text:
Treaty of Paris (1763)

The Treaty of Paris, also known as the Treaty of 1763, was signed on 10 February 1763 by the kingdoms of Great Britain, France and Spain, with Portugal in agreement, following Great Britain and Prussia's victory over France and Spain during the Seven Years' War.

The signing of the treaty formally ended the conflict between France and Great Britain over control of North America (the Seven Years' War, known as the French and Indian War in the United States), and marked the beginning of an era of British dominance outside Europe. Great Britain and France each returned much of the territory that they had captured during the war, but Great Britain gained much of France's possessions in North America. Additionally, Great Britain agreed to protect Roman Catholicism in the New World. The treaty did not involve Prussia and Austria, as they signed a separate agreement, the Treaty of Hubertusburg, five days later.

Exchange of territories
During the war, Great Britain had conquered the French colonies of Canada, Guadeloupe, Saint Lucia, Martinique, Dominica, Grenada, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, and Tobago, the French "factoreries" (trading posts) in India, the slave-trading station at Gorée, the Sénégal River and its settlements, and the Spanish colonies of Manila (in the Philippines) and Havana (in Cuba). France had captured Minorca and British trading posts in Sumatra, while Spain had captured the border fortress of Almeida in Portugal, and Colonia del Sacramento in South America.

The treaty restored most of the territories to their original owners, but Britain was allowed to keep considerable gains. France and Spain restored all their conquests to Britain and Portugal. Britain restored Manila and Havana to Spain, and Guadeloupe, Martinique, Saint Lucia, Gorée, and the Indian factories to France. In return, France recognized the sovereignty of Britain over Canada, Dominica, Grenada, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, and Tobago.

France also ceded the eastern half of French Louisiana to Britain; that is, the area from the Mississippi River to the Appalachian Mountains. France had already secretly given Louisiana to Spain three months earlier in the Treaty of Fontainebleau, but Spain did not take possession until 1769. Spain ceded Florida to Britain. In addition, France regained its factories in India but recognized British clients as the rulers of key Indian native states and pledged not to send troops to Bengal. Britain agreed to demolish its fortifications in British Honduras (now Belize) but retained a logwood-cutting colony there. Britain confirmed the right of its new subjects to practise Catholicism.

France lost all its territory in mainland North America except for the territory of Louisiana west of the Mississippi River. France retained fishing rights off Newfoundland and the two small islands of Saint Pierre and Miquelon, where its fishermen could dry their catch. In turn, France gained the return of its sugar colony, Guadeloupe, which it considered more valuable than Canada. Voltaire had notoriously dismissed Acadia as quelques arpents de neige (a few acres of snow).

Louisiana question
The Treaty of Paris is notable because it furthered the transfer of Louisiana from France to Spain. However, the agreement to transfer had occurred with the Treaty of Fontainebleau, but it was not publicly announced until 1764. The Treaty of Paris gave Britain the east side of the Mississippi (including Baton Rouge, Louisiana, which was to be part of the British territory of West Florida). On the east side, New Orleans remained in French hands (albeit temporarily). The Mississippi River corridor in what is now Louisiana was later reunited following the Louisiana Purchase in 1803 and the Adams–Onís Treaty in 1819.

The 1763 treaty states in Article VII:

"VII. In order to reestablish peace on solid and durable foundations, and to remove for ever all subject of dispute with regard to the limits of the British and French territories on the continent of America; it is agreed, that, for the future, the confines between the dominions of his Britannick Majesty and those of his Most Christian Majesty, in that part of the world, shall be fixed irrevocably by a line drawn along the middle of the River Mississippi, from its source to the river Iberville, and from thence, by a line drawn along the middle of this river, and the lakes Maurepas and Pontchartrain to the sea; and for this purpose, the Most Christian King cedes in full right, and guaranties to his Britannick Majesty the river and port of the Mobile, and every thing which he possesses, or ought to possess, on the left side of the river Mississippi, except the town of New Orleans and the island in which it is situated, which shall remain to France, provided that the navigation of the river Mississippi shall be equally free, as well to the subjects of Great Britain as to those of France, in its whole breadth and length, from its source to the sea, and expressly that part which is between the said island of New Orleans and the right bank of that river, as well as the passage both in and out of its mouth: It is farther stipulated, that the vessels belonging to the subjects of either nation shall not be stopped, visited, or subjected to the payment of any duty whatsoever. The stipulations inserted in the IVth article, in favour of the inhabitants of Canada shall also take place with regard to the inhabitants of the countries ceded by this article."

British perspective
The war was fought all over the world, but the British began the war over French possessions in North America. After a long debate of the relative merits of Guadeloupe, which produced £6 million a year in sugar, and Canada, which was expensive to keep, Great Britain decided to keep Canada for strategic reasons and to return Guadeloupe to France. The war had weakened France, but it was still a European power. British Prime Minister Lord Bute wanted a peace that would not push France towards a second war.

Although the Protestant British worried about having so many Roman Catholic subjects, Great Britain did not want to antagonize France by expulsion or forced conversion or for French settlers to leave Canada to strengthen other French settlements in North America.

French perspective
Unlike Lord Bute, the French Foreign Minister, the Duke of Choiseul, expected a return to war. However, France needed peace to rebuild. France preferred to keep its Caribbean possessions with their profitable sugar trade, rather than the vast Canadian lands, which had been a financial burden on France. French diplomats believed that without France to keep the Americans in check, the colonists might attempt to revolt. In Canada, France wanted open emigration for those, such as the nobility, who would not swear allegiance to the British Crown. Finally, France required protection for Roman Catholics in North America.

Article IV stated:

"IV. His Most Christian Majesty renounces all pretensions which he has heretofore formed or might have formed to Nova Scotia or Acadia in all its parts, and guaranties the whole of it, and with all its dependencies, to the King of Great Britain: Moreover, his Most Christian Majesty cedes and guaranties to his said Britannick Majesty, in full right, Canada, with all its dependencies, as well as the island of Cape Breton, and all the other islands and coasts in the gulph and river of St. Lawrence, and in general, every thing that depends on the said countries, lands, islands, and coasts, with the sovereignty, property, possession, and all rights acquired by treaty, or otherwise, which the Most Christian King and the Crown of France have had till now over the said countries, lands, islands, places, coasts, and their inhabitants, so that the Most Christian King cedes and makes over the whole to the said King, and to the Crown of Great Britain, and that in the most ample manner and form, without restriction, and without any liberty to depart from the said cession and guaranty under any pretence, or to disturb Great Britain in the possessions above mentioned. His Britannick Majesty, on his side, agrees to grant the liberty of the Catholick religion to the inhabitants of Canada: he will, in consequence, give the most precise and most effectual orders, that his new Roman Catholic subjects may profess the worship of their religion according to the rites of the Romish church, as far as the laws of Great Britain permit. His Britannick Majesty farther agrees, that the French inhabitants, or others who had been subjects of the Most Christian King in Canada, may retire with all safety and freedom wherever they shall think proper, and may sell their estates, provided it be to the subjects of his Britannick Majesty, and bring away their effects as well as their persons, without being restrained in their emigration, under any pretence whatsoever, except that of debts or of criminal prosecutions: The term limited for this emigration shall be fixed to the space of eighteen months, to be computed from the day of the exchange of the ratification of the present treaty."

Dunkirk question
During the negotiations that led to the treaty, a major issue of dispute between Britain and France had been over the status of the fortifications of the French coastal settlement of Dunkirk. The British had long feared that it would be used as a staging post to launch a French invasion of Britain. Under the 1713 Treaty of Utrecht, the British forced France to concede extreme limits on those fortifications. The 1748 Treaty of Aix-la-Chapelle had allowed more generous terms, and France constructed more significant defences for the town.

The 1763 treaty had Britain force France to accept the 1713 conditions and demolish the fortifications constructed since then. That would be a continuing source of resentment to France, which would eventually have that provision overturned in the 1783 Treaty of Paris, which brought an end to the American Revolutionary War.

Reactions

When Lord Bute became the British prime minister in 1762, he pushed for a resolution to the war with France and Spain since he feared that Great Britain could not govern all of its newly acquired territories. In what Winston Churchill would later term a policy of "appeasement", Bute returned some colonies to Spain and France in the negotiations.

Despite a desire for peace, many in the British Parliament opposed the return of any gains made during the war. Notable among the opposition was former prime minister William Pitt, the Elder, who warned that the terms of the treaty would lead to further conflicts once France and Spain had time to rebuild and later said, "The peace was insecure because it restored the enemy to her former greatness. The peace was inadequate, because the places gained were no equivalent for the places surrendered." The treaty passed by 319 votes to 65.

The Treaty of Paris took no consideration of Great Britain's battered continental ally, King Frederick II of Prussia, who negotiated peace terms separately in the Treaty of Hubertusburg. For decades after the signing of the Treaty of Paris, Frederick II decried it as a British betrayal.

Many Protestant American colonists were disappointed by the protection of Catholicism in the Treaty of Paris. Criticism of the British colonial government as insufficiently anti-Catholic and fear of the protections for Catholicism expanding beyond Quebec was one of many reasons for the breakdown of American–British relations that led to the American Revolution.

Effects on French Canada

The article permitted unrestrained emigration for 18 months from Canada. However, passage on British ships was expensive. A total of 1,600 people left New France by that clause, but only 270 of them were French Canadians. Some claim that there was a deliberate British policy to limit emigration to avoid strengthening other French colonies.

Article IV of the treaty allowed Catholicism to be practiced in Canada. King George III agreed to allow Catholicism within the laws of Great Britain, which included various Test Acts to prevent governmental, judicial and bureaucratic appointments from going to Roman Catholics. They were believed to be agents of the Jacobite pretenders to the throne, who normally resided in France and were supported by its government. The Test Acts were somewhat relaxed in Quebec, but top positions such as governorships were still held by Anglicans.

