30 THE TREATY OF WASHINGTON. 



respective Arorumeuts in Juue : so tliat the Counter- 

 Cases would on eacli side be response to the previous 

 Cases, and the Arguments to the previous Counter- 

 Cases. 



This course of presentation was in no sort prejudi- 

 cial to the United States, as plaintiffs, and was exceed- 

 ingly advantageous to Great Britain, as defendant. 



THE AMERICAN CASE. 



Nevertheless, when our " Case " went in, — that is to 

 say, the opening argument for the United States, — its 

 true character as such was misapprehended in En- 

 gland, where it seemed to be forgotten that the time 

 and place for replying to it were in the British Coun- 

 ter-Case, and not in the newspapers of London or in 

 the British Parliament. 



Similar misconception occurred subsequently with 

 regard to the American Argument; the Counsel for 

 Great Britain thinking that he ought to have the op- 

 portunity of replying, as will be explained hereafter, 

 and losins: sis-ht of the fact that the British Govern- 

 ment had already argued the matter three times in 

 " Case," " Counter-Case," and " Argument." 



As to the American Case, it seemed to fall into the 

 adversary's camp like a bomb-shell, which rendered 

 every body dumb for a month, and then produced 

 an explosion of clamor, which did not cease for three 

 or four months, and until the final decision of the 

 Tribunal of Arbitration. 



The leading journals of England, whether daily or 

 weekly, such as the London Times, Telegraph, and 



