This

which, in consideration for the removal by the United States of duties imposed upon sugar, coffee, and other raw productions of the countries named, those governments removed or reduced the import duties formerly imposed upon bread stuff, provisions, lumber, coal, and other products. reciprocity provision was dropped from the Tariff Act (Wilson) of 1894. Owing to the brief existence of these agreements, and also to the fact that a severe commercial and financial depression interrupted trade in 1893, it is difficult to furnish evidence as to their value. In 1897, the republican party in general advocated the reintroduction of such a policy, while the democratic party opposed. The Tariff Act (Dingley), 1897, consequently reintroduces certain reciprocity provisions [Commercial Arrangements concluded with Foreign Countries, 55th Congress, 1st Session, Senate Doc. No. 52, p. 150; also Report of the Committee on Ways and Means concerning Reciprocity and Commercial Treaties, Washington, 1896, p. 643; also the Reciprocity Treaty with Canada of 1854, by F. E. Haynes in Pub. Amer. Ec. Assoc., v. 7 pp. 417-486, and for subject in general, E. Schuyler's Amer. Diplomacy, New York, 1886, ch. ix.]

RECOGNITION.

D. R. D.

(a) Recognition of New Form of Government, p. 269; (b) Independence, p. 269; (c) Belligerency, 269. INTERNATIONAL LAW knows at least three kinds of recognition, and it may be doubted whether a fourth is not slowly shaping itself. With the vast development of trans-oceanic commerce this subject becomes one of considerable economic importance.

(a) There is first Recognition of a new form of Government in an old-established state. This occurs when, as the result of a successful revolution, or a peaceful change, a monarchy is turned into a republic, or a republic into a monarchy, or a kingdom into an empire, or a new line of kings is established in a country, or a new president takes the place of one who is overthrown. It is the custom for other states to recognise the new government and carry on with it the intercourse they were wont to carry on with its predecessor, when events have shown that its own subjects and citizens are content to submit to its authority and allow it to speak on their behalf. The only alternatives to recognition in such a case are a cessation of intercourse or a war of intervention. The first is impracticable, unless the state in question is very insignificant; the second is happily rare. Despotic rulers are not eager to recognise republican governments, nor are powerful republics quick to enter into relations with successful dictators. But if the new political institutions prove to be stable, recognition must be accorded sooner or later. Thus Prussia, which was at first unwilling to treat as an established government the group of men who proclaimed the French Republic on 4th September 1870, entered into negotiations for peace with them in January 1871, after five months of strenuous warfare had shown that France entrusted her resources and her honour to their keeping.

269

(b) The next kind of recognition to be considered is termed Recognition of Independence. It happens when a new state is received into the family of nations and allowed to take its place as an international unit among the other powers of the civilised world. The rise of such a state is usually due to successful insurrection; and it is this case which has attracted the attention of statesmen and publicists, and caused the development of well-established rules. If a province or a colony revolts with a view to obtaining a separate state. existence of its own, other powers may recognise its independence without giving just cause of offence to the mother country, when the struggle is actually or virtually ended in favour of the political community claiming to be a new state. A de facto independence which bids fair to be permanent, and against which no serious efforts are made by the state most concerned in destroying it, is a matter of which other states may take notice as their inclinations and interests prompt. But if they recognise independence while the recognised power is still engaged in an uncertain conflict, their act is an act of intervention which the mother country may justly resent by war. This was the case in 1778 when France recognised the independence of the revolted British colonies in North America, while Great Britain was putting forth all her power in order to reduce them to obedience, and the result of the struggle was a matter of the greatest uncertainty. We immediately went to war with France, as the French government had calculated that we should. On the other hand, our recognition of the independence of Buenos Ayres, in 1824, caused no war with Spain, because that power had for years practically abandoned the contest with its rebellious dependency, and left it to the enjoyment of actual selfgovernment. Recognition of independence may be granted either by formal declaration or by entering into such relations as usually exist between independent states, as for instance the negotiation of a treaty, or the reception of a diplomatic representative. When a new state comes into being by some more peaceful process than separation from a state already in existence, there can be no question as to the propriety of its recognition as an independent member of international society, provided that it possesses a government capable of fulfilling the duties and supporting the responsibilities thrown upon civilised powers by modern international law (see Lawrence, Principles of International Law, §§ 57-60).

