Union in Peril: The Crisis over British Intervention in the Civil War

Civil War America

by Howard Jones

Little has been written about why Great Britain and other leading European countries failed to intervene in the Civil War, although it is generally agreed that their involvement could have greatly affected the outcome. Howard Jones provide the first substantial study of the crisis in Anglo-American relations during the conflict and its impact on the South's attempt to win foreign support during the crucial years of 1861 and 1862.

Genres: History, Civil War, American Civil War

316 pages, Hardcover

First published November 1, 1992

About the author

A specialist in the history of American foreign policy, Howard Jones was Distinguished University Research Professor Emeritus at the University of Alabama.

Reviews

[Jerome Otte · Rating 4 out of 5]

In this readable but somewhat repetitive book, Jones examines the British debate over intervention in the American Civil War from Lincoln’s election to late 1862. He discusses the debate on all the potential aspects of “British intervention,” such as British recognition of the Confederacy, mediation proposals, the possibility of naval action against the Union blockade, and possibility of Britain entering the war. He discusses the views of British officials on these subjects, especially those of John Russell.

Jones argues that the British were above all determined to maintain their neutrality despite the pressure to intervene in the war, and that the British had a poor understanding of the war’s causes and the determination of both the US and the Confederacy to win. He also stresses the impact of Antietam and the Emancipation Proclamation on the British cabinet’s decision.

Most of Jones’ research is based on the papers of the British cabinet and foreign diplomats, meaning we see little of outside pressure on the government or is effect. Jones suggests that British intervention would have led to war but probably wouldn’t have affected the Civil War’s outcome. Jones does not, however, elaborate much on this argument. Still, an interesting and well-written work regardless.

[Daniel · Rating 3 out of 5]

Much good analysis, though it ends on a damp squib.