Article IV has also been cited as the basis for Quebec's unique legal code that differs from the rest of Canada. There was a general constitutional principle in the United Kingdom allowing colonies taken through conquest to continue their laws. That was limited by royal prerogative, which allowed the monarch to change the accepted laws in a conquered colony later. However, the treaty eliminated that power because of a different constitutional principle, which considered the terms of a treaty to be paramount. In practice, Roman Catholics were allowed to become jurors in inferior courts in Quebec and to argue based on principles of French law. However, the judge was British, and his opinion on French law could be limited or hostile. If the case was appealed to a superior court, neither French law nor Roman Catholic jurors were allowed.

Many French residents of what are now the Maritime Provinces of Canada were deported during the Great Expulsion of the Acadians (1755–1763). After signing the peace treaty guaranteed some rights to Roman Catholics, some Acadians returned to Canada. However, they were no longer welcome in the British colony of Nova Scotia. They were forced into New Brunswick, which became a bilingual province as a result of that relocation.

Britain now owned much land that France had owned, and the French people of Quebec felt greatly betrayed by the French concession. The commander-in-chief of the British, Jeffrey Amherst noted, "Many of the Canadians consider their Colony to be of utmost consequence to France & cannot be convinced ... that their Country has been conceded to Great Britain."

title: Treaty of Paris (1763)


text:
USS Colorado

USS Colorado may refer to:

 * USS Colorado (1856), a three-masted steam screw frigate in commission from 1858–1876
 * USS Colorado (ACR-7), a Pennsylvania-class armored cruiser in commission from 1905–1927
 * USS Colorado (BB-45), a Colorado-class battleship in commission from 1923–1947
 * USS Colorado (SSN-788), a Virginia-class nuclear-powered fast attack submarine commissioned in 2018, in active service

In fiction:
 * USS Colorado (SSBN-753), a fictional Ohio-class submarine featured in the 2012 TV series Last Resort

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: USS Colorado


text:
Treaty of Paris (1783)

The Treaty of Paris, signed in Paris by representatives of King George III of Great Britain and representatives of the United States on September 3, 1783, officially ended the American Revolutionary War and recognized the Thirteen Colonies, which had been part of colonial British America, to be free, sovereign and independent states.

The treaty set the boundaries between British North America, later called Canada, and the United States, on lines the British labeled as "exceedingly generous", although exact boundary definitions in the far-northwest and to the south continued to be subject to some controversy. Details included fishing rights and restoration of property and prisoners of war.

This treaty and the separate peace treaties between Great Britain and the nations that supported the American cause, including France and Spain, are known collectively as the Peace of Paris. Only Article 1 of the treaty, which acknowledges the United States' existence as free, sovereign, and independent states, remains in force.

Agreement
Peace negotiations began in Paris in April 1782, following the victory of George Washington and the Continental Army in the American Revolutionary War. The negotiations continued through the summer of 1782. Representing the United States were Benjamin Franklin, John Jay, Henry Laurens, and John Adams. Representing the Kingdom of Great Britain and King George III were David Hartley and Richard Oswald.

The treaty was drafted on November 30, 1782, and signed at the Hôtel d'York at present-day 56 Rue Jacob in Paris on September 3, 1783, by Adams, Franklin, Jay, and Hartley.

In September 1782, French Foreign Minister Vergennes proposed a solution to deadlocked negotiations between the United States and the British, which was rejected by the United States. France was exhausted by the war, and all parties sought peace, except for the Kingdom of Spain, which insisted on continuing the Revolutionary War until it could capture Gibraltar from the British. Vergennes developed treaty terms under which Spain would forego holding Gibraltar and the United States would be granted independence, but it would be confined to the area east of the Appalachian Mountains. Britain would keep the area north of the Ohio River, which was part of the Province of Quebec. In the area south of that would be an independent Indian barrier state, under Spanish control.

The American delegation perceived that they could obtain a better treaty in negotiating directly with the British in London. John Jay promptly told the British that he was willing to negotiate directly with them and to bypass France and Spain, and British Prime Minister Lord Shelburne agreed. In charge of the British negotiations, some of which took place in his study at Lansdowne House, now a bar in the Lansdowne Club, Shelburne now saw a chance to split the United States from France and to establish the new nation as a valuable economic partner. The terms were that the United States would gain all of the area east of the Mississippi River, north of present-day Florida, and south of present-day Canada. The northern boundary would be almost the same as it is today.

The United States would gain fishing rights off Nova Scotia's coasts and agreed to allow British merchants and Loyalists to try to recover their property. The treaty was highly favorable for the United States and deliberately so from the British point of view. Shelburne foresaw highly profitable two-way trade between Britain and the rapidly-growing United States, which came to pass.

Great Britain also signed separate agreements with France and Spain, and provisionally with the Netherlands. In the treaty with Spain, the territories of East and West Florida were ceded to Spain without a clear northern boundary, which resulted in a territorial dispute resolved by the Treaty of Madrid in 1795. Spain also received the island of Menorca, but the Bahama Islands, Grenada, and Montserrat, which had been captured by the French and Spanish, were returned to Britain. The treaty with France was mostly about exchanges of captured territory. France's only net gains were the island of Tobago, and Senegal in Africa, but it also reinforced earlier treaties, guaranteeing fishing rights off Newfoundland. Dutch possessions in the East Indies, captured in 1781, were returned by Britain to the Netherlands in exchange for trading privileges in the Dutch East Indies by a treaty, which was not finalized until 1784.

The Congress of the Confederation, operating as the legislative body of the newly established United States, ratified the Treaty of Paris on January 14, 1784, in Annapolis, Maryland, in the Old Senate Chamber of the Maryland State House. Copies were sent back to Europe for ratification by the other parties involved, the first reaching France in March 1784. British ratification occurred on April 9, 1784, and the ratified versions were exchanged in Paris on May 12, 1784.

Terms
The treaty and the separate peace treaties between Great Britain and the three colonial powers that supported the American cause, France, Spain, and the Dutch Republic, are known collectively as the Peace of Paris. Only Article 1 of the treaty, which acknowledges the United States' existence as free sovereign and independent states, remains in force. The U.S. borders changed in later years, which is a major reason specific articles of the treaty were superseded.

Preamble. Declares the treaty to be "in the Name of the Most Holy and Undivided Trinity" followed by a reference to the Divine providence states the bona fides of the signatories, and declares the intention of both parties to "forget all past misunderstandings and differences" and "secure to both perpetual peace and harmony." Eschatocol. "Done at Paris, this third day of September in the year of our Lord, one thousand seven hundred and eighty-three."
 * 1) Britain acknowledges the United States, comprising what had been the Province of New Hampshire, Province of Massachusetts Bay, Colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, Connecticut Colony, Province of New York, Province of New Jersey, Province of Pennsylvania, Delaware Colony, Province of Maryland, Colony of Virginia, Province of North Carolina, Province of South Carolina, and Province of Georgia, to be free, sovereign, and independent states, and that the British Crown and all heirs and successors relinquish claims to the Government, property, and territorial rights of the same, and every part thereof,
 * 2) Establishing the boundaries of the United States, including but not limited to those between the United States and British North America from the Mississippi River to the Southern colonies. Britain surrenders their previously owned land,
 * 3) Granting fishing rights to United States fishermen in the Grand Banks, off the coast of Newfoundland and in the Gulf of Saint Lawrence;
 * 4) Recognizing the lawful contracted debts to be paid to creditors on either side;
 * 5) The Congress of the Confederation will "earnestly recommend" to state legislatures to recognize the rightful owners of all confiscated lands and "provide for the restitution of all estates, rights, and properties, which have been confiscated belonging to British subjects" (Loyalists);
 * 6) The United States will prevent future confiscations of the property of Loyalists;
 * 7) Prisoners-of-war on both sides are to be released. All British property now in the United States is to remain with them and to be forfeited;
 * 8) Both Great Britain and the United States are to be given perpetual access to the Mississippi River;
 * 9) Territories captured by either side subsequent to the treaty will be returned without compensation;
 * 10) Ratification of the treaty is to occur within six months from its signing.

Consequences
Historians have often commented that the treaty was very generous to the United States in terms of greatly enlarged boundaries. Historians such as Alvord, Harlow, and Ritcheson have emphasized that British generosity was based on a statesmanlike vision of close economic ties between Britain and the United States. The concession of the vast trans-Appalachian region was designed to facilitate the growth of the American population and to create lucrative markets for British merchants without any military or administrative costs to Britain. The point was that the United States would become a major trading partner. As French Foreign Minister Vergennes later put it, "The English buy peace rather than make it." Vermont was included within the boundaries because the state of New York insisted that Vermont was a part of New York although Vermont was then under a government that considered Vermont not to be a part of the United States.

Privileges that the Americans had received from Britain automatically when they had colonial status, including protection from pirates in the Mediterranean Sea under which the First Barbary War and the Second Barbary War had been fought, were lost. Individual states ignored federal recommendations, under Article 5, to restore confiscated Loyalist property and Article 6, which provided for confiscating Loyalist property for "unpaid debts". The Commonwealth of Virginia defied Article 4 and maintained laws against payment of debts to British creditors. Several Loyalists attempted to file for a return for their property in the U.S. legal system after the American Revolutionary War, but most were unsuccessful.

