scholarly journals Gone with the War? Neutral State Responsibility and the Geneva Arbitration of 1872

1999 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 787-820 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth Chadwick
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Civil War ◽  
Great Britain ◽  
International Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
American Civil War ◽  
Great Powers ◽  
State Responsibility ◽  
Central Importance ◽  
Neutral State

The Geneva Arbitration of 1872 was convened to settle various differences between the United States and Great Britain and, in particular, American allegations of British collusion with regard to shipbuilding for the Southern Confederacy during the American Civil War. The Arbitrators ultimately found Britain liable, and awarded $15,500,000 to the United States. This decision remains controversial to the extent that it rested on rules which were not yet accepted as principles of general international law, and which clearly favoured the case of the United States from the outset. It is thus the purpose of this article to explore the facts behind the Geneva Arbitration, and to argue that the finding of British liability in Geneva marked the beginning decline of the laws of neutrality. Neutral Countries […] may be exploited by the Great Powers both strategically and as a source of additional armies and fleets. Of central importance to the game are those Neutral Countries and provinces which are designated as “Supply Centres.” […] A player's fighting strength is directly related to the number of Supply Centres he or she controls, whilst the game is won when one player controls at least 18 Supply Centres.

Some British Opinions as to Neutral Rights,1861 to 1865

1929 ◽  
Vol 23 (3) ◽  
pp. 517-537 ◽  
Author(s):  
James P. Baxter
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Civil War ◽  
Great Britain ◽  
International Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
American Civil War ◽  
World War ◽  
The World ◽  
Effective Use

In the controversy between Great Britain and the United States as to neutral rights from 1914 to 1917, both governments appealed again and again to precedents of the American Civil War. British prize courts as well as British diplomats made effective use of the Civil War decisions. Indeed, Professor A. Pearce Higgins has recently gone so far as to assert that, if one views the decisions as a whole, there was no greater extension of the principles of international law by the decisions of British prize courts during the World War than in the American cases.

The American Society of International Law 1906–1956

1956 ◽  
Vol 50 (2) ◽  
pp. 293-312 ◽  
Author(s):  
George A. Finch
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Civil War ◽  
Great Britain ◽  
International Relations ◽  
International Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
Peace Treaty ◽  
Law And Justice ◽  
Jay Treaty ◽  
American Society

The founding fifty years ago of a society to promote the establishment of international relations on the basis of law and justice was a step marking the progress that had been made at the beginning of the century in the age-long efforts to find a means of substituting reason for force in the settlement of international controversies. At that time arbitration was generally regarded as the most suitable and acceptable substitute for war. Great Britain and the United States had both heavily contributed to that conviction first by submitting to arbitration under the Jay Treaty of 1794 the numerous misunderstandings that developed in carrying out the provisions of the Peace Treaty of 1783, and then three-quarters of a century later in submitting to arbitration by the Treaty of Washington of 1871 the dangerous Alabama Claims dispute following the American Civil War.

International law 1908–1983

Legal Studies ◽  
1983 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 267-282
Author(s):  
Christine Gray
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Great Britain ◽  
International Law ◽  
Latin American ◽  
United States Of America ◽  
The United States ◽  
Great Powers ◽  
American States ◽  
The Family ◽  
Congo Free State

In 1908 international law governed relations between ‘civilised states’ only. It applied exclusively to those states within the Family ofNations - 45 fully sovereign states according to the first edition of Oppenheim's International Law. These 45 included the six ‘Great Powers’, Austria-Hungary, France, Germany, Great Britain, Italy and Russia, various lesser European states, the United States of America and 20 Latin American states. In Africa ‘The Negro Republic of Liberia and the Congo Free State were the only real and full members ofthe Family of Nations’, in Asia only Japan. The position ofsuch states as Persia, Siam, China, Korea and Abyssinia was doubtful; ‘These states are certainly civilised states, and Abyssinia is even a Christian state.

