102 Tin: TREATY OF WASHINGTON'. 



British Ciovcrnnicnt avouUI seem to Lave supposed 

 that the United States were to discuss and coniute 

 the Britisli " Counter-Case" in tlie American " Counter- 

 Case ;" that is, to make reply to an elaborate argu- 

 ment on the law and the facts [tor sucli is the British 

 "Counter-Case"] without seeing it or possessing any 

 knowledge of its contents. j\Ianifestly, no complete 

 and systematic final "Argument" on the part of the 

 United States was possible without previous thought- 

 ful knowledge of the British " Counter-Case." And 

 yet tSir Ruundell Palmer, in expressing desire to an- 

 sii'o' our "Argument," reasoned expressly on the im- 

 plication that it ought to have been "^/ mtre conq^Je- 

 ■nictit ofj^i'ct'ioKS tJoemncntsy No such idea certainly 

 is conveyed by the Treaty; and the implication is 

 contrary to reason and the very nature of things. 



Sir lloundell Palmer entered on the question the 

 moment it became reasonably certain that the Arbi- 

 tration would proceed. On the 20th of June he pro- 

 ])Osed to us, informally, to arrange for reargument of 

 the cause, he to have until the end of the first week 

 of August to prepare his Argument, and we to the 

 end of August to pirpare a rei)ly. The effect of this 

 would be a suspension of the sittings for more than 

 ten weeks, and a prolongation to that extent [and 

 perhaps much more] of the absence of the American 

 Arbitrator, Agent, and Counsel from their country. 

 In other respects the proposition involved much in- 

 equality; for it would have given to the British 

 Counsel ncarhj six iccel'S at his own home in London, 

 with books, assistants, translators, and printing-offices 



