as well as those below them who look forward to enfranchisement through his agency. It can scarcely be presumed that any measure which the government may be likely to pass without his concurrence and that of his friends in Parliament will meet with popular approval, or be considered as a settlement for any length of time. It is not impossible that the next step in the agitation, if relieved from the pressure of his position, may be to demand a still more popular measure, not stopping short of universal household suffrage, unembarrassed by any of the restraints or qualifications now proposed to limit its operation. The great difficulty at the root of the whole matter in Parliament is the secret disinclination of many of the members to any change whatever. Hence, whilst the profession runs all in one direction, the action to sustain it is uncertain, fitful, and changeable. This is a not infrequent symptom in advance of a great revolution. In the present restless and uneasy condition of all the central regions of Europe, it would seem as if a small event might suddenly lead to the most important and extraordinary consequences. I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant, Hon. WILLIAM H. SEWARD, CHARLES FRANCIS ADAMS. Secretary of State, Washington, D. C. No. 1361.] Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES, SIR: Your despatch No. 1965, of the 16th of last month, came to hand last evening, just as I was about to fulfil 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 portions ust 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 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 sit 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, CHARLES FRANCIS ADAMS. Secretary of State, Washington, D. C. No. 1971.] Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. [Confidential.] DEPARTMENT OF STATE, SIR: Your confidential despatch No. 1355 has been received. You are right in supposing that Lord Stanley's paper of the 9th of March had not been communicated to me when my confidential despatch No. 1952 was written. Indeed, the latter communication would not have been made had the former been then before me. Your suggestions, which were made upon a full knowledge of that despatch, have been submitted to the President, and have been carefully considered. He sees at present no prospect of coming to an agreement with her Majesty's government upon the so-called Alabama claims, and thus the whole controversy between the two states must remain open indefinitely. While thus far the balance of inconveniences and losses is suffered by the United States, I feel quite certain that the balance of faults has been on the side of Great Britain. First, the concession of belligerency ought not to have been made. Second, upon our earnest appeals it ought to have been earlier rescinded. Third, the principle of indemnities ought to have been conceded, or, fourth, the remedy of arbitration ought to have been at once proposed. Fifth, when the first decision was reconsidered and arbitration was proposed, it should have been an unconditional arbitration. As the case now stands, the injuries by which the United States are aggrieved are not chiefly the actual losses sustained in the several depredations, but the first unfriendly or wrongful proceeding of which they are but consequences. If the President were never so much disposed to drop that wrong out of sight in the prosecution of the claims, the recent proceedings of Congress in both houses show that an approval of such a waiver could not be obtained either from Congress or from the nation. It is, however, hardly necessary to say that in this case the President does not disagree from, but, on the contrary, entirely agrees with Congress and the nation. I am not aware of anything further that you or I can do now to change the situation in which her Majesty's government have placed the subject, and, as they say, after due deliberation. It is not given us to foresee what new and untried misfortune may hereafter befall our country; I can say, however, with entire confidence, that I can conceive of no scourge which may be in reserve for the American people that will ever produce a conviction on their part that the proceedings of the British government in recognizing the confederacy were, not merely unfriendly and ungenerous, but entirely unjust. Since the British government seem content to leave this conviction in its full force, we must be content to abide their decision. Probably I shall not be directed by the President to recur again in this correspondence to the subject of the Alabama claims until after the whole subject shall have been reviewed by the national legislature. I am, sir, your obedient servant, CHARLES FRANCIS ADAMS, Esq., &c., &c., &c. WILLIAM H. SEWARD. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. No. 1362.] LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES, SIR: I have the honor to transmit a copy of a note received from Lord Stanley so long since as the 29th of March last, together with an account relating to the balance remaining due to the United States on the settlement of the rate of exchange in payment of the first instalment of the Japanese indemnity. It was not until yesterday that I received from the paymaster general a draft for the sum referred to, which is the reason of the delay in giving you a report in the case. I have caused the money to be deposited with Messrs. Baring Brothers & Co., to the credit of the State Department, as in the former cases of the same kind. I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant, Hon. WILLIAM H. SEWARD, CHARLES FRANCIS ADAMS. Secretary of State, Washington, D. C. Lord Stanley to Mr. Adams. FOREIGN OFFICE, March 29, 1867. SIR: With reference to my note of the 14th of July last, on the subject of the Japanese indemnity, I have the honor to enclose a statement which I have received from the lords commissioners of her Majesty's treasury of the sum due to the United States government on account of the difference between the British official rate of exchange and the actual current rate at the time when the instalments of the indemnity were paid. This statement is founded on certificates furnished by a bill-broker and by the Oriental Bank Corporation in Yokohama, and I have the honor to acquaint you that