Great Britain and the American Civil War. By Ephraim Douglass Adams. (New York: Longmans, Green and Company. 1925. Two volumes. Pp. ix, 307; vii, 340.) - The Diplomatic Relations of Great Britain and the United States. By R. B. Mowat. (New York: Longmans, Green and Company. 1925. Pp. xi, 350.) - John Slidell. By Louis Martin Sears. (Durham, North Carolina: Duke University Press. 1925. Pp. 252.)

1926 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 444-447
Author(s):  
Henry Donaldson Jordan
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
New York ◽  
North Carolina ◽  
Civil War ◽  
Great Britain ◽  
The United States ◽  
American Civil War ◽  
Diplomatic Relations ◽  
Duke University

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.

Austro-American Relations during the Era of the American Civil War

1968 ◽  
Vol 4 ◽  
pp. 203-226
Author(s):  
Burton Ira Kaufman
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Civil War ◽  
Political Institutions ◽  
The United States ◽  
American Civil War ◽  
Diplomatic Relations ◽  
American Review ◽  
Habsburg Empire ◽  
The Family ◽  
The Government

For most of the nineteenth century prior to the American Civil War relations between the United States and Austria were characterized by rancor and ill feeling. As Protestants with strong nativist sentiments and republicans anxious to spread their political institutions to other nations, Americans generally regarded Catholic Austria and its conservative monarchy with great suspicion and distrust. An attempt by an Austrian Catholic missionary society in the 1820's to foster Catholicism in America led to sharp recriminations against the government in Vienna, which some even accused of supporting conspiracies against the United States. In 1848, when revolution swept the Habsburg empire, Americans almost unanimously supported the revolutionaries, condemning an Austria which the North American Review called a “conglomeration of dissimilar races having no principle of unity but despotism.” Secretary of State John M. Clayton ordered A. Dudley Mann to Hungary to welcome the country into the family of nations as soon as her independence was assured. When the Hungarian revolutionary leader Lajos Kossuth toured the United States, he met a hero's welcome wherever he went. In response, Austria pursued an unfriendly policy of her own towards the United States, even briefly breaking off diplomatic relations.

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.

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document