ALABAMA CLAIMS, 85 
tance. I allude, of course, to what was frequently 
spoken of as the question of “indirect claims.” 
The expression is incorrect, and, if admissible as a 
popular designation, it must not be permitted to pro- 
duce any misconception of the true question at issue. 
It would be less inaccurate to speak of them as “claims 
for indirect or constructive losses or damages,” which 
is the more common phrase in the diplomatic papers; 
and less inaccurate still to say “remote or consequen- 
tial losses and damages.” But, in truth, none of these 
expressions are correct, and the use of them has done. 
much to obscure the actual point of controversy, and 
to divert the public mind into devious paths of argu- 
ment or conclusion. 
When, in the instructions to Mr. Motley of Septem- 
ber 25th, 1869, President Grant caused the British 
Government to be informed, through the Secretary 
of State, of the nature of the grievances of the United 
States, he employed the following language: 
“The President is not yet prepared to pronounce on the 
question of the indemnities which he thinks due by Great 
Britain to individual citizens of the United States for the de- 
struction of their property by rebel cruisers fitted out in the 
ports of Great Britain. 
“Nor is he now prepared to speak of the reparation which, 
he thinks due by the British Government for the larger ac- 
count of the vast national injuries it has inflicted on the United 
States. 
“Nor does he attempt now to measure the relative effect of 
the various causes of injury, whether by untimely recognition 
of belligerency, by suffering the fitting out of rebel cruisers, or 
by the supply of ships, arms, and munitions of war to the Con- 
federates, or otherwise, in whatsoever manner. 
