Synthesized answer
The British government’s proclamation of neutrality on May 14, 1861, recognized the Confederates as belligerents [1]. This upheld the spirit of neutrality by formally declaring Britain’s non-involvement in the U.S. Civil War, aligning with the neutral duty “not to permit or suffer either belligerent to make use of its ports or waters as the base of naval operations against the other” [3]. However, the recognition also challenged neutrality in practice, as it allowed Confederate agencies in England to purchase arms and ship them via ordinary merchant vessels to the Bahamas, where they were transferred to fast blockade-running steamers [1].
The shipbuilding issue further tested neutrality. The “Alabama” was built by Messrs. Laird at Birkenhead, “obviously intended for a man-of-war,” yet she escaped British detention and was later armed and commissioned by the Confederacy [1][2]. This led to U.S. grievances over “breaches of neutrality in allowing the ‘Alabama’… and other Confederate vessels to be built and equipped on British territory” [2]. The subsequent arbitration rules required a neutral to “use due diligence to prevent the fitting out, arming or equipping within its…
Synthesized from the book passages below. Chat with the book on Feynman for follow-up.
From the book
tes on the 13th of April 1861. On the 19th of April President Abraham Lincoln declared a blockade of the southern ports. On the 14th of May the British government issued a proclamation of neutrality, by which the Confederates were recognized as belligerents. This example was followed shortly afterwards by France and other nations. The blockade of the southern ports was not at first effective, and blockade-running soon became an active industry. The Confederates established agencies in England for the purchase of arms, which they despatched in ordinary merchant vessels to the Bahamas, whence…
rpool in two British ships. Captain Semmes there took command of her under a commission from the Confederate government. After a most destructive career she was sunk off Cherbourg by the “Kearsarge” on the 19th of June 1864. On these facts the United States government alleged against Great Britain two grievances, or sets of grievances. The first was the recognition of the Southern States as belligerents and a general manifestation of unfriendliness in other ways. The second was in respect of breaches of neutrality in allowing the “Alabama,” the “Florida” (originally the “Oreto”, the…
rst agreed upon.” After some discussion the British commissioners consented that the three following rules should apply. A neutral government is bound—(1) to use due diligence to prevent the fitting out, arming or equipping within its jurisdiction of any vessel, which it has reasonable ground to believe is intended to cruise or to carry on war against a power with which it is at peace, and also to use like diligence to prevent the departure from its jurisdiction of any vessel intended to cruise or carry on war as above, such vessel having been specially adapted, in whole or in part, within…
nfriendly utterances of British politicians and the material assistance afforded to the Confederates by British traders. The inclusion of the indirect losses and the other matters just referred to caused great excitement in England. That they were within the treaty was disputed, and it was argued that, if they were, the treaty should be amended or denounced. In October 1872 Lord Granville notified to General Schenck, the United States minister, that the British government did not consider that the indirect losses were within the submission, and in April the British counter-case was filed…
. With respect to the “Alabama” claims the British commissioners suggested that they should be submitted to arbitration. The American commissioners refused “unless the principles which should govern the arbitrators in the consideration of the facts could be first agreed upon.” After some discussion the British commissioners consented that the three following rules should apply.
More questions about this book
- Explain the "Alabama" Arbitration as if to a child, highlighting *why* it was significant both historically and legally, and how it demonstrated arbitration's value.
- Walk through the precise sequence of events, beginning with the Southern States' secession, that led to the construction of the "Alabama" in a neutral country, detailing the causal links between each step.
- If you were a British official in 1862, what *specific legal and diplomatic challenges* would arise if the "Alabama" were *not* detained, considering the information presented and the stated purpose of the vessel?
- Connecting the initial statement about arbitration to the specific facts, how did the detailed circumstances surrounding the "Alabama" controversy make arbitration an indispensable tool for preventing a wider conflict?