122 THE TREATY OF WASHINGTON. 



on tlie 5tli, Gtb, and Stli of August, consisting alto- 

 gether of 47 pages of the same folio impression. 



It would not be convenient, and it does not come 

 witliin my })lan, to discuss the Arguments of Counsel 

 on eitlier side, except where some particular point of 

 sucli Argument calls for notice. Hence, as in the 

 case of the general Arguments of April and of June, 

 so as to the special Arguments called for by the Tri- 

 bunal, it Mill be sufficient to enumerate them, and to 

 give to them their pro])er place in the history of the 

 Arbitration. 



The first Argument of Sir Roundell Palmer, how- 

 cvei', calls for some observations. 



Of his 43 pages, 31, — say three rpiarters, — are de- 

 voted no}>iinaU>/ to the question of due diligence gen- 

 erally considered. 



Now, in the previous regular Arguments, each Gov- 

 ernment had fully discussed this question, and hail, 

 as if by connnon consent, concluded in ex])ress terms 

 that it neither required nor admitted any further dis- 

 cussion. That conclusion was cori'cct. Accordingly, 

 most of these 31 pages are occupied with matters re- 

 motely, if at all, connected with the q\iestion, AVhat 

 constitutes due diligence? — such as [copying, word for 

 woril, sundry marginal notes] rules and principles 

 of international law ; express or implied engagements 

 of Great Britain ; eflect of prohibitory municipal laws; 

 the three llules of the Treaty; the maxims cited by 

 the United States from Sir Kobert riiillimore o^ the 

 question, Ci vitas ne (hliqucvit an civcs; for what pur- 

 pose Great Britain refers to her mynicipallaws ; doc« 



