156 THE TREATY OF WASHINGTON. 
prevention of violation of neutrality in the ports of 
such Neutral. That is to say, the parties to the 
Treaty of Washington are estopped from claiming 
compensation, one of the other, on account of the na- 
tional injuries occasioned by any such breaches of 
neutrality, not because they are ¢nzdirect losses,—for 
they are not,—but because they are natzonal losses, 
losses of the State as such. And each of us may, in 
controversies on the same point with other nations, 
allege the moral authority of the Tribunal of Geneva. 
But, while natzonal losses incurred by the Bellig- 
erent as a State in consequence of such breaches of 
neutrality are not to be made the subject of “com. 
pensation or computation of damages,” all private or 
individual losses may be, under the qualifications and 
limitations as to character and amount found by the 
Tribunal, and which will be explained in treating - 
that part of the Decision. 
These conclusions are the inevitable result of care- 
ful comparison ‘of the several claims with the several 
decisions. True it is, the national claims of indem- 
nity for the cost of the pursuit of the Confederate 
cruisers happened to come before the Tribunal asso- 
ciated with strictly private claims, and the strictly 
private claims on account of payment of extra war 
premiums associated with national claims; but these 
are perfectly immaterial incidents, which do not in 
any way affect appreciation of the opinions of the 
Tribun§l. 
Another subject. of. reflection suggests itself, in 
comparing the respective decisions on national and 