(c) Recognition of Belligerency forms the third of the kinds of recognition we are considering. When a community engages in insurrection against the constituted authorities with the object of changing the government, redressing grievances, or securing its own independence, it places itself in a peculiar and anomalous position. War is a function of states, and it is not a state-it may On the other hand, not even wish to become one. it is supporting armies, and possibly navies also, and is carrying on hostile operations with all the means at its disposal. If it is not a lawful belligerent its troops are bandits and their acts of force mere robbery and murder. Yet, as we have just seen, its independence and statehood cannot be

270

recognised do not acquire the rights of war an against neutrals, except in respect of those states who have accorded them recognition. The mothercountry cannot be expected to recognise in a formal and official manner the belligerency of its revolted subjects; but in practice it generally treats them as lawful combatants, from both humanity and a desire to avoid reprisals.

and obligations of a state as far as the war and foreign commerce are concerned, but no further. Its troops are lawful combatants, its ships of war lawful cruisers, its captures lawful captures, its customs lawful duties, and its blockades lawful

blockades. But it may not send regular diplomatic ministers, or negotiate treaties, or carry on with neutral powers the usual official intercourse between government and government. Recognition of the belligerency of insurgents is never welcome to the state against which they are in revolt, though it gains by being free from international responsibility for the acts of its rebels, and by being able to enforce against recognising powers all the rights over neutral commerce possessed by a regular belligerent. But recognition gives it no just ground of quarrel if the recognised community possesses an organised government, ruling over a fairly well-defined territory, and carrying on war in civilised fashion with forces under a reasonable degree of order and discipline, and if, in addition, the interests of the recognising state are so closely affected by the conflict that it is obliged to decide how it will treat the insurgents and their operations. The question was thoroughly discussed in the controversy which grew out of the recognition of the belligerency of the southern confederacy by Great Britain in 1861, soon after the outbreak of the great civil war in the United States (see Letters of Historicus, London, 1863). The rules laid down above would be generally accepted to-day, but they do not cover every possible or probable case. Five times within recent years has a conflict against established authority been maintained mainly by a revolted fleet. On none of these occasions did other powers recognise belligerency, but whenever the revolt was serious and longcontinued, they hesitated to treat the insurgent ships as pirates. Only in one case, that of Chile in 1891, was the insurrection successful. Yet in every case a distinction was made in practice between the revolted cruisers and ordinary pirates; and, with some few aberrations, the principle was acted upon that, as long as there was no attempt to exercise belligerent rights against the subjects and commerce of other powers, they on their part would not interfere with the operations of the insurgent squadrons, or prevent the exaction of reasonable customs duties in ports under insurgent control. Some name for this is required, and it might well be called recognition of insurgency (see an article by Lawrence called "Recognition of Belligerency considered in relation to Naval Warfare," in the Journal of the Royal United Service Institution for January 1897). Recognition by one power does not bind other powers, and the insurgents whose belligerency is

[See Hall, International Law, pt. i. ch. i. and

(i.e. Sir W. V. Harcourt), London, 1863.-Halleck, International Law, ch. iii. §§ 21-28 and notes, Baker's ed. London, 1878.-Lawrence, Principles of International Law, §§ 56-60, 302-305, London and Boston, 1900.-Oppenheim, International Law, pt. i. ch. ii. London, 1905.]

