Mr. Johnson to Mr. Seward
Sir: After deciphering (and, as I believe, correctly) your cipher cable dispatch of the 20th, received on the 21st instant, at 12.20 noon, I had an interview with Lord Clarendon at his house, on yesterday morning. I found that he had received by cable a dispatch, substantially the same, from Mr. Thornton. After an interview which lasted an hour, I left him under the impression that he would agree substantially to that part of the amendment suggested by you to the first article of the convention signed by Lord Stanley and myself on the 10th of November, which provides that for the paragraph you quote there be substituted the following:
In the case of any and every claim, the arbitrator or umpire may be the head of a friendly sovereign state or nation. In naming or agreeing upon an arbitrator or umpire, the commissioners on each side may refer themselves to their own government for instructions, and the contracting parties will in such case, within six months after notice of such reference shall have been given, decide upon such arbitrator or umpire, and instruct their commissioners accordingly.
But he strongly objects, and I do not believe that he will yield the objection, to that portion of your proposed amendment which provides that “If it shall happen, nevertheless, that at the expiration of the period of six months before named no person, the head of a sovereign state or otherwise, has been agreed upon as arbitrator or umpire, then and in that case the commissioners on each side shall name a person, the head of a sovereign state or otherwise,” &c. The grounds of his objections are, first, that it would be to call in question the good faith of the two governments to suppose that if the choice of an arbitrator was referred to them in the manner suggested in the first part of your amendment, that they would not agree upon one; and, second, that the [Page 394] commissioners being authorized to appoint as arbitrator the head of a foreign state, he thinks, and he is probably right, would be deemed so discourteous that no head of a foreign government so selected would agree to serve. His lordship’s long diplomatic experience gives to his opinions upon all such subjects great weight. I have no doubt that the contingent provision you suggest is altogether unnecessary, as I am satisfied that his lordship and yourself would very promptly agree upon an arbitrator.
The other amendments you propose I believe he will agree to, except that of changing the convention into a protocol, and the signing it in Washington instead of London.
In order to make the obligation of the two governments to appoint an arbitrator, if the appointment is referred to them, the more absolute, I suggested to his lordship, and he concurred in it, the insertion of the words “shall and” before the word “will,” in that part of your amendment, so as to make it read thus: “The contracting parties shall and will in such case, within six months,” &c., make the appointment. It cannot for a moment be believed that, if this be done, either government would hesitate to comply with so imperative a stipulation.
If, upon further reflection, with these objections of Lord Clarendon before you, you agree to waive that part of your amendment to which they refer, it is very advisable that you telegraph to me at once, as I think that will enable me to bring the negotiation to a speedy and satisfactory termination.
I remain, with high regard, your obedient servant,
Hon. William H. Seward, Secretary of State, Washington, D. C.