150 THE TREATY OF WASHINGTON. 



fore the Tribunal. Neither of them seems to have 

 imagined that the cause of truth or of justice would 

 have been promoted by going outside of the docu- 

 ments and arsfuments submitted, in order to criticise 

 or cavil at the opinions of the British Arbitrator. 



We begin with Mr. Adams. His opinions are of 

 some length ; and, although containing correct state- 

 ments of local law where such statements were mate- 

 rial, yet deserve to be regarded in the better light of 

 diplomacy and of international jurisprudence. He 

 does not descend from the Bench into the arena of the 

 Bar, If he had seen fit to do this, he might have dis- 

 covered quite as much inducement to acrimony and 

 acerbity of discussion in the wanton accusations of 

 the entire political life of the United States, which 

 the British Case, Counter-Case, and Argument con- 

 tain, as Sir Alexander did in any thing which the 

 Cases and Argument of the United States contained. 

 But he yielded to no such temptation. "He put 

 aside the temper of the advocate," as the Telegrapli 

 truly says, to speak " with the impartiality of a jurist 

 and the delicate honor of a gentleman." Accordingly, 

 his opinions are without blemish either in temper 6r 

 in lanmiao-e. He finds want of due dilic^ence- in the 

 matter of the Alabama: and so did the British Ar- 

 bitrator. He finds extraordinary disregard of law in 

 the matter of the Florida: and so did the British 

 Arbitrator. He finds a series of acts of scandalous 

 wrong perpetrated by officers of the British Govern- 

 ment in both these cases: and so did the British Ar- 

 bitrator. He can not, as the British Arbitrator does, 



