Military success in early 1862 leads to substantive Federal presence in the lower Mississippi valley. By mid-1862, Federal forces hold Helena, Nashville, Memphis, and New Orleans. The Federal presence sparks large numbers of fugitive slaves to seek freedom, forcing Federal military officials to deal with the slavery issue. The lower Mississippi valley witnesses the first instance of extensive Federal territorial control and large numbers of fugitive slaves. It also experiences the first substantive efforts toward “Reconstruction,” though the failure of southern Unionists – in Louisiana especially – to seize the initiative influences Lincoln in issuing the preliminary Emancipation Proclamation. The emancipatory provisions of the 1862 Confiscation Act partly in response to developments in the lower Mississippi valley, but contrasting responses of slaves and slaveholders to the Federal presence in the region, also reveal the difficulties of implementing the act.

During second half of 1862, Unionists – including slaveholders – in the occupied lower Mississippi valley organize politically, with assistance from Federal military authorities. By July, Lincoln has already decided to issue an Emancipation Proclamation, and his frustration with the failure of Unionists in Louisiana to act influences his thinking. Lincoln issues preliminary Emancipation Proclamation in September, spelling out requirements for Confederate areas not to be declared in rebellion. Federal military forces establish contraband camps for fugitive slaves, but also express fears of former slaves becoming dependent of government support; they also implement systems of wartime free labor on plantations under military oversight.

This paper utilizes Monte Carlo simulation to estimate the frequency with which private property was confiscated in the Greek world in the Classical period (circa 480–330 BCE). Confiscation is defined for the purposes of this paper as the uncompensated, sudden loss of landed property. The first step is to establish the demographic context within which confiscation occurred, and then to analyze four mechanisms for the confiscation of property: exile arising from stasis; the expulsion of a population by a foreign power; andrapodismos or mass enslavement; and the imposition of a cleruchy. Other mechanisms by which confiscation occurred, but which cannot be quantified, are briefly discussed. The model shows that, based on the beliefs I hold about the four mechanisms for confiscation that have been analyzed, the average estate owner faced a 2.6–18.6 % chance of experiencing confiscation in his lifetime, with a mean likelihood of 10.5 %. This finding is at odds with the prevailing view that Greek poleis ensured the security of private property, which in turn contributed to the remarkable economic growth of the period. The conclusion suggests some possible responses by the Greeks themselves to the imperfect property security they experienced.

This chapter explores the international legal protection offered to animals in occupied territory. Some rules of international humanitarian law protecting private and public property apply to animals as well. The legal framework is complemented by the domestic law in force prior to the occupation, and by international conventions on animal conservation that remain applicable during armed conflict. Nonetheless, animals in occupied territory are insufficiently protected. In order to strengthen legal protection, occupying powers should properly fulfil their duty to observe and apply local legislation such as animal welfare statutes. A non-anthropocentric approach based on animals’ needs, rather than on animals as property or as parts of the environment, would help to enhance the protection of animals in occupied territory.

Chapter 7 takes the analysis beyond the conduct of hostilities and issues related to physical damage to foreign investments. It addresses the rules on expropriation universally included in investment treaties and analyses them against the backdrop of armed conflict. The chapter shows that the protection from expropriation in times of armed conflict principally follows the same general parameters as in times of peace: investment treaties offer protection from abusive property seizures often observed during armed conflict as well as unreasonable or discriminatory restrictions on the use of property and businesses. When it comes to indirect expropriation, the chapter suggests to follow a mitigated version of the so-called police powers doctrine. While the debate on the delineation between expropriatory measures and non-compensable regulations is not new, the context of armed conflict provides new insights based on domestic and international case law on war-time property restrictions. Armed conflict and the interests involved, the chapter argues, broaden the scope of police powers and increase the state’s leeway in restricting the free enjoyment of property.

The chapter describes David Kretzmer as a role model for a world-renowned expert: the exceptional breadth of his expertise, the razor-sharpness of his inquiries, his ability to differentiate between law and politics in sensitive issues, his courage to deal critically with ‘the embarrassing’, his exemplary teaching, his impeccable intellectual integrity, his activism in protecting human rights and his modesty. The article briefly describes Kretzmer’s contributions on several issues: the legal status of the Israeli Arab-Palestinian citizens, the Israeli belligerent occupation and counter-terrorism measures like deportations, house demolitions and targeted killings, judicial activism and other trends (both transparent and hidden) in the Israeli case law, and racial incitement as a criminal offense. It exemplifies Kretzmer’s impact on the Israeli Supreme Court.

Stemming from its primeval origins in ancient notions of punitive punishment, by medieval times, Chinese slavery had already long ago become culturally embedded enough to function effectively as an invisible institution, practiced endogenously as well as exogenously. Since earliest times, slave status in medieval China, which was a class-bound, inheritable, and thus only rarely escapable condition, tended to befall either the surviving dependents of executed elites who had contravened authority or else those oftentimes non-Chinese unfortunates—combatants or otherwise—who were captured alive in battle or simply taken by force. Additionally, at any time, exigency could compel the sale of children into slavery. Slaves themselves were divided into two broad categories according to ownership, being either official slaves or private slaves. A crucial development of the medieval age is that both types of slaves came to be accounted for in the dynastic legal codes, which was an especially important occurrence for private slaves because, for the first time, their treatment by their masters became regulated. Finally worth noting in the medieval Chinese case is the prominence of specialized functionaries who, although unfree by any measure, were not typically regarded societally as slaves. Included under this rubric were eunuchs and concubines.

This chapter focuses firstly on the expansion of internment and confinement between 1915 and the beginning of 1917 in Europe and outside it. It traces the differences among the various belligerents in the treatment of enemy aliens, the living conditions in the camps, and the national, gender and generational composition of the inmates. It also concentrates on the one hand on the popular pressure in support of the wholesale internment of enemy aliens and, on the other, on the broadening of the humanitarian activities pursued by international non-governmental organization such as the International Committee of the Red Cross that actively promoted the exchange of prisoners of war and civilian internees. The second part of the chapter addresses the spread of a nationalistic economic discourse that boosted the intensification of the economic war and the attack on enemy aliens' property with the creation of new state bureaucracies and the beginning of the liquidation of sequestered assets. The chapter shows how the capacity of the state to enforce such policies was continuously put to the test by the effect of the war on politics and by its military evolution.