T. J. L

RECOGNITIONS. The system of recognition by jury was improved and extended under Henry II., who, in what is known as the Great Assize, applied it to obviate the need of having recourse to trial by battle in disputes as to land. Glanvill (De legibus Angliæ, ii. c. 7-17) states that the proceedings began by the person in possession applying the Curia Regis to stay all other proceedings until the cause for which he placed himself on the assize had been determined. His adversary then applied to the court for a writ by which four knights of the same country and neighbourhood should be directed to choose twelve lawful knights, also from the same neighbourhood, who should declare an oath which of the two litigants had the greater right to the land in dispute. When the four knights had appeared before the court, and the twelve had been nominated and sworn, the recognition proceeded on the day appointed, whether the case was defended or undefended. If the twelve jurors knew the facts of the case and agreed on a verdict the cause was ended; but if some of them were ignorant of the facts they were to be set aside, and others called in their place who were better informed. So, also, if they were divided in opinion, others had to be brought in until twelve were unanimously in favour of one side or the other. The course in the assizes of Novel Disseisin, Mort d'ancester, Darrein presentment, and others was the same, except that the sheriff nominated the jurors.

It will be observed that the jurors were sworn witnesses to the fact, and not, as at present, judges of the fact, founding their verdict wholly on testimony brought before them. It is also remarkable that their knowledge of the case might be derived per verba patrum suorum, or from persons in whom they implicitly trusted.

[Stubbs, Const. Hist., i. p. 615.-Select Charters, p. 161. Sir F. Palgrave, The Merchant and the Friar, 1837, 2nd ed. 1844.

R. H.

RECOINAGES, or the calling in of old and issue of new coins, played a very small part in English history down to 1547. Nearly every alteration of the coinage (1066 to 1543) reduced its weight but not its fineness, and

since 1344 (when gold began to be regularly coined) affected both metals simultaneously; the exceptions are the lightening of gold only in 1465, and the issue of one base gold coin in 1526; so that as a rule the new circulated on equal terms with the old abraded and depreciated coins. True, we read of detached laws demonetising light silver and offering to recoin it at the holder's expense (1292), and in one case the king offered to waive his dues if light gold were brought in for recoinage within a certain date (1421), thus putting a premium upon speed. And, doubtless, the debasement of gold and silver (1543-45) drove out the old coin, but by natural and not artificial means. The difficulty of superseding the old coinage was never crucial until the task of restoring gold and silver was undertaken, in 1549 and 1548 respectively; for the two metals have, since 1548, been dealt with separately. order to restore gold (1549-53) the old coins were exchanged at the mint during a certain interval at tale rates; afterwards their tale values were reduced. Similarly in such subsequent alterations of the gold coinage as have been due to the altered ratio of gold to silver, and therefore involved reductions of weight, the tale value of old pieces has been usually raised. Other restorations of the coin being due to light and base coin, have involved complete demonetisation, which has been effected differently at different times. The most important instances were the following:

In

In 1560-61 the mint took base silver TESTOONS and GROATS at a reduced tale rate from 27th September to 20th May, adding, up to 25th April, a premium for large quantities. Lesser silver moneys were similarly bought in up to 20th September. Otherwise part of the base money was demonetised 9th April, and the other part 20th July. The mint bought in £638,113: 16: 6 tale, and netted a profit of £14,079: 139 (Froude, Hist. of England, vol. vii. p. 453, confuses silver with total recoinage).

In 1696 tax collectors took light and base silver coin at tale rates from 1st Jan. to 4th May, and TELLERS OF THE EXCHEQUER up to 24th June (7 & 8 Will. III. c. 1); then they paid it in to the central and to five local mints to be recoined. After this last date its demonetisation was complete. The remaining hammered silver money was taken by weight at the mints from 4th Nov. 1696 to 1st July 1697 at a premium of 2d., and by tax collectors for a less period at a premium of 4d. per oz. over mint value; otherwise it was demonetised 1st Dec. 1696. These two recoinages amounted, according to Ruding, to £6,882,908: 19:7 tale, and cost £2,700,000 (?) (Ruding includes recoinages from plates; Macaulay, Hist. of England, ch. xxi., confuses these two processes.)

