The Civil War News & Views Open Discussion Forum - Archive

Re: What would have meant ---
In Response To: Re: What would have meant --- ()

"In 1861 James Dunwoody Bulloch commissioned Lairds Shipbuilders of Birkenhead, England, to build him a ship. There can now be no doubt that Lairds knew the true purpose of this vessel, but she was built ostensibly as an unarmed vessel. This was done to prevent transgression of the British Neutrality Act , which would have resulted in the said vessels seizure by British authorities."

This explains why she sailed on a shakedown cruise and was not manned, armed and renamed until she got to the Azores. That the British government did no stop her was probably the reason they were a party to any suit. Stan

Messages In This Thread

Legality Question
YES *NM*
NO !!!!!
Re: NO !!!!!
Re: NO !!!!!
Re: NO !!!!!
Re: NO !!!!!
Re: NO !!!!!
Re: NO !!!!!
Re: NO !!!!!
Re: NO !!!!!
Re: NO !!!!!
Re: NO !!!!!
Recognition
Re: Recognition
"Belligerent status"
Re: "Belligerent status"
Belligerent Parties
Re: Belligerent Parties
What would have meant ---
Re: What would have meant ---
Re: What would have meant ---
Re: Belligerent Parties
Re: Belligerent Parties
Re: Belligerent Parties
Re: Belligerent Parties
Re: Belligerent Parties
Re: Belligerent Parties
Re: Belligerent Parties
Re: Belligerent Parties
Re: Belligerent Parties
Re: Belligerent Parties
Re: Belligerent Parties
Re: Belligerent Parties
Re: Belligerent Parties
Re: Belligerent Parties
War Between The States.
Re: Legality Question
Re: Legality Question
Re: Legality Question
Re: Legality Question
Re: Legality Question
Re: Legality Question
Re: Legality Question
Re: Legality Question
Re: Legality Question
Good Subject Doyle! *NM*
Re: Good Subject Doyle!
Re: Good Subject Doyle!
Re: Good Subject Doyle!
Re: Legality Question
Re: Legality Question
Re: Legality Question
Re: Legality Question
Re: Legality Question