176 THE TREATY OF WASHINGTON. 
ments were, indeed, found against some inferior per. 
sons, but not against the responsible authors of the 
loss ‘and shame. which the Alabama and the Florida 
brought on Great Britain. Traces occasionally appear 
in the journals of London of some discontent on the 
part of tax-payers, who are now called on to respond 
to the United States for the dishonorable gains of 
the Lairds and the Millers. Expressions of sentiment 
in this respect appear in the recent debates in the 
House of Commons. Indeed, ifan account were taken 
of the injury inflicted on the British people by the 
actual losses in Confederate bonds purchased in Great 
Britain, and the profits lost on bonds of the United 
States not purchased there and sold instead in Ger- 
many; the losses on British ships and cargoes cap- 
tured in attempting to run the blockade of Southern 
ports; the payment by the Government to the United 
instance, “papers are presented to the Secretary of State by 
the British Minister on the 11th day of October, 1855, alleg- 
ing unlawful equipment in violation of neutrality by that ves- 
sel; the papers are sent to the Attorney-General on the 12th, 
and on the same day orders are given by telegraph to amar 
go the vessel, and are actually executed on the 13th at New 
York, 
Mr. Fawcett has not without reason called the attention of 
the House of Commons to this defect in the conduct of the law 
business of the British Government. The reply that the At- 
torney or Solicitor General should be allowed to continue in 
private business, in order to possess competent knowledge for 
the conduct of the business of the Government, is quite pre- 
posterous; it would be just as reasonable to insist that the 
Lord Chancellor or the Chief Justice of the Queen’s Bench 
must continue at the Bar. 