In 1773-74 tellers of the exchequer, tax

271

collectors, and special local exchangers, bought in at tale rates two classes of light gold coin during 1 months and 3 months 19 days respectively, and exchanged them at the Bank of England, which forwarded them to the mint for recoinage; a third and worse class was bought in by weight. This recoinage cost £517,320: 2:24.

In 1817 tale values were given by the mint, helped by local exchangers and banks, for all light silver from 12th Feb. to 1st March, and for all but the lightest silver for another three months; otherwise the old silver was demonetised 1st March. In this recoinage most of the new coin was ready before the old coin was called in. This recoinage amounted to £2,599,487:5:2 tale, omitting coins coined in advance or out of plate, etc., and cost £793,624 13:5, £233,764: 3:10 of which was paid out of profits of the new silver (token) coinage [Accounts and Papers, 1818, No. 227]. In the copper recoinage of 1817 copper more than twenty years old was brought in by weight with the usual premia for quantity and speed. The recoinages of gold, under the act of 1891, had withdrawn up to March 1911 about £66,550,000 in sovereigns and half sovereigns. For further details see LIGHT GOLD AND SILVER COIN.

[R. Ruding, Annals of the Coinage, 3rd ed. 1840.-United States Annual Reports of the Director of the Mint state annual recoinages of every important country.]

J. D. R.

RECORDE, ROBERT (1510 ?-1558), was admitted at Oxford about 1525 and elected fellow of All Souls' in 1531. and medicine at Cambridge, graduated M.D. He taught mathematics there in 1545, returned to Oxford, and afterwards practised as a physician in London in 1547. He became controller of the mint at Bristol in 1549, and in May 1551 general surveyor of the mines and money in England and Ireland.

He was the first who wrote on arithmetic, geometry, and astronomy in English; he introduced algebra into England, and was probably the first among his countrymen to adopt the system of Copernicus. His works include some on medicine. The mathematical treatises are (1) The Grounde of Artes (1540, and many subsequent editions to 1699) on arithmetic, in which reference is made to a publication on alloys, contemplated by Recorde; (2) The Whetstone of Witte (1557, etc.) on algebra, the first English book containing the symbols + and -, and "a paire of paralleles, or Gewowe lines of one lengthe, thus: = to represent equality; (3) The Pathway to Knowledge (1551, etc.) on geometry; (4) The Castle of Knowledge (1551, etc.) on astronomy.

[Dictionary of National Biography, vol. xlvii. p. 367-369.-Prof. de Morgan in Companion to the Almanac, 1837, p. 30.]

RECOUP (Fr. recoupe). regain a sum advanced or lost.

H. R. T.

To replace, or

R. W. B.

272

RECOURSE. In dealing with bills of exchange, each holder has a right of recourse upon his immediate endorser and upon every other previous endorser, provided the bill has been duly presented at maturity, and noted or protested according to law, and also that the demand for repayment is made in due course without delay. As a matter of convenience it is usual, in extensive discount operations, in the case of bills endorsed in blank by previous holders, to dispense with actual endorsement of each bill by obtaining a written undertaking to admit recourse. In some cases bills are discounted without recourse, and are so endorsed. Coupons and notes, payable abroad, are sold with recourse unless otherwise agreed. R. W. B.

