Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T07:25:47.490Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Boycott in Foreign Affairs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 April 2017

Charles Cheney Hyde  and
Louis B. Wehle
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

When Viola so informed the Clown in Twelfth Night, was she prophetic of our nice dallying today with the word boycott? Have we made it wanton in applying it to foreign affairs? Let us see.

Type
Research Article
Information
American Journal of International Law , Volume 27 , Issue 1 , January 1933 , pp. 1 - 10
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 1933

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 It will be recalled that in 1905, the United States notified the Chinese Government that under the provisions of Article 15 of the treaty of 1858, it would be held responsible for any loss sustained by American trade on account of any failure on the part of China to stop “the present organized movement against the United States.” That movement, embracing a so-called boycott of American goods, and the printing by the native press of inflammatory articles against the United States, was described by the American Minister as “ a conspiracy in restraint of our trade carried on under official guidance and with the sympathy of the central Government.” It was, moreover, closely associated with an anti-foreign movement “ready”—to quote Secretary Rook—”to overleap all bounds and to lead at any time to the recurrence of the dreadful atrocities of Lienchow.” See Foreign Relations, 1905, 204–234.