A Victorian Embarrassment: Consular Jurisdiction and the Evils of Extraterritoriality

In 1856, the Treaty of Paris nominally welcomed the Ottoman Empire into the Concert of Europe, but this exposed a deep fault line in international relations. Although the gesture implied full sovereign rights, it seemed incompatible with the extraterritorial privileges held by Europeans in Ottoman l...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inInternational history review Vol. 40; no. 2; pp. 273 - 291
Main Author Cobbing, Andrew
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Toronto Routledge 15.03.2018
Taylor & Francis, Ltd
Taylor & Francis Ltd
Subjects
Ambivalence
Campaigns
consular jurisdiction
Courts
Disputes
Embarrassment
European history
Extraterritoriality
Historical analysis
International law
International relations
Jurisdiction
Opium
Political discourse
Privileges & immunities
Resistance
Trade agreements
Treaties
Victorian period
United Kingdom > UK
France
Ottoman Empire
Japan
Europe
Paris France
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

More Information
Summary:In 1856, the Treaty of Paris nominally welcomed the Ottoman Empire into the Concert of Europe, but this exposed a deep fault line in international relations. Although the gesture implied full sovereign rights, it seemed incompatible with the extraterritorial privileges held by Europeans in Ottoman lands under the age-old capitulations. New commercial treaties complicated the issue by extending similar privileges to British subjects as far afield as China, Siam and Japan. Consular jurisdiction soon became the focus of controversy in Westminster as extraterritoriality featured prominently in local disputes following British commercial expansion across Asia, among them the Arrow incident that led to the Second Opium War. In Japan and other states, it would also become a key grievance in popular campaigns against 'unequal treaties' and the injustices of informal empire. This analysis shows how, even before such narratives of resistance emerged, there was already a seam of ambivalence in Victorian political discourse on the question of extraterritoriality. In the Foreign Office, it came as no surprise to be told of defects in these treaties, but it was the context of the existing debate, notably fresh initiatives to set up mixed courts, that framed the British response.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 14
ISSN:0707-5332
1949-6540
DOI:10.1080/07075332.2017.1309562