instructions have been given to her Majesty's paymaster general to pay to you the sum of one thousand six hundred and thirtyfive pounds eight shillings and fourpence, (£1,635 8s. 4d.,) being the amount due to the United States government. I have the honor to be, with the highest consideration, sir, your most obedient, humble servant, CHARLES FRANCIS ADAMS, Esq., &c., &c., &c. STANLEY. JAPANESE INDEMNITY. Amounts received into the treasury chest for remittance to the government of the United States of America. On account of first instalment of $500,000, viz: Proportion (3) of the total prior charge of $420,000, viz: $70,000 payable to the three governments in equal amounts... One-fourth each of the balance of the instalment, viz: $430,000, after deducting above Total..... Sterling value of the above amount at the current rate of exchange, viz: Amount already paid at the British official rate of 4s. 3d. the dollar. $23, 3331 107,500 130,833 £29, 437 10 0 27,802 1 8 1,635 8 4 Mr. Adams to Lord Stanley. LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES, MY LORD: I have to acknowledge the reception of your lordship's note of the 29th of March last, enclosing a statement from the lords commissioners of her Majesty's treasury of the sum due the United States on account of the difference between the official rate of exchange and the actual current rate at the time when the instalments of the Japanese indemnity were paid. I have also to acknowledge the receipt, yesterday, of a letter from the office of her Majesty's paymaster general, covering a draft on the Bank of England for the sum of sixteen hundred and thirty-five pounds eight shillings and fourpence, being the sum stated in the account and mentioned in your lordship's note as about to be paid to the United States. I pray your lordship to accept, &c., &c., &c. The Right Hon. LORD STANLEY, &c., &c., &c. No. 1364.] CHARLES FRANCIS ADAMS. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. LEGATION of the United States, SIR: The events of the past week have not been without some political importance. The ministry experienced a defeat on one portion of their measure for extending the franchise which terminated in their consent to accept the adverse modification. It was generally supposed that they would again make a stand upon the proposals to embrace the lodger franchise and what is called the compound householder; but at a large meeting of the conservative members, called by Lord Derby to meet yesterday for consultation, the sense of the majority was in favor of every concession, down to the limit suggested by him of a surrender of the principle of the personal payment of taxes. It is, therefore, not impossible that such modifications may be made of the contested portions of the bill as to effect its ultimate adoption by a majority of the house. In this form it cannot be doubted that a far more considerable enlargement of the franchise than had been contemplated by the most sanguine of two years ago will have been brought about. It is difficult to comprehend the process of reasoning through which this revolution has been worked by the agency of the party which has ever been identified with hostility to popular reforms. But the fact must have a material bearing upon the progress of the country in the same direction for the future. The power of moral resistance to extensive changes in existing institutions has been so far crippled that their happening now becomes a mere question of time and favoring circumstances. An incident has attended the popular movements in London which appears to be of some signification. The riots which took place in Hyde Park last year, on the attempt made by the government to exclude the reform associations who proposed to hold a public meeting within the grounds, so far alarmed both the ministers and the higher classes that, when an announcement was issued a short time since, by the same parties, of a determination to repeat the experiment on yesterday, the 6th instant, it was at first met with a corresponding spirit of resistance. As a consequence there was last week a very general apprehension of some fearful struggle, ending in more or less of confusion and possible bloodshed. The government was known to have taken certain measures which had, at least, the appearance of a resolution to resort to force, if need be, to put a stop to the proceedings. It was not until yesterday morning that an announcement through the press declared that no legal power existed to interfere with the liberty of persons entering the park, within the legitimate hours, for any purpose not absolutely an infraction of the peace of the realm. The consequence was that the power of restraint was limited by this rule only to the commission of such acts as could be technically construed as breaches of the peace. Hence the people were permitted free ingress. Multitudes accordingly entered, assembled together, organized their meetings, and made speeches, in very orderly fashion; not a single violation of law happened, and what threatened to be a serious collision ended in a very quiet and pacific demonstration. This is a result far more creditable to the popular party than to the administration. It indicates a self-sustaining power in the former to act boldly but within the law, which strongly fortifies their claim to become a constituent portion of the political organization of the state. The conference of the great powers to consult upon the case of the Duchy of Luxembourg, and, if possible, to prevent a struggle between France and Prussia, assembles here this day. There is much uneasiness felt everywhere as to the issue of this experiment. Whilst people here are sanguine as to success in bringing about a composition, the feeling in Paris and Berlin is by no means so confident. I shall be able to make a further report to you on the subject by the steamer of Saturday. I have the honor to be, sir, your Hon. WILLIAM H. SEWARD, obedient servant, CHARLES FRANCIS ADAMS. Secretary of State, Washington, D. C. No. 1975] Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, SIR: Your despatch of the 23d of April, No. 1357, is received. It presents vividly the state of solicitude for the preservation of European peace which now exists in England, and with equal clearness the state of auxiety which has been |