ALABAMA CLAIMS. 113 



delivered " to eacL of tlic said Arljitrators and to tlie 

 Agent of tlie other j^arty a \vritteu or printed argu- 

 ment showing the ])oints and referring to the. evi- 

 dence on whicli his Government relies." These " Ar- 

 guments " were freshly in the possession of the Arbi- 

 trators. To call on Counsel^/br tJie reason cn^signed, 

 to reargue the matters therein argued, was just as 

 unreasonable as it would be for a judge presiding at 

 a hearing in common law, equity, or admiralty, to 

 call on the counsel, who have just finished their ar- 

 guments, to do something for the "assistance" of the 

 Court, — it would be difficult to see what,— to the end 

 " that arguments scattered over a mass of documents 

 may be presented in a concentrated and appreciable 

 form." And if in this case such arguments had been 

 filed in print, it would be natural for counsel to say 

 that they had just done the thing required of them, 

 as the Court w'ould perceive if it would please to 

 read those arguments: which, in the present case, it 

 M'ould seem. Sir Alexander had neglected to do ; and, 

 instead of doing it, he had got bewildered by plung- 

 ing unpreparedly into the " mass of documents" filed 

 by the two Governments. 



After discussion, the Triliunal decided to proceed 

 with the case of the Florida, according to the pro- 

 gramme of Mr. Sta)mpfli, that is, in efiect, overruling 

 the motion of Sir Alexander Cockburn. 



The Tribunal, it would seem, could not perceive 

 the advantage of discussing speculative general ques- 

 tions, as in a moot court; and, more especially, ques- 

 tions of law, which had already been discussed abuu- 



li 