The actual geography of North America turned out not to match the details used in the treaty. The treaty specified a southern boundary for the United States, but the separate Anglo-Spanish agreement did not specify a northern boundary for Florida. The Spanish government assumed that the boundary was the same as in the 1763 agreement by which it had first given its territory in Florida to Great Britain. While the West Florida Controversy continued, Spain used its new control of Florida to block American access to the Mississippi, in defiance of Article 8. To the north, the treaty stated that the boundary of the United States extended from the "most northwesternmost point" of the Lake of the Woods in present-day Minnesota, Manitoba, and Ontario, directly westward until it reached the Mississippi River. However, the Mississippi does not extend that far northward, and the line going west from the Lake of the Woods never intersects the river. Additionally, the Treaty of Paris did not explain how the new border would function in terms of controlling the movement of people and trade between British North America and the United States. The American diplomats' expectation of negotiating a commercial treaty with Great Britain to resolve some of the unfinished business of the Treaty of Paris failed to materialize in 1784. Despite government agreements for British evacuation of northern forts, Britain continued to occupy the forts. Meanwhile, the British were dissatisfied with the American harassment of loyalists. The United States would thus wait until 1794 to negotiate its first commercial agreement with the British Empire, the Jay Treaty.

Great Britain violated the treaty stipulation that it would relinquish control of forts in United States territory "with all convenient speed". British troops remained stationed at six forts in the Great Lakes region and at two at the north end of Lake Champlain. The British also built an additional fort in present-day Ohio in 1794, during the Northwest Indian War. They justified their treaty violations during the unstable and extremely tense time that existed in the area following the Revolutionary War, and in the failure of the newly established Federal government of the United States to fulfill commitments made to compensate loyalists for British losses, forcing the British to liquidate various assets in the region. All of the posts were relinquished peacefully through diplomatic means as a result of the Jay Treaty:

title: Treaty of Paris (1783)


text:
Treaty of Paris (1814)

The Treaty of Paris, signed on 30 May 1814, ended the war between France and the Sixth Coalition, part of the Napoleonic Wars, following an armistice signed on 23 April between Charles, Count of Artois, and the allies. The treaty set the borders for France under the House of Bourbon and restored territories to other nations. It is sometimes called the First Peace of Paris, as another one followed in 1815.

Parties to the treaty
This treaty was signed on 30 May 1814, following an armistice signed on 23 April 1814 between Charles of Bourbon, Count of Artois, as Lieutenant General of the Realm, and the allies. Napoleon had abdicated as Emperor on 6 April, as a result of negotiations at Fontainebleau.

Peace talks had started on 9 May between Talleyrand, who negotiated with the allies of Chaumont on behalf of the exiled Bourbon king Louis XVIII of France, and the allies. The Treaty of Paris established peace between France and Great Britain, Russia, Austria, and Prussia, who in March had defined their common war aim in Chaumont. Signatories were:
 * Talleyrand, for France
 * Lords Castlereagh, Aberdeen and Cathcart for Great Britain
 * Counts Razumovsky and Nesselrode for Russia
 * Prince Metternich and Count Stadion for Austria
 * Baron Hardenberg and Wilhelm von Humboldt for Prussia.

The Treaty was also signed by Portugal and Sweden while Spain ratified shortly after in July. The allied parties did not sign a common document, but instead concluded separate treaties with France allowing for specific amendments.

New borders of France
The allies had agreed to reduce France to her 1792 borders and restore the independence of her neighbors after Napoleon Bonaparte's defeat.

Plan for Congress of Vienna
In addition to the cessation of hostilities, the treaty provided a rough draft of a final settlement, which according to article 32 was to be concluded within the next two months at a congress involving all belligerents of the Napoleonic Wars. This provision resulted in the Congress of Vienna, held between September 1814 and June 1815.

The Allies declared that their aim was to establish a lasting peace based on a just distribution of forces among the powers, and considered it not necessary to impose harsh conditions on France as she had been restored to a monarchy. Thus the preliminary conditions already agreed in Paris were moderate for France so as not to disturb the re-enthronement of the returned Bourbon king: France's borders of 1 June 1792 were confirmed, and in addition, she was allowed to retain Saarbrücken, Saarlouis, Landau, the County of Montbéliard, part of Savoy with Annecy and Chambéry, also Avignon and the Comtat Venaissin as well as artifacts acquired during the war, while on the other hand she had to cede several colonies.

To distinguish this agreement from a second treaty of Paris, concluded on 20 November 1815 as one of the treaties amending Vienna, the treaty of 30 May 1814 is sometimes referred to as the First Peace of Paris.

Territories of other nations
The treaty reapportioned several territories amongst various countries. Most notably, France retained all European territory that it possessed on 1 January 1792 and also reacquired many of the territories lost to Britain during the war. They included Guadeloupe (Art. IX), which had been ceded to Sweden by Britain when it entered the coalition. In return, Sweden was compensated 24 million francs, which gave rise to the Guadeloupe Fund. The only exceptions were Tobago, Saint Lucia, Seychelles and Mauritius, all of which were handed over to British control. Britain kept sovereignty over the island of Malta (Art. VII).

The treaty returned to Spain the territory of Santo Domingo, which had been transferred to France by the 1795 Peace of Basel (Art. VIII). The Peace of Basel had implicitly recognised French sovereignty over Saint-Domingue, which Dessalines later proclaimed independent under the name of Haiti. France did not recognize the independence of Haiti until 1824.

This treaty formally recognized the independence of Switzerland (Art. VI).

House of Bourbon
The treaty recognised the Bourbon monarchy in France, in the person of Louis XVIII, because the treaty was between Louis XVIII the king of France and the heads of states of the Coalition great powers (Preamble to the treaty).

Slave trade and slavery
The treaty aimed to abolish the French slave trade in France (but not slavery) over a five-year period (Additional Art. I). The territories of France were not included in this aim. This aim was also included in the succeeding 1815 treaty, applying to all parties, but with "without loss of time" rather than by a given date.

Aftermath
Several powers, despite the peaceful intentions of the treaty, still feared a reassertion of French power. The Netherlands, now freed from the French empire, asked William I of the House of Orange to be their prince; he accepted in late 1813. This was a first step to what occurred in 1815 during the Congress of Vienna and simultaneously, Napoleon's Hundred Days. In March 1815, the United Kingdom of the Netherlands was formed, which added the former territory of the low countries that had been ruled by the Austrian Empire to the Netherlands, and had William I as its king. His son William joined the fighting at Waterloo, whose battle site was located in the United Kingdom of the Netherlands. Though the Dutch initiated their request to William I, the great powers of the Napoleonic wars had made a secret pact to support a strong nation on that border with France with William as its king, in the Eight Articles of London, signed on 21 June 1814. Thus the action by the Dutch had the strong support of Britain and the other signatories of that pact.

Many German states had been consolidated by Napoleon, and retained that status after the Treaty of Paris of 1814. Prussia gained territory in western Germany, near the border with France, in a swap with William I of the Netherlands. In Italy, several different political entities were recognized.

Following Napoleon's brief return to power and defeat, a new Treaty of Paris was signed the following year.

title: Treaty of Paris (1814)


text:
Treaty of Paris (1815)

The Treaty of Paris of 1815, also known as the Second Treaty of Paris, was signed on 20 November 1815, after the defeat and the second abdication of Napoleon Bonaparte. In February, Napoleon had escaped from his exile on Elba, entered Paris on 20 March and began the Hundred Days of his restored rule. After France's defeat at the hands of the Seventh Coalition at the Battle of Waterloo, Napoleon was persuaded to abdicate again, on 22 June. King Louis XVIII, who had fled the country when Napoleon arrived in Paris, took the throne for a second time on 8 July.

The 1815 treaty had more punitive terms than the treaty of the previous year. France was ordered to pay 700 million francs in war reparations, among the largest in history, and even lost territory it had gained during the French Revolutionary Wars as its borders were reduced to those that had existed on 1 January 1790. France was to pay additional money to cover the cost of providing additional defensive fortifications to be built by neighbouring Coalition countries. Under the terms of the treaty, large parts of France were to be under military occupation by up to 150,000 soldiers for five years, with France covering the cost. However, the Coalition occupation under the command of the Duke of Wellington was deemed necessary for only three years; the foreign troops withdrew from France in 1818 (Congress of Aix-la-Chapelle).

In addition to the definitive peace treaty between France and Great Britain, Austria, Prussia and Russia, there were four additional conventions and an act confirming the neutrality of Switzerland, signed on the same day.

Definitive treaty
The 1815 peace treaties were drawn up entirely in French, the lingua franca of contemporary diplomacy. There were four treaties, between France and each of the four major Seventh Coalition powers: Austria, Great Britain, Prussia and Russia. All four treaties were signed on the same day (20 November 1815), had verbatim stipulations, and were styled the same way (for example the "Definitive Treaty between Great Britain and France").

The treaty was harsher towards France than the Treaty of 1814, which had been negotiated through the manoeuvre of Talleyrand, because of reservations raised by the recent widespread support for Napoleon in France. France lost the territorial gains of the Revolutionary armies in 1790–92, which the previous treaty had allowed France to keep; the nation was reduced to its 1790 boundaries (plus the enclaves of the Comtat Venaissin, the County of Montbéliard and the Stadtrepublik Mülhausen, which France was allowed to keep, but minus a few patches of territory along the northern border, including Landau and the Saarlouis exclave, which had been French since 1697, as well as six French communes bordering Lake Geneva which were ceded to the Republic of Geneva so that it be connected to the rest of Switzerland. France was now also ordered to pay 700 million francs in indemnities, in five yearly instalments, and to maintain at its own expense a Coalition army of occupation of 150,000 soldiers in the eastern border territories of France, from the English Channel to the border with Switzerland, for a maximum of five years. The twofold purpose of the military occupation was rendered self-evident by the convention annexed to the treaty outlining the incremental terms by which France would issue negotiable bonds covering the indemnity: in addition to safeguarding the neighboring states from a revival of revolution in France, it guaranteed fulfilment of the treaty's financial clauses.

