EXPLANATION. (Hansard, 25 July 1872)

§ LORD REDESDALE

said, he wished to call the attention of the noble Earl the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs to a matter which was a little personal to himself (Lord Redesdale.) On Tuesday evening, he had called attention to what he had always contended for—namely, that we ought, in the first instance, to deny our liability for the damage done by the Alabama and similar vessels, seeing that the Southern States had since become reunited to the American Republic, which was, in fact, now demanding compensation for wrongs done to it by one of its component parts. The noble Earl opposite, according to what appeared to be a very accurate report of his speech, said on that occasion— The noble Lord must not think that he has the sole property of that argument, for the question was considered by the Legal Advisers of the Crown; and not only by them, but I have had letters on the subject from different persons, some of them of very great authority, and some of them of no particular authority. He (Lord Redesdale), however, found that on the 12th May, 1872, the noble Earl used this language— The noble Lord had raised a point which had not, that he was aware, been previously raised. It certainly had not suggested itself to the Legal Advisers of the successive Governments which had to deal with the question, and it had not formed a portion of the instructions given to our Commissioners."—[3 Hansard, ccvi. 700.] 1747 He ventured, therefore, to think that the letters which the noble Earl had received on the subject must have been subsequent to the 12th May, 1871.