ALABAMA CLAIMS. 165 



claimants, but a general fund to be administered by 

 the United States in good faitb, in conformity with 

 their own conceptions of justice and equity, within 

 the range of the Award. If, according to any theory 

 of distribution adopted by the United States, the 

 sum awarded prove inadequate, we have no claim on 

 Great Britain to supply the deficiency : on the other 

 hand, if the A^vard should prove to be in excess, we 

 are not accountable to Great Britain for any balance. 

 On this point, precedents exist in the diplomatic his- 

 tory of Great Britain herself 



The Tribunal does not afford us any rules of limit- 

 ation affecting the distribution of the Award, un- 

 less in the declaration that "prospective earnings," 

 " double claims " for the same losses, and " claims for 

 gross freights, so far as they exceed net freights," can 

 not properly be made the subject of compensation, — - 

 that is to say, as against Great Britain. 



Nor does the Tribunal define afiirmatively what 

 claims should be satisfied otherwise than in the com- 

 prehensive terms of the Award, which declares that 

 the sum awarded is "the indemnity to be paid by 

 Great Britain to the United States for the satisfac- 

 tion of all the claims referred to the consideration of 

 the Tribunal^ conformably to the provisions contained 

 in Article VII. of the aforesaid Treaty." 



The Arbitrators, — be it obse^'ved, — do not say for 

 tlie satisfaction of certain specific claims among those 

 referred to the consideration of the Tribunal, but of 

 " all the claims " so referred conformably to the pro- 

 visions of the Treaty. 