Although some of the Allies, notably Prussia, initially demanded that France cede significant territory in the East, rivalry among the powers and the general desire to secure the Bourbon Restoration made the peace settlement less onerous than it might have been. The treaty was signed for Great Britain by Lord Castlereagh and the Duke of Wellington and by the duc de Richelieu for France; parallel treaties with France were signed by Austria, Russia, and Prussia, forming in effect the first confederation of Europe. The Quadruple Alliance was reinstated in a separate treaty also signed 20 November 1815, introducing a new concept in European diplomacy, the peacetime congress "for the maintenance of peace in Europe" on the pattern of the Congress of Vienna, which had concluded 9 June 1815.

The treaty is brief. In addition to having "preserved France and Europe from the convulsions with which they were menaced by the late enterprise of Napoleon Bonaparte", the signers of the Treaty also repudiated "the revolutionary system reproduced in France".

The treaty is presented "in the desire to consolidate, by maintaining inviolate the Royal authority, and by restoring the operation of the Constitutional Charter, the order of things which had been happily re-established in France". The first Treaty of Paris, of 30 May 1814, and the Final Act of the Congress of Vienna, of 9 June 1815, were confirmed. On the same day, in a separate document, Great Britain, Russia, Austria, and Prussia renewed the Quadruple Alliance. The princes and free towns, who were not signatories, were invited to accede to its terms, whereby the treaty became a part of the public law by which Europe, with the exclusion of the Ottoman Empire, established "relations from which a system of real and permanent balance of power in Europe is to be derived".

Article on the slave trade
An additional article appended to the treaty addressed the issue of slavery. It reaffirmed the Declaration of the Powers, on the Abolition of the Slave Trade, of 8th of February 1815 (which also formed ACT, No. XV. of the Final Act of the Congress of Vienna) and added that the governments of the contracting parties should "without loss of time, ... [find] the most effectual measures for the entire and definitive abolition of a Commerce so odious, and so strongly condemned by the laws of religion and of nature".

Convention on pecuniary indemnity
A convention on pecuniary indemnity regulated the mode of liquidating the indemnity of 700 millions francs to be paid by France, in conformity to the fourth article of the treaty. The sum was to be paid, day by day, in equal portions, in the space of five years, from 1 December 1815.

Thus, France was required to pay on account of this convention 383,251 francs every day for five years, equal to about 16,000 pounds sterling at the exchange rate of the day. For this daily quota, the French government had to give assignations on the French treasury, payable to bearer, day by day. In the first instance, however, the Coalition Commissioners were to receive the whole of the 700 million in fifteen bonds of 46⅔ million each; the first of which was payable on 31 March 1816, the second on 21 July 1816, and so on, every fourth month. In the month preceding the commencement of each of these four monthly periods, France was to redeem successively one of these bonds for 46⅔ millions, by exchanging it against the first-mentioned daily assignations payable to bearer, which assignations, for the purpose of convenience and negotiability, were again subdivided into coupures, or sets of smaller sums. As a guarantee for the regular payment of these assignations, and to provide for deficiencies, France assigned, moreover, to the allies, a fund of interest, to be inscribed in the Grand Livre of her public debt, of seven millions francs on a capital of 140 millions. A liquidation was to take place every six months, when the assignations duly discharged by the French Treasury were to be received as payments to their amount, and the deficiency arising from assignations not honoured would be made good, with interest, at five percent from the fund of interest inscribed in the Grand Livre, in a manner specified in this convention.

The distribution of the sum among the Coalition Powers, agreed to be paid by France in this convention, was regulated by a separate convention, the Protocol for the pecuniary indemnity to be furnished by France and the Table of allotment:

Convention on the military line
A convention on the military line regulated all matters concerning the temporary occupation of the frontiers of France by a Coalition army of 150,000 men, conforming to Article V of the definitive treaty. The military line to be occupied, would extend along the frontiers which separated the departments of the Pas de Calais, of the North of the Ardennes, of the Meuse, of the Moselle, of the Lower Rhine, and of the Upper Rhine, from the interior of France.

It was also agreed that neither the Coalition nor the French troops would occupy (unless for particular reasons and by mutual agreement), the following territories and districts:
 * In the department of the Somme, all the country north of that river, from Ham, to where it falls into the sea;
 * In Aisne, the districts of Saint-Quentin, Vervins and Laon;
 * In the Marne, those of Rheims, Sainte-Menehould, and Vitry;
 * In the Haute-Marne, those of Saint-Dizier and Joinville;
 * In Meurthe, those of Toul, Dieuze, Sarrebourg and Blamont;
 * In the Vosges, those of Saint-Dié, Bruyères and Remiremont;
 * The district of Lure, in the Haute-Saône; and that of Saint-Hippolyte in Doubs.

Within the line occupied by the Coalition army, 26 fortresses were allowed to have garrisons (see the table on the right), but without any materiel or equipment of artillery and engineer stores.

France was to supply all the needs of the 150,000 Coalition troops who remained in the country. Lodging, fuel, light, provisions, and forage were to be furnished in kind, to an extent not exceeding 200,000 daily rations for men, and 50,000 daily rations for horses; and for pay, equipment, clothing, &c.

France was to pay to the Coalition 50 million francs per annum during the five-year occupation: the allies, however, were content with only 30 million, on account, for the first year. The territories and fortresses definitively ceded by France, as well as the fortresses to be provisionally occupied by the Coalition troops for five years, were to be given up to them within ten days from the signature of the principal treaty, and all the Coalition forces, except 150,000 which were to remain, were to evacuate France within 21 days from that date.

The direct expense entailed upon France by this convention greatly exceeded the 700 million francs of the indemnity. Estimating the value of the soldier's portion and allowances at 1½ francs, and the cavalry ration at 2 francs, the annual cost of the deliveries in kind for 200,000 portions and 50,000 rations would have been 146 million in francs, which, with the addition of 50 million franc of money per annum, formed a total of 196 million francs per year, equal to 22,370 sterling per day at the exchange rate of the time.

Convention on private claims upon France
A convention on private claims upon France assured the payment of money due by France to the subjects of the Coalition powers, in conformity with the treaty of 1814 and to the Article VIII of the 1815 peace treaty. There were twenty-six articles in the convention, which provided for the following: All these claims were to be sent in within a year after the ratification of the treaty or they would be voided (Article XVI), and committees for their liquidation were to be appointed.
 * the liquidation of all claims arising from articles furnished by individuals, and partnerships, by virtue of contracts and other arrangements with French administrative authorities;
 * arrears of pay to military persons or employees no longer subjects of France;
 * deliveries to French hospitals;
 * loans contracted by French military or civil authorities;
 * losses of money confided to the French post-office etcetera;
 * the restitution of the funds of the Hamburg bank, seized by Marshal Davout, to be regulated by a separate convention between commissioners from that city and those of Louis XVIII. This issue was already contentious and had been subject to secret articles in both of the 1814 Convention for a suspension of hostilities with France and the 1814 Paris Peace Treaty. The matter was settled when the French government agreed to pay compensation in a special convention signed by the parties on 27 October 1816.
 * the payment of a claim of upwards of forty million francs to the Counts of Bentheim and Steinfurt.

Articles XVII–XIX related to the payment of the claims and their inscription in the Grand Livre (general ledger). The claims under this convention were immense, so it was impossible for the parties to have a clear idea of the necessary amount at the time of the treaty's signing. As a guarantee of payment, Article XX provided that a capital, bearing 3½ millions of francs in interest, be inscribed in the Grand Livre, the interest of which was to be received half yearly by joint-commissioners.

Convention on claims of British subjects
A fourth convention related exclusively to the liquidation of the claims of British subjects on the government of France, in conformity with the Paris peace treaty of 1814, and the Article VIII of the Paris Peace Treaty of 1815. All British subjects who had suffered loss of property in France since 1 January 1791, by sequestration or confiscation by the French government, were to be indemnified. The amount of permanent stock lost was to be inscribed in the Grand Livre, and to bear interest from 22 March 1816; excepting, however, such holders as had, since 1797, voluntarily submitted to receive their dividends at a third. The same was to be the case in regard to former life annuities from the French government.

Indemnification was further granted for the loss of immovable property by sequestration, confiscation, or sale; and particular regulations were laid down for ascertaining its value in the fairest possible manner. A separate account was to be kept of arrears that had accrued for all types of property, for which arrears were to be calculated at an interest of four percent per annum. Movable properly, lost through the above causes, was also to be paid for by inscriptions according to its value, with interest calculated on it at three percent per annum. From this indemnity, however, were excluded ships, cargoes, and other movable property seized in conformity to the laws of war and the prohibitory decrees. All claims of the above, or any other description, were to be given in, within three months after the date of the signing fourth convention (20 November 1815) from Europe, six months from the western colonies, and twelve months from the East Indies, &c.

The claims were to be examined and decided on by a mixed commission of liquidation: and, if their votes were equal, an arbitrator would be chosen by lot from a mixed commission of arbitration. As a guarantee for the payment of claims sanctioned under this convention, there was to be inscribed in the Grand Livre, before 1 January 1816, a capital bearing 3½ millions francs of interest, in the name of a further mixed commission of English and French officers, who were to receive such interest; without, however, disposing of the same otherwise than by placing it in the public funds, at accumulating interest for the benefit of the creditors. As soon as the inscription had been effected, Britain would restore the French colonies as agreed in the treaty of 1814, including the islands of Martinique and Guadeloupe, which had been provisionally re-occupied by the British troops.

Act on the neutrality of Switzerland
The Swiss Confederation had been internationally recognised as an independent neutral state at the Peace of Westphalia in 1648. During the Napoleonic Wars it failed to remain neutral, as some cantons had been annexed into other states and, under French influence, the Act of Mediation was signed, replacing the Swiss Confederation with the more centralised Helvetic Republic, allied to France. With the fall of Napoleon in 1814, the cantons of Switzerland started the process of writing a new, less centralised constitution.

