Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward.
Sir: Your despatch No. 1965, of the 16th of last month, came to hand last evening, just as I was about to fulfill an engagement to meet a party invited to dinner by Lord Stanley. I seized a favorable moment in the course of the evening to apprise him of the fact that I had your answer to his last note of the 9th of March, and to ask of him an interview in order to communicate the substance of it. He at once fixed the hour of noon this day, at which time I saw him at the Foreign Office, and I have just now returned to the legation to make my report to our conference.
I commenced by observing to his lordship that I was not instructed to deliver a copy of the despatch received, but for the sake of shortening matters I would read to him all its essential parts. I did so, beginning with the second paragraph and going to the end. His lordship took notes of the essential portionsust as they were read.
I then took the occasion to remark to his lordship that although, in literal strictness, you could not avoid to regard the last paragraph of his letter of the 9th as embracing the actual proposal officially made, yet it seemed to me that the limitation thus made to the arbitration could scarcely have been one intended by him, as it was clearly in conflict with the broader and wider statement of the disposition of her Majesty’s government contained in the preceding paragraphs, beginning with the words, “The real matter at issue,” &c, &c. Indeed, on general grounds I could not imagine it likely that if her Majesty’s government could make up its mind to assent to arbitration on a case which all must agree was the strongest one presented, it would hesitate in order to exclude others in which they would feel more confident of their ground.
His lordship at once gave his assent to that view of the case. In the language used in the last paragraph he did not intend to preclude the consideration of other, in his mind less important, claims of the same class.
I then pointed out the other ground of disagreement contained in your fifth paragraph, in the refusal of his lordship’s proposal of a mixed commission, to dispose of general claims on both sides, as separate from arbitration. To which [Page 83] he made the remark that these claims consisted on their side, for the most part, of small questions of damage by the destruction of property of private persons in the war, or of individual complaints of different sorts, upon which it could scarcely be expected that a suitable umpire to determine the greater questions would be found willing to adjudicate. The difficulty here was grave rather as a practical matter of business than in any other light. He would take time to consider it, in order to make up an answer.
I called his lordship’s attention to the fact that no direct notice had been taken of the single exception he had made in his former despatch. I was not in a position to express an opinion whether this was intended as a waiver of that question, or it was still designed to include it in the general arbitration. It was no more than proper for me to allude to it as making an essential point in the preparation of any answer which his lordship might send.
His lordship said he had observed that and augured favorably from it. He asked me what I thought of printing the correspondence, so far as it had gone. He said there would be inquiries about it in Parliament which he ought to be prepared to answer.
I replied by simply expressing my private opinion of its inexpediency; so far as I might permit myself to judge, the line of difference between the two governments was becoming thinner and thinner, Assuming any tolerable share of good will to prevail, I saw no reason why earnest efforts might not eliminate it altogether. At least some further chance ought to be given to reach this result before coming to publication. His lordship remarked that Parliament might probably yet sits for three months.
I concluded by saying that I should make my report to you in time for the next Saturday’s steamer. I presumed his lordship would prefer to send his reply, as he had done before, through Sir Frederick Bruce. He said yes; but it was doubtful whether he could get it ready so soon as Saturday. The pressure of continental affairs was just now so great that the time and attention of the government were much absorbed in them.
I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant,
Hon. William H. Seward, Secretary of State, Washington, D. C.