RECOVERY. A collusive action by means of which a tenant in tail could bar all entails, remainders, and reversions, and could either convey an estate in fee simple to a purchaser, or retain it himself. This was in ordinary use from the reign of Edward IV. to the year 1833. Roughly speaking, it was a device by which a man whose estate was entailed on his children could "cut off the entail," that is, deprive them of their right to succeed him, and could either keep his land as a fee simple, or sell it to strangers. It resulted from the desire of the judges to break down the statute of Edward I. known as de donis. In a common recovery with "double voucher," the lands were conveyed by deed by the tenant in tail to a person called the tenant to the præcipe," against whom feigned proceedings were then taken in the court of common pleas. The "demandant," or intending purchaser, who desired to become the "recoveror," issued a writ against the tenant to the præcipe who thereupon called on the tenant in tail to warrant his title in accordance with a supposed agreement to do so. The tenant in tail, in his turn, vouched or called upon some landless person, usually the crier of the court, to warrant his own title. The demandant then, by permission of the court, took the crier or "common vouchee" aside to speak with him, and having once quitted the court, the man did not return. On this default judg. ment was given for the demandant or recoveror to recover the lands from the tenant to the præcipe, that is, in reality, from the tenant in tail; and for the tenant in tail to recover lands of equal value from the common vouchee, who, by disappearing, had failed to warrant his title. If lands of equal value had actually been recovered, they would have taken the place of those lost by the common vouchee's default, and would have descended to the issue of the tenant in tail; but as the man had no land, the judgment of the court against him was nugatory, and thus not only the rights of the issue, but also of the reversioners and remainder men were defeated, and the estate tail was therefore said to be barred. On the other hand, the demandant

RECTA PRISA was the right which, according to Fleta (Lib. 2, c. 22, written circa A.D. 1290), the king exercised in taking one barrel of wine from the prow and another from the stern of every vessel laden with wine, on payment of twenty shillings for each such barrel. If he required more he was obliged to pay a price settled by trustworthy people (precium fide dignorum).

Whether this definition was correct or not in 1290, it does not altogether agree with that given in Liber Albus, written a hundred and

thirty years later. In that work the king is

stated to have been entitled to take 2 tons of wine from every vessel bringing 20 tons or more; and 1 ton from every vessel bringing 10 tons or more but less than 20 tons. From a ship bringing less than 10 tons he was entitled to take nothing.

The Cinque Ports and the port of London claimed to be exempt from Recta Prisa, but it is clear from the terms of the grant to the barons of the Cinque Ports in 6 Ed. I. that the exemption was only intended to apply to wines imported by them for their own use.

[See PRISAGE; PURVEYANCE.-Hubert Hall, Customs Revenue of England, Lond. 1885, 8vo.] G.I.T.

REDEMPTION OF NATIONAL DEBT. The obligation to redeem the National Debt at some time or other has been recognised from the earliest period of the nation's public indebtedness. It is at the back of the whole history of the SINKING FUND (q.v.). At times, however, the only method of discharging an obligation to repay a loan was that of raising a fresh loan; and the ease with which this was done seems to have encouraged the idea that the debt might as well remain permanently. Without destroying the sense of obligation to repay, the idea threw it into the background; and this made it easier to vary and postpone arrangements for reducing debt. Nevertheless a gradual reduction of the burthen, except in time of war, became a feature of the finance of the United Kingdom during the past century, as shown by the following table:

1817 (after Napoleonic Wars)
1854 (before Crimean War),
1857 (after Crimean War)
1899 (before South African War)
1903 (after South African War)
1914 (just before Great War)

Amount of Debt. £848,282,477

775,041,272

808,108,722

635,393,734

798,349,190 706,154,110

The method of reduction has been the operation of so-called "Sinking Funds" (q.v.), con

version into terminable annuities and certain other schemes administered by the National Debt Commissioners.

[See Parliamentary Paper Cd. 8227, 1897 and since, and arts. on CONVERSION OF BRITISH NATIONAL DEBT; NATIONAL DEBT and SINKING FUND.] C. A. H.

RE-ENTRY. The right of re-entry is the name given to a lessee's right to cancel the lease and take possession of the property leased in the event of the lessee failing to observe the covenants contained in the lease. This right has been rendered much less oppressive by recent legislation (see ENTRY, RIGHT OF).

