deportment and 

 lanii-uaire at several meetinijs of the Tribunal. 



These, however, were but the transitory incidents 

 of ]>opular emotion and public discussion, and of sec- 

 ondary significance. 



AGITATION llKsrKCTING TIIIO NATIONAL CLAIMS, 



But the agitation which soon followed, on the sub- 

 ject of certain of the claims set forth in the Case of 

 the United States, arose at once to national impor- 



