# The New International Encyclopædia/Alabama Claims

Edition of 1905. See also Alabama Claims on Wikipedia; and the disclaimer.
​ ALABAMA CLAIMS. A series of claims for indemnity made upon Great Britain by the United States, based upon the alleged omission of Great Britain to observe the obligations imposed by international law upon neutral nations with reference to their dealings with, and duties to, belligerents. The claims, in most particulars, arose from damages inflicted by vessels in the Confederate service which had been fitted out or built in English waters and allowed to sail thence. The Declaration of Paris (q.v.), adopted in 1856 by most of the nations of Christendom, had abolished privateering, and, though the United States was not a party to the convention, this decree had become a recognized principle of international law. Moreover, both the United States and England had passed acts early in the century prohibiting the equipment of land or sea forces for the purpose of operating against the territory or commerce of a friendly nation, and making it the duty of the Government to prevent such filibustering (Act of Congress of April 20, 1818, 3 Stats. at Large, 448; Foreign Enlistment Act, 59 George III., cap. 69). It was upon these acts and principles affecting international relations, that the claims of the United States were founded.
The facts of the case were these: Following President Lincoln's call for volunteers, President Davis of the Confederate States offered letters of marque and reprisal (q.v.) to private vessels to prey upon the commerce of the United States. Prompt advantage was taken of this offer, and numerous privateers issued from southern ports to harry the New York and New England merchant marine. Meanwhile, Queen Victoria had issued her proclamation of neutrality, forbidding her subjects to take part with either side, and directing her official servants to accord belligerent rights to both parties to the struggle. Equipment was forbidden the vessels of both belligerents. Nothwithstanding this proclamation, and the repeated and urgent protests of the American minister, Charles Francis Adams, the sympathy of British officials, especially in the colonial ports, with the Southern cause was notorious, and harbors like Nassau in the West Indies became the refuge of Confederate cruisers.
The history of the Alabama is typical of the more flagrant cases submitted to the tribunal of arbitration. She was built at Birkenhead, England, under circumstances of great suspicion. The attention of the British Government was repeatedly called to the case, and finally some steps were taken by the authorities to detain the vessel; but “No. 290,” as she was called, left port without register or clearance papers, July 29, 1862, and, taking on her equipment in the Azores from two English vessels, assumed the name Alabama, under which she became famous, and set out on her career of destruction. In much the same manner the Florida, Georgia, Shenandoah, and various other cruisers eluded the watchfulness of British officials. Before her destruction by the Kearsarge, June 19, 1864, the Alabama is said alone to have captured and destroyed seventy vessels of the United States.
The first phase of the controversy appeared in 1862, in the negotiations between the American minister, Mr. Charles Francis Adams, and Lord John Russell, with reference to the alleged violation of England's Foreign Enlistment Act by the Alabama, and the obligation of the English Government to detain her; and though the English Government manifested a different policy subsequent to the sailing of the Alabama, and prevented the sailing of ships which were equipped in violation of law, several ships which had come from English ports were nevertheless on the seas, and the total damage inflicted by them upon American shipping was enormous. The whole matter constituted the most important problem of diplomacy left as a result of the Civil War. As early as 1865, steps were taken to determine a method of adjustment; but it was not till 1871 that a basis for adjudication was agreed upon, in the important Treaty of Washington, May 8. By this treaty, it was stipulated that all claims known generically as the “Alabama claims” should be submitted to the decision of five arbitrators, one named by England, one by the United States, and one each by the King of Italy, the Emperor of Brazil, and the President of the Swiss Confederation. For the guidance of this court of arbitration, the Treaty of Washington laid down the important “three rules” defining the obligation of a neutral power to use “due diligence” to prevent the hostile use of its ports against a friendly nation. In accordance with this arrangement, the court met at Geneva, December 15, 1871. The chairman of the court was Count Federigo Sclopis, the arbitrator named by the King of Italy; and the other members were Baron d'Itajuba, Brazilian minister at Paris, Jacob Stæmpfli, for three terms president of the Swiss Confederation, Sir Alexander Cockburn, and Mr. Charles Francis Adams. The chief counsel for England was Sir Roundell Palmer, and the American counsel were William M. Evarts, Caleb Cushing, and Morrison R. Waite. The American case, however, was prepared by Mr. J. C. Bancroft Davis. Both the case and the counter-case were prepared and maintained with great ability and acumen, and the arguments were followed with marked interest. More than once, however, a premature termination of the proceedings was threatened by the insistence of the American counsel upon the fact that in estimating the indemnity not only direct damages should be considered, but also such indirect losses as had befallen citizens of the United States through the decrease of trade, the increase of insurance rates, the prolongation of the war, and the additional cost of the prosecution of the war caused by these cruisers. Finally, the claims of the United States for indirect damages were unanimously rejected, on the ground that the principles of international law did not sanction an award of compensation between nations upon claims of that indefinite character. On September 14, 1872, the final award was signed, by which it was decreed that England had incurred no liability arising from the action of the Sumter, the Nashville, the Georgia, the Tallahassee, and the Chickamauga, or of their tenders, and by a vote of three to two that England had incurred no liability for the work of the Retribution. It was, however, determined, by a vote ​of three to two, that England was responsible for a portion of the acts committed by the Shenandoah; by a vote of four to one that England was liable for the results of all the operations of the Florida; and by a unanimous vote that England was responsible for all the depredations of the cruiser Alabama; and that liability also attached to the acts of the tenders of the Florida and the Alabama. The consideration of claims arising from the operations of other vessels was excluded for want of evidence. Instead of awarding specific damages apportioned against the several ships and among the several private parties injured, the court awarded a single sum of $15,500,000, as a full indemnity of all claims against Great Britain. This amount was accordingly paid in the following year. In order to determine the claims of private owners, and to distribute the fund among such claimants. Congress created, by the statute of June 23, 1874, a claims court by which judgments were rendered aggregating $9,315.753. A second and similar court was established by the statute of June 5, 1882. The indirect results of this arbitration — which belong rather to the history of international law than to that of the case under consideration — were of even greater importance than its direct results. In strengthening the principle of arbitration as a means of settling grave international differences, in furnishing a high example of justice and disinterestedness in judging between nations, and in defining and elevating the conception of national responsibility, the Geneva tribunal rendered an incalculable service to humanity. The rules laid down for the government of the arbitrators and the court will be found under the title Washington, Treaty of. For its permanent contributions to international law, see that title. The circumstances under which the case was submitted to arbitration, and its relation to other questions of difference between England and the United States existing at the time, are explained in the articles on Arbitration. International Law, and Washington, Treaty of.
Bibliography. For the most recent and complete work upon the Geneva arbitration, consult: J. B. Moore, International Arbitrations, pages 495-682 (Washington, 1898); and for a discussion of the claims courts, pages 4639-4685 of the same work: also Balch, The Alabama Arbitration (Philadelphia. 1900); Beaman, The Alabama Claims and their Settlement (Washington, 1871); Davis, Mr. Fish and the Alabama Claims (Boston, 1893); C. F. Adams, Life of Charles Francis Adams (Boston, 1900); Cushing, The Treaty of Washington, an authoritative work upon the preliminaries (Washington, 1873); for discussions of special phases of the subject, Bullock, Secret Service of the Confederate States (London, 1883); R. Semmes, The Cruise of the Alabama (London, 1864); and A. Sinclair, Two Years on the Alabama (Boston, 1895). A remarkable collection of printed and manuscript official papers pertaining to the arbitration was made by Hon. J. A. J. Creswell and given to the Johns Hopkins University.