E. 8.

REES, OTTO VAN (died 1868), born at Liège, Belgium, studied law at Utrecht from 1844 to 1851, and practised in it there till 1858. He then was appointed professor of Political Science at the university of Groningen, and in 1860 at that of Utrecht, where he lived until his death in 1868. Besides a large number of articles on different historical and economic subjects, for the greater part published in his periodical the Pantheon, Van Rees wrote the following more distinctly scientific works:

Verhandeling over de Aenwysing der politike gronden en maximen van Holland en WestVriesland door Pieter de la Court. (Treatise and Summary of Political Bases and Maxims in Holland and West-Vriesland, by P. de la Court), Utrecht, Dekema, 1851.- Prysverhandeling over de verdiensten van Gysbert Karel van Hogendorp als staathuishoudkundige, tenaanzien van Nederland. (Prize-Essay on the Merits of G. K. van Hogendorp as an Econ

omist, with reference to the Netherlands), Utrecht, Van der Post, 1854.-Voorlezingen over de geschiedenis der Nederlandsche volksplantingen in Noord-Amerika, beschouwd uit het oogpunt der koloniale politiek (Lectures on the History of the Dutch Colonies in NorthAmerica, considered from the point of view of Colonial Politics), Tiel, Campagne, 1855.— Geschiedenis der staathuishoudkunde in Nederland (History of Political Economy in Holland), Utrecht, Kemink en Zoon, 1865 and

1868.

Of these works, which all have an historical character, the latest mentioned especially has great merits; the first part of this contains a very complete history, not only of the science of political economy in Holland, but also of the general social development of Holland to the end of the 18th century, from an economical point of view; the second part gives the history of the East and West-Indian Companies; it is the best work written on that subject.

A. F. V. L.

REEVE. The præpositus or representative usually elected by the VILLEINS of a MANOR from VOL. III.

273

among themselves, though sometimes nominated by the lord. He had the public duty of going with the priest and four other men, hundredarii, to attend the HUNDRED court, the court of the county, and the justices in eyre, when the lord of the manor himself did not go. He also led the men to the FYRD (q.v.). At other times he acted as a kind of foreman of the villeins, superintending their labour and keeping account with the bailiff of the due performance of each man's yearly task. In return he was freed from all the ordinary duties of a villein in respect of his holding; but the office does not seem to have been desired, and Maitland (Sel. Pleas in Manorial Courts, pp. 23, 45) gives instances of considerable payments made for permission to relinquish it. At Whissonsett in 1382 (Court Rolls, in possession of Mr. Walter Rye) the office was annexed to certain holdings in turn.

R. H.

REFEREE is the name for a person to whom a dispute is referred as arbitrator (see ARBITRATION).

All proceedings under a reference are now regulated by the Arbitration Act 1889, which Ideals with arbitrations agreed on by the parties, as well as with references under orders of court. In either case the referee has extensive powers as regards the summoning and the examination of witnesses, and his award is enforced in the same way as a judgment of the court. Three "official referees are attached to the supreme court, but arbitrations ordered by the court may also be referred to "special" referees, whilst, on the other hand, voluntary arbitrations may be taken before the "official referees" (see Arbitration Act, 1889, 3).

"

E. S.

REFERENDUM means the decision of a

political question, partly by the direct votes of the people, partly by representative institutions. Decisions by a people without reprexi.), or in the "Landesgemeinde" of Glarus, sentative institutions, as in Tacitus (Germania, Uri, Unterwald, and Appenzell for the last six centuries, or in the "town meeting" of New England townships for nearly three centuries, or in ROUSSEAU'S or MORE's Utopias, illustrate "direct self-government," not the referendum. Again in 1888 et seq., French and Italian mayors took the votes of their constituents on matters involving expense; this, like the votes in Belgian towns for universal suffrage (Feb. 1893), and the Durham miners' vote against eight hours (1891), and the South Australian vote on education (1896) binds nobody, and therefore does not belong to politics. Votes for a person are "plébiscites" not referenda; revise specified articles of the constitution, was and the Belgian election in 1892, in order to an election ad hoc, not a referendum. Again the Swiss laws of 1874 and 1892, under which one of the two federal councils or 50,000 citizens may demand a popular vote whether the constitution or some part of it shall be