ALABAMA CLAIMS. 1381. 
The Reasons are on their face, and as the London 
Press could not fail to perceive and admit, “an elab- 
orate reply to the American Case” [that is to say, an 
advocate’s plea], “rather than a judicial verdict.” 
| Lelegraph, September 25. | 
It is, in truth, a mere nisi préus argument, not up 
to the level of an argument in danc; inappropriate 
to the character of a judge; and which might have 
been quite in place at Geneva as an “Argument” in 
the cause, provided any British Counsel could have 
been found to write so acrimoniously and reason so 
badly as Sir Alexander, 
To establish these positions, it would suffice to cite 
some of the criticisms of the London Press. 
The Zélegraph [September 26] argumentatively. 
demonstrates the palpable fallacy of the reasoning 
by which Sir Alexander endeavors to excuse the ad- 
mitted violation of law and the want of due dil: 
gence of the British Government.in the case of the 
Florida, especially at Nassau. 
The News [September 26] condemns and regrets 
the declaration made by Sir Alexander in his “ Rea- 
sons” twice, where he speaks of himself “sitting on 
the Tribunal as in some sense the representative of 
Great Britain,” and contrasts this with the sounder 
view of his duty expressed in Parliament by Lord 
Cairns. 
Compare, now, this observation of the News with 
certain pertinent remarks of the Zélegraph [Septem- 
ber 25]. Speaking of Mr. Adams, it says: “He put 
aside the temper of the advocate when he took his 
