PROTOCOL VIII.

Record of the proceedings of the tribunal of arbitration at the eighth conference, held at Geneva, Switzerland, on the 28th of June, 1872.

The conference was held pursuant to adjournment. All the arbitrators and the agents of the two governments were present.

The protocol of the last conference was read and approved, and was signed by the president and secretary of the tribunal and the agents of the two governments.

Sir A. Cockburn

Sir Alexander Cockburn, as one of the arbitrators, then proposed to the tribunal to require a written or printed statement or argument by the counsel of the two governments for further ned for elucidation on the following points, viz:

men; motion Led.

1. What is the "due diligence" required from a neutral state, according to the general rules of international law, and according to the rules of the sixth article of the treaty of Washington?

2. What were the international obligations of neutral states in respect to the construction, sale, and fitting out, within neutral territory, of ships intended for warlike use by a belligerent, independently of the municipal legislation of the neutral state, and of the rules laid down by the treaty of Washington?

3. What rights are conferred upon a belligerent power by the municipal legislation of a neutral state for the maintenance of its neutrality, if such legislation exceeds the limits of the obligations previously imposed upon neutral States by international law?

4. Is a neutral state under any international obligation to detain in, or exclude from, its ports vessels fitted out in violation of its neutrality, after such vessels have been commissioned as public ships of war by a belligerent power, whether such power be or be not recognized as a sovereign state?

5. Whether Her Majesty's proclamation of neutrality, recognizing the belligerency of the Confederate States, is in any, and what, way material to the question of the liability of Great Britain for losses sustained by the United States, in consequence of the acts of the vessels referred to in the treaty of Washington?

6. Whether the laws of Great Britain, during the civil war, were, or were not, sufficient, if properly enforced, for the fulfillment of Her Britannic Majesty's neutral obligations?

7. If a vessel, which has been fitted out in violation of the neutrality of a neutral state, has escaped from the neutral territory, through some want of due diligence on the part of the neutral government, ought such neutral state to be held responsible to the other belligerent for captures made by such vessel ?

If so, to what period does this responsibility extend? May it be modified or terminated by circumstances afterward supervening, (as, for instance, by assistance afterward rendered to the vessel by an independent power, without which her capacity for warlike purposes would have ceased, or by her entrance into a port of the belligerent to whom she belongs,) or does it necessarily extend to the end of the war?

Furthermore, does this responsibility still exist, when the persons who made such captures were insurgent citizens of the state against which they waged war, to whom, upon the conclusion of the war, such illegal acts have been condoned?

8. If a vessel, which has not been fitted out or armed in violation of

the neutrality of a neutral state, is afterward permitted to receive supplies of coal and repairs in a neutral port, does the neutral state, in whose port she receives such supplies and repairs, incur on that account a responsibility for her subsequent captures, or any of them?

After deliberation a majority of the tribunal decided not to require such statement or argument at present.

The tribunal then decided that, in the course of their discussions and deliberations, the agents should attend the conferences, accompanied by the counsel of their respective governments, except in cases when the tribunal should think it advisable to conduct their discussions and deliberations with closed doors.

The tribunal then determined to permit publicity to be given to the statement made by the agent of Her Britannic Majesty at the third conference, the declaration of the arbitrators made at the fifth conference, the subsequent statements of the agent of the United States made at the sixth conference, and of the agent of Her Britannic Majesty made at the seventh conference, and the address of the president of the tribunal delivered at the seventh conference.

The tribunal then adjourned until Monday, the 15th proximo, at 2 o'clock in the afternoon..

FREDERICK SCLOPIS.

J. C. BANCROFT DAVIS.
TENTERDEN.

ALEX. FAVROT, Secretary.

PROTOCOL IX.

Record of the proceedings of the tribunal of arbitration at the conference held at Geneva, in Switzerland, on the 15th of July, 1872.

The conference was held pursuant to adjournment. All the arbitrators and the agents of the two governments were present.

The protocol of the last conference was read and approved, and was signed by the president and secretary of the tribunal and the agents of the two governments.

Count Sclopis, as president, said that it would be necessary in the Order of proceed first place to determine the method and order of proceeding in the consideration of the subjects referred to the tribunal. Mr. Stampfli stated that he had prepared, and proposed to submit, for the adoption of the tribunal, a written programme on this question. After discussion the consideration of this programme was deferred to the next conference.

The tribunal then adjourned until Tuesday, the 16th instant, at 2 o'clock in the afternoon.

FREDERICK SCLOPIS.

J. C. BANCROFT DAVIS.
TENTERDEN

ALEX. FAVROT, Secretary.

PROTOCOL X.

Record of the proceedings of the tribunal of arbitration at the tenth conference held at Geneva, in Switzerland, on the 16th of July, 1872.

The conference was held pursuant to adjournment. All the arbitrators and the agents of the two governments were present. Order of proceedThe protocol of the last conference was read and ap- ings. Mr. Stampili's proved, and was signed by the president and secretary of burn's renewed mothe tribunal and the agents of the two governments.

piper. Sir A. Cock

tron for argument.

The following programme, submitted by Mr. Stampfli at the last meeting, was taken into consideration:

Sir Alexander Cockburn, one of the arbitrators, submitted the following propositions to the consideration of the tribunal :

I. That the complaint of the Government. of the United States is of a threefold character, and may be stated under the three following heads, viz:

1. That, by want of due diligence on the part of the British government, vessels of war were suffered to be equipped in ports of Her Majesty, and to depart therefrom, to the injury of American commerce;

2. That such vessels, having been again found in British ports or waters, were not seized or detained, but were suffered to go forth again on the same destructive service;

3. That such vessels received undue assistance, or were permitted to remain an unduly long time, in ports within Her Majesty's dominions.

