50 THE TREATY OF WASHINGTON. 
“The Arbitrators do not propose to express or imply any 
opinion.upon the point thus in difference between the two 
Governments as to the interpretation or effect of the Treaty, 
but it seems to them obvious that the substantial object of 
the adjournment must be to give the two Governments an op: 
portunity of determining whether the claims in question shall 
or shall not be submitted to the decision of the Arbitrators, 
and that any difference between the two Governments on this 
point may make the adjournment unproductive of any useful 
effect, and, after a delay of many months, during which both 
nations may be kept in a state of painful suspense, may end in 
a result which it is to be presumed both Governments would 
equally deplore, that of making this arbitration wholly abor- 
tive. This being so, the Arbitrators think it right to state 
that, after the most careful perusal of all that has been urged 
on the part of the Government of the United States in respect 
of these claims, they have arrived, individually and collective- 
ly, at the conclusion that these claims do not constitute, upon 
the principles of international law applicable to such cases, 
good foundation for an award of compensation or computation 
of damages between nations; and should, upon ‘such princi- 
ples, be wholly excluded from the consideration of the Tribu- 
nal in making its award, even if there were no disagreement 
between the two Governments as to the competency of the 
TriSunal to decide thereon. With a view to the.settlement 
of the other claims, to the consideration of which by the Tri- 
bunal no exception has been taken on the part of Her Britan- 
nic Majesty’s Government, the Arbitrators have thought it de- 
sirable to lay before the parties this expression of the views 
they have formed upon the question of public law involved, in 
order that, after this declaration by the Tribunal, it may be 
considered by the Government of the United States whether 
any course can be adopted respecting the first - mentioned 
claims which would relieve the Tribunal from the necessity of 
deciding upon the present application of Her Britannic Maj- 
esty’s Government.” 
Count Sclopis added that it was the intention of 
the Tribunal that this statement should be consid- 
