58 THE TREATY OF WASHINGTON. 
umes folio, contains little new matter, being in part, 
at least, defensive argument in response to the Amer- 
ican “Case.” 
The American Counter-Case, consisting of two 
volumes folio, replies argumentatively to the British 
“Case,” and brings forward a large body of docu- 
mentary proofs, responsive to matters contained in 
that “Case,” which, although utterly foreign to the 
question at issue, required to be met, because con- 
sidered material by Great Britain, namely, allegations 
of default on the part of the United States in the 
execution of their own neutrality laws, to the preju- 
dice of other Governments. 
The introduction of all this matter into the British 
Case, the iteration of it in the British Counter-Case 
and the British Argument, and the extreme promi- 
nence given to it, as we shall hereafter see, by the 
British Arbitrator, serve to illustrate the singular 
unreasonableness and injustice of the angry com- 
plaints emitted in England against the American 
Case. 
The American Case contains no suggestion which 
is not strictly pertinent to the issues raised by the 
Treaty. It discusses the conduct of the British Gov- 
ernment relatively to the United States during our 
Civil War, with strict application to the “Alabama 
Claims.” It charges that, in those transactions, the 
British Government was guilty of culpable omission 
to observe the requirements of the law of nations as 
respects the United States, and with responsible neg- 
ligence in the non-execution of the neutrality laws of 