On 20 March 1815, at the Congress of Vienna, the European powers (Austria, France, Great Britain, Portugal, Prussia, Russia, Spain and Sweden) agreed to recognise permanently an independent, neutral Switzerland, and on 27 May Switzerland acceded to this declaration.

However, during Napoleon's Hundred Days the Seventh Coalition suspended the signing of the Act of Acknowledgement and Guarantee of the perpetual Neutrality of Switzerland until after Napoleon Bonaparte was defeated; this allowed Coalition forces to pass through Swiss territory. So with Article 84 of the Final Act of the Congress of Vienna dated 20 November 1815, the four major Coalition powers (Austria, Great Britain, Prussia and Russia) and France gave their formal and authentic acknowledgement of the perpetual neutrality of Switzerland.

Return of looted art
Much art had been looted from across Europe by the French armies since 1793. The First Treaty of Paris had made no demands in this respect, but the second treaty required that stolen artworks be returned to their countries of origin. The process was haphazard, as some states had ceased to exist, but the treaty was one of the first in history to require the return of war booty on a large scale.

title: Treaty of Paris (1815)


text:
Treaty of Paris (1898)

The Treaty of Peace between the United States of America and the Kingdom of Spain, commonly known as the Treaty of Paris of 1898, was signed by Spain and the United States on December 10, 1898, that ended the Spanish–American War. Under it, Spain relinquished all claim of sovereignty over and title to territories described there as the island of Porto Rico and other islands now under Spanish sovereignty in the West Indies, and the island of Guam in the Marianas or Ladrones, the archipelago known as the Philippine Islands, and comprehending the islands lying within the following line: (details elided), to the United States. The cession of the Philippines involved a compensation of $20 million from the United States to Spain.

The treaty came into effect on April 11, 1899, when the documents of ratification were exchanged. It was the first treaty negotiated between the two governments since the 1819 Adams–Onís Treaty.

The Treaty of Paris marked the end of the Spanish Empire, apart from some small holdings. It had a major cultural impact in Spain known as the "Generation of '98". It marked the beginning of the United States as a world power. In the U.S., many supporters of the war opposed the treaty, which became one of the major issues in the election of 1900 when it was opposed by Democrat William Jennings Bryan, who opposed imperialism. Republican President William McKinley supported the treaty and was easily reelected.

Background
The Spanish–American War began on April 25, 1898, due to a series of escalating disputes between the two nations, and ended on December 10, 1898, with the signing of the Treaty of Paris. It resulted in Spain's loss of its control over the remains of its overseas empire. After much of mainland in the Americas had achieved independence, Cubans tried their hand at revolution in 1868–1878, and again in the 1890s, led by José Martí. The Philippines at this time also became resistant to Spanish colonial rule. August 26, 1896, presented the first call to revolt, led by Andrés Bonifacio, succeeded by Emilio Aguinaldo y Famy. Aguinaldo then negotiated the Pact of Biak-na-Bato with the Spaniards and went into exile to Hong Kong along with the other revolutionary leaders.

The Spanish–American War that followed had overwhelming public support in the United States due to the popular fervor towards supporting Cuban freedom.

On September 16, President William McKinley issued secret written instructions to his emissaries as the Spanish–American War drew to a close:

"By a protocol signed at Washington August 12, 1898 . . . it was agreed that the United States and Spain would each appoint not more than five commissioners to treat of peace, and that the commissioners so appointed should meet at Paris not later than October 1, 1898, and proceed to the negotiation and conclusion of a treaty of peace, which treaty should be subject to ratification according to the respective constitutional forms of the two countries.

For the purpose of carrying into effect this stipulation, I have appointed you as commissioners on the part of the United States to meet and confer with commissioners on the part of Spain.

As an essential preliminary to the agreement to appoint commissioners to treat of peace, this government required of that of Spain the unqualified concession of the following precise demands:

 * The relinquishment of all claim of sovereignty over and title to Cuba.
 * The cession to the United States of Puerto Rico and other islands under Spanish sovereignty in the West Indies.
 * The cession of an island in the Ladrones, to be selected by the United States.
 * The immediate evacuation by Spain of Cuba, Puerto Rico, and other Spanish islands in the West Indies.
 * The occupation by the United States of the city, bay, and harbor of Manila pending the conclusion of a treaty of peace which should determine the control, disposition, and government of the Philippines.

These demands were conceded by Spain, and their concession was, as you will perceive, solemnly recorded in the protocol of the 12th of August. . ..

It is my wish that throughout the negotiations entrusted to the Commission the purpose and spirit with which the United States accepted the unwelcome necessity of war should be kept constantly in view. We took up arms only in obedience to the dictates of humanity and in the fulfillment of high public and moral obligations. We had no design of aggrandizement and no ambition of conquest. Through the long course of repeated representations which preceded and aimed to avert the struggle, and in the final arbitrament of force, this country was impelled solely by the purpose of relieving grievous wrongs and removing long-existing conditions which disturbed its tranquillity, which shocked the moral sense of mankind, and which could no longer be endured.

It is my earnest wish that the United States in making peace should follow the same high rule of conduct which guided it in facing war. It should be as scrupulous and magnanimous in the concluding settlement as it was just and humane in its original action. The luster and the moral strength attaching to a cause which can be confidently rested upon the considerate judgment of the world should not under any illusion of the hour be dimmed by ulterior designs which might tempt us into excessive demands or into an adventurous departure on untried paths. It is believed that the true glory and the enduring interests of the country will most surely be served if an unselfish duty conscientiously accepted and a signal triumph honorably achieved shall be crowned by such an example of moderation, restraint, and reason in victory as best comports with the traditions and character of our enlightened republic.

Our aim in the adjustment of peace should be directed to lasting results and to the achievement of the common good under the demands of civilization, rather than to ambitious designs. The terms of the protocol were framed upon this consideration. The abandonment of the Western Hemisphere by Spain was an imperative necessity. In presenting that requirement, we only fulfilled a duty universally acknowledged. It involves no ungenerous reference to our recent foe, but simply a recognition of the plain teachings of history, to say that it was not compatible with the assurance of permanent peace on and near our own territory that the Spanish flag should remain on this side of the sea. This lesson of events and of reason left no alternative as to Cuba, Puerto Rico, and the other islands belonging to Spain in this hemisphere.

The Philippines stand upon a different basis. It is nonetheless true, however, that without any original thought of complete or even partial acquisition, the presence and success of our arms at Manila imposes upon us obligations which we cannot disregard. The march of events rules and overrules human action. Avowing unreservedly the purpose which has animated all our effort, and still solicitous to adhere to it, we cannot be unmindful that, without any desire or design on our part, the war has brought us new duties and responsibilities which we must meet and discharge as becomes a great nation on whose growth and career from the beginning the ruler of nations has plainly written the high command and pledge of civilization.

Incidental to our tenure in the Philippines is the commercial opportunity to which American statesmanship cannot be indifferent. It is just to use every legitimate means for the enlargement of American trade; but we seek no advantages in the Orient which are not common to all. Asking only the open door for ourselves, we are ready to accord the open door to others. The commercial opportunity which is naturally and inevitably associated with this new opening depends less on large territorial possession than upon an adequate commercial basis and upon broad and equal privileges. . ..

In view of what has been stated, the United States cannot accept less than the cession in full right and sovereignty of the island of Luzon. It is desirable, however, that the United States shall acquire the right of entry for vessels and merchandise belonging to citizens of the United States into such ports of the Philippines as are not ceded to the United States upon terms of equal favor with Spanish ships and merchandise, both in relation to port and customs charges and rates of trade and commerce, together with other rights of protection and trade accorded to citizens of one country within the territory of another. You are therefore instructed to demand such concession, agreeing on your part that Spain shall have similar rights as to her subjects and vessels in the ports of any territory in the Philippines ceded to the United States."

Negotiations
Article V of the peace protocol between United States and Spain on August 12, 1898, read as follows:

"The United States and Spain will each appoint not more than five commissioners to treat of peace, and the commissioners so appointed shall meet at Paris not later than Oct. 1, 1898, and proceed to the negotiation and conclusion of a treaty of peace, which treaty shall be subject to ratification according to the respective constitutional forms of the two countries."

The composition of the American commission was somewhat unusual in that three of its members were senators, which meant, as many newspapers pointed out, that they would later vote on the ratification of their own negotiations. These were American delegation's members: The Spanish commission included the following Spanish diplomats:
 * William R. Day, chairman, a former U.S. Secretary of State who had resigned from the position to lead the commission
 * William P. Frye, a senator from Maine
 * Cushman Kellogg Davis, a senator from Minnesota
 * George Gray, a senator from Delaware
 * Whitelaw Reid, a former diplomat and a former nominee for Vice President
 * Eugenio Montero Ríos,
 * Buenaventura de Abarzuza,
 * José de Garnica,
 * Wenceslao Ramírez de Villa-Urrutia,
 * Rafael Cerero, and
 * Jules Cambon (French diplomat).

The American delegation, headed by former Secretary of State William R. Day, who had vacated his position as U.S. Secretary of State to head the commission, arrived in Paris on September 26, 1898. The negotiations were conducted in a suite of rooms at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. At the first session, on October 1, the Spanish demanded that before the talks got underway, the return of the city of Manila, which had been captured by the Americans a few hours after the signing of the peace protocol in Washington, to Spanish authority. The Americans refused to consider the idea and, for the moment, it was pursued no further.

Felipe Agoncillo, a Filipino lawyer who represented the First Philippine Republic, was denied participation in the negotiation.

