§ EARL GRANVILLEMy Lords, last evening the noble Marquess (the Marquess of Salisbury) asked me whether Her Majesty's Government were prepared to lay before Parliament the American Counter Case; and, in reply, 1676 I stated that General Schenck had telegraphed to his Government to know whether there was any objection to our doing so. Yesterday, General Schenck told me that, in the opinion of the American Government, there would be no objection to such a course as soon as the Counter Case had been laid before Congress, and in the evening he told me this had been done. I beg, therefore, to now present it to your Lordships.
Counter-Case of the United States presented to the Tribunal of Arbitration at Geneva under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington: Presented (by command), and ordered to lie on the Table.—North America (No. 6.) (1872.)
§ THE DUKE OF RICHMONDMy Lords, I rise for the purpose of putting to my noble Friend the Question of which I gave him Notice last evening. I feel this is a subject of such importance, and one on which so much anxiety is felt in the country, that no apology is due to your Lordships for the course I am taking. I think the time has arrived when we are entitled to expect some direct and definite assurance from Her Majesty's Government on this very important question. In putting this Question, my Lords, I do not at all desire that any debate or discussion should arise upon it. I think, in fact, such a result would be extremely inconvenient, and would not be fair to the noble Earl (Earl Russell) who has a Motion on the subject for next Monday. I put the Question because the course which I, and those who do me the honour of acting with me, intend to follow with respect to that Motion will be mainly influenced by the answer which my noble Friend may give me on the present occasion. I will not say more now, but ask my noble Friend whether the Government are prepared to give the House an assurance that further proceedings in the Arbitration at Geneva will be suspended unless the claims termed the Indirect Claims are abandoned or withdrawn by the Government of the United States?
§ EARL GRANVILLEMy Lords, in answer to the Question which the noble Duke has put to me, I have to state that I regret I cannot agree with him that the proper time for answering the Question is the present moment. Even under the threat which he has just uttered as to the course which he and his Friends 1677 may pursue, I must say that, in the opinion of Her Majesty's Government, it would not be for the public interest if they were to make a declaration as to the future course they will take in the Arbitration until they are made aware of the manner in which the United States Government intend to deal with the despatch of the 20th of March. I may add that we have official information that the answer to that despatch has left America, and we believe it is now on the way. I may further add that Her Majesty's Government have not the slightest doubt they will receive the support of Parliament in maintaining that position which they have held consistently with regard both to the scope and the meaning of the reference to the Tribunal of Arbitration; and they believe that any declaration at this stage of the diplomatic proceedings would not strengthen but weaken that position.
§ LORD BUCKHURSTsaid, he had put on the Paper a Notice of his intention to ask for the production of certain papers having reference to the Alabama. As, however, the noble Earl the Foreign Secretary had been good enough to tell him that those Papers would be found in the Library, although they were not on the Table of the House, he would not put his Question; but he begged to ask the noble Earl, Whether the Papers to which he had referred him contained the instructions sent to different ports relative to the Alabama after she left Liverpool?
§ EARL GRANVILLEsaid, he could not answer the Question without Notice. The Papers to which he had referred the noble Lord were in the appendices of several large volumes.