Synthesized answer
Based solely on the provided passages, the most compelling argument for detaining the "Alabama" would be that the vessel was "obviously intended for a man-of-war" and that the law officers advised that, if the particulars from the US consul were correct, "the vessel ought to be detained" [1]. The passages also show that sworn evidence was later obtained, and the law officers again advised that "there was sufficient ground for detention" [5]. As the US Consul, you would argue that the evidence clearly meets the legal standard for detention under the Foreign Enlistment Act.
The passages do not describe any diplomatic risks that such a request would entail for Anglo-American relations at the time of the request. However, the passages do reveal that the British authorities (the commissioners of customs) initially "declined to move" on the evidence [5], and that a delay in processing the papers allowed the vessel to escape [5]. This suggests a reluctance or lack of urgency on the British side. The later history shows that the "Alabama" claims became a major source of tension, leading to arbitration and disputes over "indirect losses" [2][4], but the passages do not explicitly state…
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…
. 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.
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…
was laid before the law officers, who advised that, if these particulars were correct, the vessel ought to be detained. On the 21st of July sworn evidence, which was supplemented on the 23rd of July, was obtained and laid before the commissioners of customs (who were the proper authorities to enforce the provisions of the Foreign Enlistment Act of 1819), but they declined to move. On the 23rd of July the same evidence was laid before the law officers, who advised that there was sufficient ground for detention. By some accident, which has never been satisfactorily explained, but was probably…
More questions about this book
- Explain, as if to someone unfamiliar with the American Civil War, why the British government's proclamation of neutrality and recognition of the Confederates as belligerents was a pivotal moment leading to the "Alabama" Arbitration.
- The text suggests the "Alabama" Arbitration highlights "the value of arbitration as a means of averting war." Based *only* on the actions described concerning the vessel's construction and US concerns, how did the potential for arbitration begin to mitigate a direct conflict between the US and Britain?
- From the perspective of a neutral nation like Britain, what specific obligations or challenges arose when the United States presented evidence regarding the "Alabama" being built on British soil for a belligerent power?
- How does the detailed description of the "Alabama"'s construction and the subsequent US diplomatic actions illustrate the evolving concept of international neutrality during wartime in the 19th century?