II. That on each of these heads of complaint the decision of the tribunal must depend, not only on the facts relating to each vessel, but also on the principles of international law applicable to the particular subject.

III. That the rational, logical, and most convenient course to be pursued will be, before proceeding to deal with each of these heads of complaint, to consider and determine what are the principles of law applicable to the subject, and by which the decision of the tribunal must ultimately be determined.

IV. That it will be convenient to take the three heads of complaint separately, and in the order hereinbefore stated.

V. That there is nothing in the VIIth article of the treaty which prevents the adoption of this mode of proceeding, the only object and effect of that article being to insure the separate consideration of the facts relating to each vessel, and a separate and distinct judgment of the tribunal on the complaints specifically referable to each in particular.

VI. That the consideration of the first-mentioned head of complaint, reference being had to the VIth article of the treaty, and the rules therein laid down, necessarily involves three questions of law: the first, what effect is to be given to the term "due diligence." with reference to the different allegations of the want thereof put forward by the United States Government; the second, whether the general principles of international law, referred to in such VIth article, have relatively to the rights and duties of neutrals any and what effect in determining what constitutes due diligence or the want of it, or in extending or limiting the liability of a neutral state with reference to this head of complaint; the third, whether a government acting in good faith, and honestly intending to fulfill the obligations of neutrality, is to be held liable by reason of mistake, error in judgment, accidental delay, or even negligence on the part of a subordinate officer.

VII. That it will be convenient, and indeed necessary, to commence our proceedings with the consideration of these questions of law.

VIII. That, looking to the difficulty of these questions, and the conflict of opinion which has arisen among distinguished jurists on the present contest, as well as to their vast importance in the decision of the tribunal on the matters in dispute, it is the duty, as it must be presumed to be the wish of the arbitrators, in the interest of justice, to obtain all the assistance in their power to enable them to arrive at a just and correct conclusion. That they ought, therefore, to call for the assistance of the eminent counsel who are in attendance on the tribunal to assist them with their reasoning and learning, so that arguments scattered over a mass of documents may be presented in a concentrated and appreciable form, and the tribunal may thus have the advantage of all the light which can be thrown on so intricate and difficult a matter, and that its proceedings may hereafter appear to the world to have been characterized by the patience, the deliberation, and anxious desire for information on all the points involved in its decision, without which it is impossible that justice can be duly or satisfactorily done.

After discussion, the tribunal decided to proceed with the case of the Florida at the next meeting, according to the programme of Mr. Stæmpfli.

The tribunal then adjourned until Wednesday, the 17th instant, at 1 o'clock in the afternoon.

FREDERICK SCLOPIS.

J. C. BANCROFT DAVIS.
TENTERDEN.

ALEX. FAVROT, Secretary.

PROTOCOL XI.

Record of the proceedings of the tribunal of arbitration at the eleventh conference, held at Genera, in Switzerland, on the 17th of July, 1872.

All the arbi

The conference was held pursuant to adjournment. trators and the agents of the two governments were present. The protocol of the last conference was read and approved, and was signed by the president and secretary of the tribunal, and the agents of the two governments.

On the proposal of Sir Alexander Cockburn it was decided that the written opinions or statements read by the arbitrators to the tribunal should be printed, and distributed to the arbitrators and to the agents and counsel of the two governments.

The tribunal then proceeded with the consideration of the

case of the Florida.

The Florida.

The conference was adjourned until Friday, the 19th instant, at 1 o'clock in the afternoon.

FREDERICK SCLOPIS.

J. C. BANCROFT DAVIS.
TENTERDEN.

ALEX. FAVROT, Secretary.

PROTOCOL XII.

Record of the proceedings of the tribunal of arbitration at the twelfth conference, held at Geneva, in Switzerland, on the 19th of July, 1872.

All the arbi

The conference was held pursuant to adjournment. trators and the agents of the two governments were present. The protocol of the last conference was read and approved, and was signed by the president and secretary of the tribunal and the agents of the two governments.

The tribunal continued with the consideration of the case of the Florida.

The Florida.

The tribunal decided that the meetings should, for the present, be held on Mondays, Tuesdays, Wednesdays, Thursdays, and Fridays." The conference then adjourned until Monday, the 22d instant, at half past 12 o'clock.

FREDERICK SCLOPIS.

J. C. BANCROFT DAVIS.
TENTERDEN.

ALEX. FAVROT, Secretary.

PROTOCOL XIII.

Record of the proceedings of the tribunal of arbitration at the thirteenth conference, held at Geneva, in Switzerland, on the 22d of July, 1872.

The conference was held pursuant to adjournment. All the arbitrators and the agents of the two governments were present.

The proctocol of the last conference was read and approved, and was signed by the president and secretary of the tribunal, and the agents of the two governments.

The tribunal continued with the consideration of the case of the Florida.

Sir Alexander Cockburn, as one of the arbitrators, proposed to the tribunal under the fifth article of the treaty of Washington, to call for the assistance of counsel upon the effect of the term of "due diligence," and as to the principles of international law motion for 1rs i went applicable to the case under the terms of that article.

Sir A. Cockburn's

demed. The A1bama.

After deliberation, a majority of the tribunal decided that it does not at present require the assistance of the agents and counsel upon the point proposed by Sir Alexander Cockburn; but that it reserves the right of requiring that assistance on any point, if necessary, according to the fifth article of the treaty.