Abstract
When Britain and France began their naval blockade of Russia under the new rules, neutrals enjoyed the most generous set of regulations ever granted by belligerents. The first part of this chapter will investigate to what extent the allies and the neutrals were satisfied with the new regime, and whether it matched the expectation of protecting British and neutral commercial interests while at the same time throttling Russia into submission. The second and third parts will show that rather than the Crimean War experience, two further strands of wartime diplomacy were crucial to the later decision to accept the Declaration of Paris. Britain made the end of privateering a priority, while the USA attempted to grasp what it perceived as a unique opportunity to secure the new neutral rights permanently, and without any concessions over privateering.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
Charles Napier, The History of the Baltic Campaign of 1854, London 1857, pp. 128–198.
Winfried Baumgart, The Crimean War 1853–1856, London 1999, p. 187.
Morning Chronicle, 26 August 1854; J. T. Danson, ‘Our Commerce with Russia, in Peace and War’, Journal of the Statistical Society of London, Vol. 17, No. 3 (September 1854), pp. 193–218, p. 217.
Albert Seaton, The Crimean War – A Russian Chronicle, London 1977, p. 30; John Shelton Curtiss, Russia’s Crimean War, Durham NC 1979, p. 423.
Barry M. Gough, ‘The Crimean War in the Pacific: British Strategy and Naval Operations’, Military Affairs, Vol. 37, No. 4 (1973), pp. 130–136, p. 131.
Antoine-Henri Jomini, Diplomatic Study of the Crimean War, Volume II, London 1882, pp. 77–78.
Konstatin Katakazi (charge d’affaires in Washington)-Nesselrode, 6 February 1854, cited in Norman E. Saul, Distant Friends – The United States and Russia, 1763–1867, Lawrence, KS 1991, p. 198.
Alan Dowty, The Limits of American Isolation: The United States and the Crimean War, New York 1971, pp. 82–83.
Stoeckl to Nesselrode, 5 February 1855, quoted in Frank A. Golder, ‘Russian-American Relations During the Crimean War’, American Historical Review, Vol. 31, No. 3 (April 1926), pp. 462–, 470.
William Gray, ‘American Diplomacy in Venezuela 1835–1865’, Hispanic American Historical Review, Vol. 20, No. 4 (November 1940), pp. 551–574, p. 569.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 2014 Jan Martin Lemnitzer
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Lemnitzer, J.M. (2014). The Crimean War and Maritime Law. In: Power, Law and the End of Privateering. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137318633_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137318633_3
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-33738-5
Online ISBN: 978-1-137-31863-3
eBook Packages: Palgrave History CollectionHistory (R0)