ALABAMA CLAIMS. 89 
Since he became the head of the Queen’s Bench he 
has occasionally appeared in the field of letters on 
questions connected with municipal or public law, but 
not in a way to invite respect at home, or attention 
beyond the limits of Great Britain. 
A few years ago he published a monogram on the 
subject of nationality, in which he reproduced in an 
abridged form [but quite incorrectly, as the remarks 
of a most. competent judge, Mr. Beach Lawrence, on 
droit Caubaine, tend to show] the matter contained 
in the report of a commission appointed by the Goy- 
ernment to inquire into and report upon the-laws of 
naturalization and allegiance in England. 
Again, when it was proposed to arraign Nelson and 
Brand as criminals in England for acts committed in 
Jamaica under proclamation of martial law, Sir Alex- 
ander Cockburn delivered a voluminous charge to the 
‘grand jury, which he afterward published with addi- 
tions and notes, notwithstanding the partiality and the 
urgency of which, the grand jury refused to find a bill; 
and it must be confessed that, as a charge, it was pas- 
sionate, vague, declamatory, and confused; and as an 
exposition of law, it is valueless when compared with 
the treatises of Mr. Finlason, in England, and of Mr. 
Whiting, in America, on the same subject. 
This “charge, and some proceedings by which it 
was followed, provoked much criticism. Mr. Ga- 
thorne Hardy, for instance, called attention to the 
fact that the Chief Justice “vacillated,” that he 
“went from one side to another,” so as to render it 
doubtful what his opinions really were; and Mr. 