For almost a month, negotiations revolved around Cuba. The Teller Amendment to the declaration of war made it impractical for the United States to annex the island as it had with Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Philippines. At first, Spain refused to accept the Cuban national debt of four hundred million dollars, but ultimately, it had no choice. Eventually, it was agreed that Cuba was to be granted independence and for the Cuban debt to be assumed by Spain. It was also agreed that Spain would cede Guam and Puerto Rico to the United States.

The negotiators then turned to the question of the Philippines. Spanish negotiators were determined to hang onto all they could and hoped to cede only Mindanao and perhaps the Sulu Islands. On the American side, Chairman Day had once recommended the acquisition of only the naval base in Manila, as a "hitching post." Others had recommended retaining only the island of Luzon. However, in discussions with its advisers, the commission concluded that Spain, if it retained part of the Philippines, would be likely to sell it to another European power, which would likely be troublesome for America. On November 25, the American Commission cabled McKinley for explicit instructions. Their cable crossed one from McKinley saying that duty left him no choice but to demand the entire archipelago. The next morning, another cable from McKinley arrived:

"to accept merely Luzon, leaving the rest of the islands subject to Spanish rule, or to be the subject of future contention, cannot be justified on political, commercial, or humanitarian grounds. The cessation must be the whole archipelago or none. The latter is wholly inadmissible, and the former must therefore be required."

This position was proposed by U.S. negotiators, though they considered it unsound, and was formally rejected on November 4. Seeking a solution to avoid collapse of the negotiations, Senator Frye suggested offering Spain ten or twenty million dollars for the islands. The State Department approved, though they considered this odious. After some discussion, the American delegation offered twenty million dollars on November 21, one tenth of a valuation that had been estimated in internal discussions in October, and requested an answer within two days. Montero Ríos said angrily that he could reply at once, but the American delegation had already departed from the conference table. When the two sides met again, Queen-Regent Maria Christina had cabled her acceptance. Montero Ríos then recited his formal reply:

"The Government of Her Majesty, moved by lofty reasons of patriotism and humanity, will not assume the responsibility of again bringing upon Spain all the horrors of war. In order to avoid them, it resigns itself to the painful task of submitting to the law of the victor, however harsh it may be, and as Spain lacks the material means to defend the rights she believes hers, having recorded them, she accepts the only terms the United States offers her for the concluding of the treaty of peace."

Work on the final draft of the treaty began on November 30. It was signed on December 10, 1898.

Spanish ratification
In Madrid, the Cortes Generales, Spain's legislature, rejected the treaty, but Maria Christina signed it as she was empowered to do by a clause in the Spanish constitution.

U.S. ratification
In the Senate, there were four main schools of thought on U.S. imperialism that influenced the debate on the treaty's ratification. Republicans generally supported the treaty, but those opposed either aimed to defeat the treaty or exclude the provision that stipulated the acquisition of the Philippines. Most Democrats favored expansion as well, particularly in the South. A minority of Democrats also favored the treaty on the basis of ending the war and granting independence to Cuba and the Philippines. During the Senate debate on ratification, Senators George Frisbie Hoar and George Graham Vest were outspoken opponents. Hoar stated:

"This Treaty will make us a vulgar, commonplace empire, controlling subject races and vassal states, in which one class must forever rule and other classes must forever obey."

Some anti-expansionists stated that the treaty committed the United States to a course of empire and violated the most basic tenets of the constitution. They argued that neither the Congress nor the President had the right to pass laws that governed colonial peoples who were not represented by lawmakers.

Some Senate expansionists supported the treaty and reinforced such views by arguing:

"Suppose we reject the Treaty. We continue the state of war. We repudiate the President. We are branded as a people incapable of taking rank as one of the greatest of world powers!"

"Providence has given the United States the duty of extending Christian civilization. We come as ministering angels, not despots."

Expansionists said that the Constitution applied only to citizens, an idea that was later supported by the Supreme Court in the Insular Cases.

As the Senate debate continued, Andrew Carnegie and former President Grover Cleveland petitioned the Senate to reject the treaty. Both men adamantly opposed such imperialist policies and participated in the American Anti-Imperialist League, along with other such prominent members as Mark Twain and Samuel Gompers.

Fighting erupted between Filipino and American forces in Manila on February 4, and quickly escalated into a battle between armies. This changed the course of debate in the Senate in favor of ratification. The treaty was eventually approved on February 6, 1899, by a vote of 57 to 27, just over the two-thirds majority required. Only two Republicans voted against ratification: George Frisbie Hoar of Massachusetts and Eugene Pryor Hale of Maine. Senator Nelson W. Aldrich had opposed entry into the Spanish–American War but supported McKinley after it began. He played a central role in winning the treaty's two-thirds majority ratification.

Provisions
The Treaty of Paris provided for the independence of Cuba from Spain, but the U.S. Congress ensured indirect U.S. control by the Platt Amendment and the Teller Amendment. Spain relinquished all claims of sovereignty over and title to Cuba. Upon Spain's departure, Cuba was to be occupied by the United States, which would assume and discharge any obligations of international law by its occupation.

The treaty also specified that Spain would cede Puerto Rico and the other islands under Spanish sovereignty in the West Indies as well as the island of Guam in the Mariana Islands to the United States.

The treaty also specified that Spain would cede the Philippine Islands, including the islands within a specified line, to the United States in exchange for twenty million dollars.

Specifics of the cession of the Philippines were later clarified on November 7, 1900, when Spain and the United States signed the Treaty of Washington. This clarified that the territories relinquished by Spain to the United States included any and all islands belonging to the Philippine Archipelago, but lying outside the lines described in the Treaty of Paris. That treaty explicitly named the islands of Cagayan Sulu and Sibutu and their dependencies as among the relinquished territories. The boundary between the Philippines and North Borneo was further clarified by the Convention Between the United States and Great Britain (1930).

Muslim sultanates issue
Included in the cession of the Philippines were three Moro sultanates in the southern Philippines, the Sultanate of Maguindanao, the Sultanate of Sulu, and the Confederation of sultanates in Lanao. The texts of the Spanish and English copies of the treaties and agreements ceded these to the United States, but

In the United States
Victory in the Spanish–American War turned the United States into a world power because the attainment of the territories of Guam, Puerto Rico, and the Philippines expanded its economic dominance in the Pacific. Its growth continued to have effects on U.S. foreign and economic policy well into the next century. Furthermore, McKinley's significant role in advancing the ratification of the treaty transformed the presidential office from a weaker position to a prototype of the stronger presidency that is more seen today.

In Spain
The Generation of '98 in Spain comprised those Spanish writers deeply impacted by the events and committed to cultural and aesthetic renewal. They were associated with modernism. The term refers to the moral, political and social crisis in Spain produced by the humiliating loss of the worldwide empire. The intellectuals are known for their criticism of the Spanish literary and educational establishments, which they saw as steeped in conformism, ignorance, and a lack of any true spirit. Their criticism was coupled with and heavily connected to the group's dislike for the Restoration Movement that was occurring in Spanish government.

A few years after the war, during the reign of Alfonso XIII, Spain improved its commercial position and maintained close relations with the United States, which led to the signing of commercial treaties between the two countries in 1902, 1906 and 1910. Spain would turn its attention to its possessions in Africa (especially northern Morocco, Spanish Sahara and Spanish Guinea) and would begin to rehabilitate itself internationally after the Algeciras Conference of 1906.

In the Philippines
Philippine revolutionaries had declared independence from Spain on June 12, 1898, and resisted the imposition of American sovereignty. The 1899 Battle of Manila between American and Filipino forces on February 4-5, 1899 ignited the Philippine-American War, which concluded with an American victory in 1902.

In Mindanao
The United States fought long brutal wars against the Moro sultanates in Mindanao from 1899 to 1913. It annexed the Sultanate of Maguindanao and the Confederation of sultanates in Lanao in 1905 after the Battle of the Malalag River and then annexed the Sultanate of Sulu in 1913 after the Battle of Bud Bagsak.

title: Treaty of Paris (1898)


text:
Treaty of Paris (1920)

The 1920 Treaty of Paris was an act signed by Romania and the principal Allied Powers of the time (France, United Kingdom, Italy and Japan) whose purpose was the recognition of Romanian sovereignty over Bessarabia. The treaty, however, never came into force because Japan failed to ratify it.

On 9 April 1918 (old style 27 March 1918), during the chaos of the Russian Civil War and following Romanian military intervention, the Bessarabian legislature (Sfatul Țării) voted in favor of the union of Bessarabia with Romania with 86 votes in favor, three against, and 36 abstentions, an act regarded by the Russians as a Romanian invasion.

As with the Treaty of Versailles, the 1920 treaty contained the Covenant of the League of Nations, and, as a result, it was not ratified by the United States. The United States refused initially to sign the Treaty on the grounds that Russia was not represented at the treaty conference.

The Paris Peace Treaty of 28 October 1920, formally recognized the union of Bessarabia with Romania. The union was recognized by the United Kingdom, France and Italy, but Japan did not ratify it, and the Soviet Union never recognized this Union.

title: Treaty of Paris (1920)


text:
Electric Image Animation System

The Electric Image Animation System (EIAS) is a 3D computer graphics package published by EIAS3D. It currently runs on the macOS and Windows platforms.

History
Electric Image, Inc. was initially a visual effects production company. They developed their own in-house 3D animation and rendering package for the Macintosh beginning in the late 1980s, calling it ElectricImage Animation System. (To avoid confusion with the current product with its similar name, we will refer to this initial incarnation of the product simply as ElectricImage.)

