Synthesized answer
The "Alabama" Arbitration arose from the American Civil War (1861), when the Southern Confederacy seceded and blockaded southern ports [1]. The United States alleged that Great Britain violated its neutrality by allowing Confederate vessels like the "Alabama," "Florida," and "Shenandoah" to be built and equipped on British territory, leading to destructive raids on Union shipping [3]. After years of correspondence, a commission in 1871 agreed to submit the claims to arbitration, but only after the U.S. insisted on first agreeing on the legal principles that would govern the arbitrators [2].
The central legal dispute was whether Britain had used "due diligence" to prevent these breaches of neutrality. The U.S. argued diligence must match the emergency, while Britain claimed it should only match what civilized states normally use for their own security [5]. The tribunal sided with the U.S., finding Britain legally responsible for the "Alabama" and "Florida" depredations, and for the "Shenandoah" after leaving Melbourne, awarding $15,500,000 in gold damages [5].
This case is a "conspicuous example of the value of arbitration" because it averted war by settling a major international…
Synthesized from the book passages below. Chat with the book on Feynman for follow-up.
From the book
← Alabama 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica , Volume 1 "Alabama" Arbitration by Montague Hughes Crackanthorpe Alabama River → See also Alabama Claims on Wikipedia ; and our 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica disclaimer . 244259 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica , Volume 1 — "Alabama" Arbitration Montague Hughes Crackanthorpe “ALABAMA” ARBITRATION. —This is one of those arbitrations on pecuniary claims, made by one state, on behalf of its subjects, against another state, which are referred to in the article Arbitration, International . The case is important, both from a historical and a juridical point of…
. 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.
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…
itrators that an extra-judicial declaration should be obtained from the arbitrators on the subject of the direct claims. On the 19th of June Count Sclopis intimated on behalf of all his colleagues that, without intending to express any opinion upon the interpretation of the treaty, they had arrived at the conclusion that “the indirect claims did not constitute upon the principles of international law applicable to such cases a good foundation for an award or computation of damages between nations.” In consequence of this intimation Mr Bancroft Davis informed the tribunal on the 25th of June…
ontended that it must be a diligence commensurate with the emergency or with the magnitude of the results of negligence. The British government maintained that while the measure of care which a government is bound to use in such cases must be dependent more or less upon circumstances, it would be unreasonable to require that it should exceed that which the governments of civilized states were accustomed to employ in matters concerning their own security or that of their citizens. The tribunal adopted the view suggested by the United States. It found that Great Britain was legally responsible…
More questions about this book
- The British government's proclamation of neutrality recognized the Confederates as "belligerents." How did this seemingly neutral act contribute to the international controversy surrounding the "Alabama," and what specific actions did it implicitly allow or disallow?
- What specific legal obligations or responsibilities of a neutral nation were allegedly violated by Britain in the "Alabama" case, and what evidence was presented by the United States to highlight this breach?
- Beyond the immediate resolution of pecuniary claims, what enduring principles or precedents for international law and the conduct of neutral nations do you think the "Alabama" Arbitration established?
- Analyze the sequence of events regarding the "Alabama's" construction and the US consul's appeals. At what specific juncture did British authorities have the clearest opportunity, and perhaps the legal imperative, to intervene, and what were the potential consequences had they acted differently?