104 THE TREATY OF WASHINGTON. 
event the Arbitrators could not in reason or decency 
have commenced their deliberations until the 1st of 
September; they might well have taken, as they did 
in fact take, three months to complete their delibera- 
tions; and thus the Arbitrators and the American 
Counsel [but not the English] would have been de- 
tained at Geneva until the 1st of December, and there. 
fore would not have been able to reach their homes 
until January. 
But the reargument proposed by Sir Roundell 
Palmer was contrary to the Treaty, which in express 
terms closes the rights of the two Governments as to 
hearing, and admits further discussion on their part 
only at the requisition of the Arbitrators, “if they: 
desire further elucidation in regard to any point.” 
[Art.V.] Which manifestly intends, not reargument 
of the cause, but solution of any doubt, which, after the 
completion of the arguments, may occur to the Tri- 
bunal. No consent of Counsel could annul the stip. 
ulations of the Treaty. 
Of course, for reasons of right as well as expedien- 
cy, we declined to accede to the proposition of Sir 
Roundell Palmer. 
Nevertheless, at the meeting of the 27th, immedi- 
ately after the conclusion of Count Sclopis’s discourse, 
Lord Tenterden presented a motion on the part of 
Sir Roundell Palmer for leave to file a written argu- 
ment in answer to the Argument of the United States 
delivered on the 15th, and requesting adjournment. 
for that purpose until August. Sir Roundell Palmer 
read a brief of the points he desired to argue, which 
