Skip to main content
Hide Articles List

12 articles on this Page

Advertising

TO CORRESPONDENTS.

FRIDAY, MARCH 8, 1872.

THE GOVERNMENT AND THE VOLUNTEERS.

UN SECTARIAN EDUCATION.

STRIKE AMONG SEAHAM COLLIERS.

THE NINE HOURS' MOVEMENT.

THE INCOME-TAX AGITATION.

CIVIL CONTINGENCIES FUND.

A BELGIAN VIEW OF THE ALABAMA…

News
Cite
Share

A BELGIAN VIEW OF THE ALABAMA CLAIMS. M. Emile de Laveleye publishes a long letter in the Independance Beige, in which he considers the question of international arbitration in the Alabama case. One of the most important arguments which he brings forward is the inadmissibility of the claim which makes a neutral State responsible for the "indirect damages" which have re- sulted from a careless supervision of her ports. The writer illustrates his views by supposing that the Alabama had escaped from the port of Antwerp, and that America had made the same claim against Belgium which she has now done against England. Belgium would thus have been called upon to pay five milliards to the United States, and as she could not do so the only way to satisfy her creditor would have been to surrender her independence, and a theory which, if logically followed out, can result in such consequences, cannot be tenable. He suggests that an International Congress of" jurisconsuls and plenipo- tentiaries should be appointed to form rules respecting controverted questions. Not only indirect damages, but many other matters which constantly affect the peace of the world might be dealt with. It would be an understood thing that every State would be at liberty to conform to » part, or to all of the decisions of the Congress, exactly 93 in the Convention of Geneva they dealt with the relief of the wounded, and in the St. Petersburg Convention with the explosive arms. No Government pledged itself beforehand to a blind acceptance of the decisio-us- The International Convention might promulgate princi' pies for regulating the duties and responsibilities of neutrals. England and the United States might refuse to agree to them, and the state of affairs would remain the same as it is to-day. If, on the other hand, the Convention should make proposals that both parties regarded as equi* table, the Geneva arbitrators would only have to applf themselves to the particular case of the Alabama Claims.

[No title]

Advertising