When the company later decided to offer their software for sale externally, it quickly gained a customer base that lauded the developers for the software's exceptionally fast rendering engine and high image quality. Because it was capable of film-quality output on commodity hardware, ElectricImage was popular in the movie and television industries throughout the decade. It was used by the "Rebel Unit" at Industrial Light and Magic quite extensively and was in use by a variety of game companies, such as Bad Mojo and Bad Day on the Midway. However, only these high end effects companies could afford it: Electric Image initially sold for US $7500.

EIAS has been used in numerous film and television productions, such as: Cliffs of Freedom, Piranha 3D, Alien Trespass, Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl, Daddy Day Care, K-19: The Widowmaker, Gangs of New York, Austin Powers: Goldmember, Men In Black II, The Bourne Identity, Behind Enemy Lines, Time Machine, Ticker, JAG - Pilot Episode, Spawn, Star Trek: First Contact, Star Trek: Insurrection, Galaxy Quest, Mission to Mars, Austin Powers: The Spy Who Shagged Me, Star Wars Episode 1: The Phantom Menace, Titan A.E., U-571, Dinosaur, Terminator 2: Judgment Day, Terminator 2: Judgment Day - DVD Intro, Jungle Book 2, American President, Sleepers, Star Wars Special Edition, Empire Strikes Back Special Edition, Return of Jedi Special Edition, Bicentennial Man, Vertical Limit, Elf, Blade Trinity, and Lost In Space.

TV Shows: Evil, Invisible City, Shinning Girls, Lovecraft Country, Rising Dion, Legion, The Strain, The Librarians, Falling Skies, Revolution, Breaking Bad, Alcatraz, Pan AM, The whole Truth, Lost, Flash Forward, Fringe, Surface, Weeds, Pushing Daisies, The X-Files, Alias, Smallville, Star Trek: The Next Generation, Babylon 5, Young Indiana Jones, Star Trek Voyager, Mists of Avalon, Star Trek Enterprise....

Electric Image, Inc. was always a small company that produced software on the Mac platform and so never had a large a market share. Play, Inc. purchased Electric Image corporation in November 1998. The first version of EIAS released under the Play moniker was version 2.9. Play later released the 3.0 version. This was the first version to run on Windows, and to mark this move, Play renamed the package Electric Image Universe.

In 2000, Dwight Parscale (former CEO of Newtek) and original Electric Image founders Markus Houy and Jay Roth bought back the original company from Play Inc. On September 19, 2000, the company bought back the shares of Electric Image from Play and set about to recapture the product's former customer base. The new company released version 4.0 and 5.0 under the Electric Image moniker. Then due to a licensing problem with Spatial Technologies, they dropped the Modeler program from the version 5.5 release, and renamed the package back to Electric Image Animation System.

Versions 6.0 and 6.5 were subsequently released with vast improvements to the rendering engine and OpenGL performance. Version 6.5r2 added FBX file importing capability. 6.6 added Universal Binary support and finally drops support for Mac OS 9. Version 7.0 brought Multi-Layer Rendering, Image-Based Lighting, Raytrace Sky Maps and Rigid Body Dynamics. The version, 8.0, added Photon Mapping, Fast soft shadows, area light, Quadratic light drop-off, EXR and 16bit image input support, Displacement Sea Level, new Weight maps tools, much workflow enhancement and Renderama improvements.

In 2009, EITG began negotiations to sell the intellectual property rights of ElectricImage. On January 12, 2010 it was announced that Tomas Egger, Igor Yatsenko, and Igor Ivaniuk had become the new owners of EIAS. Known collectively as "The Igors", Igor Yatsenko and Igor Ivaniuk had been EIAS's primary software developers for many years. They released version 9.0 in November 2012, followed by version 9.1 in June 2013.

Market positioning
The existing customer base for EIAS favors it for its fast renderer, its high output quality, and its camera mapping features. The tool set lends itself particularly well to hard-surface animation/rendering and other forms of non-organic tasks. It is most popular with architects and visual effects artists for TV and film.

EIAS's primary competitors in the integrated 3D package space are Autodesk with Maya, 3D Studio Max and Softimage, Maxon with Cinema 4D, and Newtek with Lightwave 3D.

Components
The Electric Image Animation System is not a single program, but rather a suite of several programs designed to work together. Each of the primary programs handles a particular part of the production workflow:

Animator
Animator is the EIAS animation program. It can directly import 3D models in the Lightwave, 3D Studio, AutoCAD, Maya, and Electric Image FACT formats. In addition to animating models, Animator allows you to set up rendering settings. It efficiently supports the animation of very geometrically complex projects.

Camera
Camera is the EIAS rendering program, known for its speed and high image quality. As of version 9.0, it supports ray tracing, Phong shading, scanline rendering, spatial anti-aliasing, motion blur, caustics, radiosity, Photon mapping, Irradiance Cache, Screen Cache and global illumination. Camera outputs to several file formats, like Quicktime and EI's own Image format. The latter is directly supported by Adobe After Effects CC and Adobe Photoshop CC.

Renderama
Renderama and Renderama Slave compose EIAS's distributed network rendering system. It allows for the rendering of a project to be distributed over a network's computers (i.e., for the formation of a render farm). It supports both single and multiprocessor computers, taking advantage of all available processors to distribute the workload. It also supports rendering across platforms (e.g., Windows 7/8 - 64 bits and Mac OS X 10.6.8 or earlier).

Modeler
Modeler saves its files in Electric Image's "FACT" file format for importing into Animator (see above). It supports ACIS modeling, "ÜberNurbs" (EIAS' subdivision surfaces modeling technology), LAWS (based on parametric formulas) as well as Boolean operations and other modern modeling tools.

Modeler last shipped in Electric Image Universe 5.0. As a result, users of EIAS 5.5 and newer use a third-party modeler instead. Electric Image recommends Nevercenter Silo for this purpose. Form•Z from auto•des•sys is also popularly used as a companion for EIAS.

title: Electric Image Animation System


text:
Exponential growth

[[File:Exponential.svg|thumb|right|300px|The graph illustrates how exponential growth (green) surpasses both linear (red) and cubic (blue) growth.

{{legend|red|Linear growth}} {{legend|blue|Cubic growth}} {{legend|green|Exponential growth}}]]

Exponential growth is a process that increases quantity over time at an ever-increasing rate. It occurs when the instantaneous rate of change (that is, the derivative) of a quantity with respect to time is proportional to the quantity itself. Described as a function, a quantity undergoing exponential growth is an exponential function of time, that is, the variable representing time is the exponent (in contrast to other types of growth, such as quadratic growth). Exponential growth is the inverse of logarithmic growth.

If the constant of proportionality is negative, then the quantity decreases over time, and is said to be undergoing exponential decay instead. In the case of a discrete domain of definition with equal intervals, it is also called geometric growth or geometric decay since the function values form a geometric progression.

The formula for exponential growth of a variable $x$ at the growth rate $r$, as time $t$ goes on in discrete intervals (that is, at integer times 0, 1, 2, 3, ...), is

$$x_t = x_0(1+r)^t$$

where $x_{0}$ is the value of $x$ at time 0. The growth of a bacterial colony is often used to illustrate it. One bacterium splits itself into two, each of which splits itself resulting in four, then eight, 16, 32, and so on. The amount of increase keeps increasing because it is proportional to the ever-increasing number of bacteria. Growth like this is observed in real-life activity or phenomena, such as the spread of virus infection, the growth of debt due to compound interest, and the spread of viral videos. In real cases, initial exponential growth often does not last forever, instead slowing down eventually due to upper limits caused by external factors and turning into logistic growth.

Terms like "exponential growth" are sometimes incorrectly interpreted as "rapid growth". Indeed, something that grows exponentially can in fact be growing slowly at first.

Biology

 * The number of microorganisms in a culture will increase exponentially until an essential nutrient is exhausted, so there is no more of that nutrient for more organisms to grow. Typically the first organism splits into two daughter organisms, who then each split to form four, who split to form eight, and so on. Because exponential growth indicates constant growth rate, it is frequently assumed that exponentially growing cells are at a steady-state. However, cells can grow exponentially at a constant rate while remodeling their metabolism and gene expression.
 * A virus (for example COVID-19, or smallpox) typically will spread exponentially at first, if no artificial immunization is available. Each infected person can infect multiple new people.

Physics

 * Avalanche breakdown within a dielectric material. A free electron becomes sufficiently accelerated by an externally applied electrical field that it frees up additional electrons as it collides with atoms or molecules of the dielectric media. These secondary electrons also are accelerated, creating larger numbers of free electrons. The resulting exponential growth of electrons and ions may rapidly lead to complete dielectric breakdown of the material.
 * Nuclear chain reaction (the concept behind nuclear reactors and nuclear weapons). Each uranium nucleus that undergoes fission produces multiple neutrons, each of which can be absorbed by adjacent uranium atoms, causing them to fission in turn. If the probability of neutron absorption exceeds the probability of neutron escape (a function of the shape and mass of the uranium), the production rate of neutrons and induced uranium fissions increases exponentially, in an uncontrolled reaction. "Due to the exponential rate of increase, at any point in the chain reaction 99% of the energy will have been released in the last 4.6 generations. It is a reasonable approximation to think of the first 53 generations as a latency period leading up to the actual explosion, which only takes 3–4 generations."
 * Positive feedback within the linear range of electrical or electroacoustic amplification can result in the exponential growth of the amplified signal, although resonance effects may favor some component frequencies of the signal over others.

Economics

 * Economic growth is expressed in percentage terms, implying exponential growth.

Finance

 * Compound interest at a constant interest rate provides exponential growth of the capital. See also rule of 72.
 * Pyramid schemes or Ponzi schemes also show this type of growth resulting in high profits for a few initial investors and losses among great numbers of investors.