Counterterrorism Between the Wars

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mary S. Barton
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Great Britain ◽  
Domestic Politics ◽  
The United States ◽  
League Of Nations ◽  
Great Powers ◽  
Common Interests ◽  
Independence Movements ◽  
Second World ◽  
The U.S

This is a book about terrorism, weapons, and diplomacy in the interwar years between the First and Second World Wars. It charts the convergence of the manufacture and trade of arms; diplomacy among the Great Powers and the domestic politics within them; the rise of national liberation and independence movements; and the burgeoning concept and early institutions of international counterterrorism. Key themes include: a transformation in meaning and practice of terrorism; the inability of Great Powers—namely, Great Britain, the United States, France—to harmonize perceptions of interest and the pursuit of common interests; the establishment of the tools and infrastructure of modern intelligence—including the U.S.-U.K. cooperation that would evolve into the Five Eyes intelligence alliance; and the nature of peacetime in the absence of major wars. Particular emphasis is given to British attempts to quell revolutionary nationalist movements in India and elsewhere in its empire, and to the Great Powers’ combined efforts to counter the activities of the Communist International. The facilitating roles of the Paris Peace Conference and League of Nations are explored here, in the context of the Arms Traffic Convention of 1919, the Arms Traffic Conference of 1925, and the 1937 Terrorism Convention.

Morris Ranger: The Rise and Fall of the Liverpool Cotton Market’s Greatest Speculator, 1835 to 1887

2021 ◽  
Vol 170 (1) ◽  
pp. 69-92
Author(s):  
Nigel Hall
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Civil War ◽  
The United States ◽  
American Civil War

In the period 1878 to 1883 there was heavy speculation in the Liverpool raw cotton market associated with a trader named Morris Ranger. Little has previously been written about Ranger and his background. Ranger was born in Germany and emigrated to the United States in 1855. He initially traded in tobacco but branched out into cotton during the American Civil War. He settled in Liverpool in 1870. His cotton speculations were enormous, but he fell bankrupt in 1883. The speculations associated with Ranger involved other Liverpool traders and drew heavy criticism from the spinning industry. The speculations played a part in a reorganisation of the Liverpool market and attempts to circumvent it, including the building of the Manchester Ship Canal.

Indian Slavery

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alan Gallay
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Civil War ◽  
American West ◽  
The United States ◽  
American Civil War ◽  
African Slave ◽  
Economic Exploitation ◽  
Indian Slavery

Indian slavery was neither fleeting nor secondary to the story of colonialism, imperialism, and economic exploitation in the Americas. Persisting for centuries, it both pre-dated African slavery in the Americas, and survived African slavery's abolition in the United States. Not until the American government's five-year program to eradicate Indian slavery in Colorado and Utah after the American Civil War did slavery officially end, though it likely persisted in several areas of the American West. This article examines the contours of Indian slavery in the Americas, its evolution and character, the varieties of labour systems implemented to control Indian labour and lives, and the existence of Indian slave trades that paralleled African slave trades.

British Reaction to American Civil War Ironclads

Vulcan ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 56-69
Author(s):  
Jesse A. Heitz
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Civil War ◽  
Great Britain ◽  
United States Navy ◽  
The United States ◽  
Arms Race ◽  
Royal Navy ◽  
Naval Power ◽  
Government Documents ◽  
Great Ease

By the 1840’s the era of the wooden ship of the line was coming to a close. As early as the 1820’s and 1830’s, ships of war were outfitted with increasingly heavy guns. Naval guns such as the increasingly popular 68 pounder could quickly damage the best wooden hulled ships of the line. Yet, by the 1840’s, explosive shells were in use by the British, French, and Imperial Russian navies. It was the explosive shell that could with great ease, cripple a standard wooden hulled warship, this truth was exposed at the Battle of Sinope in 1853. For this reason, warships had to be armored. By 1856, Great Britain drafted a design for an armored corvette. In 1857, France began construction on the first ocean going ironclad, La Gloire, which was launched in 1859. This development quickly caused Great Britain to begin construction on HMS Warrior and HMS Black Prince. By the time HMS Warrior was commissioned in 1861, the Royal Navy had decided that its entire battle fleet needed to be armored. While the British and the French naval arms race was intensifying, the United States was entering into its greatest crisis, the United States Civil War. After the outbreak of the Civil War, the majority of the United States Navy remained loyal to the Union. The Confederacy, therefore, gained inspiration from the ironclads across the Atlantic, quickly obtaining its own ironclads. CSS Manassas was the first to enter service, but was eventually brought down by a hail of Union broadside fire. The CSS Virginia, however, made an impact. Meanwhile, the Union began stockpiling City Class ironclads and in 1862, the USS Monitor was completed. After the veritable stalemate between the CSS Virginia and USS Monitor, the Union utilized its superior production capabilities to mass produce ironclads and enter them into service in the Union Navy. As the Union began armoring its increasingly large navy, the world’s foremost naval power certainly took notice. Therefore, this paper will utilize British newspapers, government documents, Royal Naval Reviews, and various personal documents from the 1860’s in order to examine the British public and naval reaction to the Union buildup of ironclad warships.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document