Computer science

 * Processing power of computers. See also Moore's law and technological singularity. (Under exponential growth, there are no singularities. The singularity here is a metaphor, meant to convey an unimaginable future. The link of this hypothetical concept with exponential growth is most vocally made by futurist Ray Kurzweil.)
 * In computational complexity theory, computer algorithms of exponential complexity require an exponentially increasing amount of resources (e.g. time, computer memory) for only a constant increase in problem size. So for an algorithm of time complexity $2^{x}$, if a problem of size $x = 10$ requires 10 seconds to complete, and a problem of size $x = 11$ requires 20 seconds, then a problem of size $x = 12$ will require 40 seconds. This kind of algorithm typically becomes unusable at very small problem sizes, often between 30 and 100 items (most computer algorithms need to be able to solve much larger problems, up to tens of thousands or even millions of items in reasonable times, something that would be physically impossible with an exponential algorithm). Also, the effects of Moore's Law do not help the situation much because doubling processor speed merely increases the feasible problem size by a constant. E.g. if a slow processor can solve problems of size $x$ in time $t$, then a processor twice as fast could only solve problems of size $x + constant$ in the same time $t$. So exponentially complex algorithms are most often impractical, and the search for more efficient algorithms is one of the central goals of computer science today.

Internet phenomena

 * Internet contents, such as internet memes or videos, can spread in an exponential manner, often said to "go viral" as an analogy to the spread of viruses. With media such as social networks, one person can forward the same content to many people simultaneously, who then spread it to even more people, and so on, causing rapid spread. For example, the video Gangnam Style was uploaded to YouTube on 15 July 2012, reaching hundreds of thousands of viewers on the first day, millions on the twentieth day, and was cumulatively viewed by hundreds of millions in less than two months.

Basic formula
A quantity $x$ depends exponentially on time $t$ if $$x(t)=a\cdot b^{t/\tau}$$ where the constant $a$ is the initial value of $x$, $$x(0) = a \, ,$$ the constant $b$ is a positive growth factor, and $τ$ is the time constant—the time required for $x$ to increase by one factor of $b$: $$x(t+\tau) = a \cdot b^{\frac{t+\tau}{\tau}} = a \cdot b^{\frac{t}{\tau}} \cdot b^{\frac{\tau}{\tau}} = x(t) \cdot b\, .$$

If $τ > 0$ and $b > 1$, then $x$ has exponential growth. If $τ < 0$ and $b > 1$, or $τ > 0$ and $0 < b < 1$, then $x$ has exponential decay.

Example: If a species of bacteria doubles every ten minutes, starting out with only one bacterium, how many bacteria would be present after one hour? The question implies $a = 1$, $b = 2$ and $τ = 10 min$.

$$x(t)=a\cdot b^{t/\tau} = 1 \cdot 2^{t/(10\text{ min})}$$ $$x(1\text{ hr}) = 1\cdot 2^{(60\text{ min})/(10\text{ min})} = 1 \cdot 2^6 =64.$$

After one hour, or six ten-minute intervals, there would be sixty-four bacteria.

Many pairs $(b, τ)$ of a dimensionless non-negative number $b$ and an amount of time $τ$ (a physical quantity which can be expressed as the product of a number of units and a unit of time) represent the same growth rate, with $τ$ proportional to $log b$. For any fixed $b$ not equal to 1 (e.g. e or 2), the growth rate is given by the non-zero time $τ$. For any non-zero time $τ$ the growth rate is given by the dimensionless positive number $b$.

Thus the law of exponential growth can be written in different but mathematically equivalent forms, by using a different base. The most common forms are the following: $$x(t) = x_0\cdot e^{kt} = x_0\cdot e^{t/\tau} = x_0 \cdot 2^{t/T} = x_0\cdot \left( 1 + \frac{r}{100} \right)^{t/p},$$ where $x_{0}$ expresses the initial quantity $x(0)$.

Parameters (negative in the case of exponential decay): The quantities $k$, $e$, and $r$, and for a given $p$ also $k$, have a one-to-one connection given by the following equation (which can be derived by taking the natural logarithm of the above): $$k = \frac{1}{\tau} = \frac{\ln 2}{T} = \frac{\ln \left( 1 + \frac{r}{100} \right)}{p}$$ where $τ$ corresponds to $T$ and to $p$ and $r$ being infinite.
 * The growth constant $k = 0$ is the frequency (number of times per unit time) of growing by a factor $r = 0$; in finance it is also called the logarithmic return, continuously compounded return, or force of interest.
 * The e-folding time τ is the time it takes to grow by a factor e.
 * The doubling time T is the time it takes to double.
 * The percent increase $τ$ (a dimensionless number) in a period $T$.

If $p$ is the unit of time the quotient $t/p$ is simply the number of units of time. Using the notation $t$ for the (dimensionless) number of units of time rather than the time itself, $t/p$ can be replaced by $t$, but for uniformity this has been avoided here. In this case the division by $p$ in the last formula is not a numerical division either, but converts a dimensionless number to the correct quantity including unit.

A popular approximated method for calculating the doubling time from the growth rate is the rule of 70, that is, $$T \simeq 70 / r$$.

Reformulation as log-linear growth
If a variable $x$ exhibits exponential growth according to $$x(t) = x_0 (1+r)^t$$, then the log (to any base) of $x$ grows linearly over time, as can be seen by taking logarithms of both sides of the exponential growth equation: $$\log x(t) = \log x_0 + t \cdot \log (1+r).$$

This allows an exponentially growing variable to be modeled with a log-linear model. For example, if one wishes to empirically estimate the growth rate from intertemporal data on $x$, one can linearly regress $log x$ on $t$.

Differential equation
The exponential function $$x(t) = x_0 e^{kt}$$ satisfies the linear differential equation: $$\frac{dx}{dt} = kx$$ saying that the change per instant of time of $x$ at time $t$ is proportional to the value of $x(t)$, and $x(t)$ has the initial value $$x(0) = x_0$$.

The differential equation is solved by direct integration: $$\begin{align} \frac{dx}{dt} & = kx \\[5pt] \frac{dx} x & = k\, dt \\[5pt] \int_{x_0}^{x(t)} \frac{dx}{x} & = k \int_0^t \, dt \\[5pt] \ln \frac{x(t)}{x_0} & = kt. \end{align}$$ so that $$ x(t) = x_0 e^{kt}.$$

In the above differential equation, if $k < 0$, then the quantity experiences exponential decay.

For a nonlinear variation of this growth model see logistic function.

Other growth rates
In the long run, exponential growth of any kind will overtake linear growth of any kind (that is the basis of the Malthusian catastrophe) as well as any polynomial growth, that is, for all $α$: $$\lim_{t \to \infty} \frac{t^\alpha}{a e^t} = 0.$$

There is a whole hierarchy of conceivable growth rates that are slower than exponential and faster than linear (in the long run). See.

Growth rates may also be faster than exponential. In the most extreme case, when growth increases without bound in finite time, it is called hyperbolic growth. In between exponential and hyperbolic growth lie more classes of growth behavior, like the hyperoperations beginning at tetration, and $$A(n,n)$$, the diagonal of the Ackermann function.

Logistic growth

In reality, initial exponential growth is often not sustained forever. After some period, it will be slowed by external or environmental factors. For example, population growth may reach an upper limit due to resource limitations. In 1845, the Belgian mathematician Pierre François Verhulst first proposed a mathematical model of growth like this, called the "logistic growth".

Limitations of models
Exponential growth models of physical phenomena only apply within limited regions, as unbounded growth is not physically realistic. Although growth may initially be exponential, the modelled phenomena will eventually enter a region in which previously ignored negative feedback factors become significant (leading to a logistic growth model) or other underlying assumptions of the exponential growth model, such as continuity or instantaneous feedback, break down.

Exponential growth bias
Studies show that human beings have difficulty understanding exponential growth. Exponential growth bias is the tendency to underestimate compound growth processes. This bias can have financial implications as well.

Rice on a chessboard
According to legend, vizier Sissa Ben Dahir presented an Indian King Sharim with a beautiful handmade chessboard. The king asked what he would like in return for his gift and the courtier surprised the king by asking for one grain of rice on the first square, two grains on the second, four grains on the third, and so on. The king readily agreed and asked for the rice to be brought. All went well at first, but the requirement for $2^{n−1}$ grains on the $n$th square demanded over a million grains on the 21st square, more than a million million (a.k.a. trillion) on the 41st and there simply was not enough rice in the whole world for the final squares. (From Swirski, 2006)

The "second half of the chessboard" refers to the time when an exponentially growing influence is having a significant economic impact on an organization's overall business strategy.

Water lily
French children are offered a riddle, which appears to be an aspect of exponential growth: "the apparent suddenness with which an exponentially growing quantity approaches a fixed limit". The riddle imagines a water lily plant growing in a pond. The plant doubles in size every day and, if left alone, it would smother the pond in 30 days killing all the other living things in the water. Day after day, the plant's growth is small, so it is decided that it won't be a concern until it covers half of the pond. Which day will that be? The 29th day, leaving only one day to save the pond.

title: Exponential growth


text:
Treaty of Paris (1951)

The Treaty of Paris (formally the Treaty establishing the European Coal and Steel Community) was signed on 18 April 1951 between France, Italy, West Germany, Belgium, Luxembourg, and the Netherlands, establishing the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC), which subsequently became part of the European Union. The treaty came into force on 23 July 1952 and expired on 23 July 2002, exactly fifty years after it came into effect.

The treaty was intended to bring diplomatic and economic stability in western Europe after the Second World War. Some of the main enemies during the war were now sharing production of coal and steel, the key resources which previously had been central to the war effort.

The Europe Declaration, issued by the representatives of the six nations, declared that the Treaty had given birth to Europe. The Declaration emphasised that the supranational principle was the foundation of the new democratic organisation of Europe. The supranational concept was opposed by Charles de Gaulle.

title: Treaty of Paris (1951)