File 3104/1915 Pt 2 ‘German War: conquered territory: status: question of trading; looting, etc., of goods by Turks’ [‎74v] (153/493)

2
* . j • i „ + i. Q t nTlv further action need be taken i.j the matter,
information extends, consider tha < ^ ^ to enclose CO pi e3 0 f the correspondence*
To Governor-General, Nigeria, 4th April. no t e d ill the margin, in which the position
To ditto. 3rd June. ig more f u Uy explained, and to reter to the^
letter from this Department of the 5th April t enclosing copi«» of twrespondence^|
relating to the management of enemy-owned plantations in , „ orr A SDonc | ence
(c) In the cases of Samoa and AV«- Guinea I am to refer cor espondence
terminating with your letter of the 26th October.^ I am to point out that, so tai
“3the former territory, it would seem that grounds o military necessity
for the action taken were afforded by the repeated efforts particulars as t< b
are available in this Department, made by enemy traders o eo ,
ship regulations and the law as to trading with the enemy, and also b\ the effect
of the continuance of enemy trade on the minds of the native population, as
indicated in the telegram from the Governor of New Zealand,§ a copy of which was
enclosed in the Colonial Office letter of the 8th February last. ] The Governments
of the Commonwealth of Australia and of New Zealand have, however, keen
invited to furnish full particulars by telegramU (copy enclosed herewit ) of the
action actually taken in these territories and the grounds on which such action was
taken, and the contents of any replies which may be received from those Governments
will be communicated to von in due course.
(d) German South-West Africa* —No action has been taken for the liquidation
of enemy firms.
(e) German East Africa.—I am to refer to the correspondence ending with
the Foreign Office letter of the 26th August,** and to point out that it is not at
present contemplated that any steps should be taken beyond tlie appointment of
controllers of enemy businesses, unless it should be found desirable on grounds of
military necessity to deport or intern enemy subjects carrying on business in that
territory, or unless events should prove that the carrying on of such business by
enemy subjects, even under control, constitutes a menace to the safety of the occupy
ing Government, or is assisting the German Government in carrying on the War.
4. Mr. Long is not aware to what lengths the German Government has pro
ceeded in the matter of trade restrictions in the occupied parts of Belgium and
of France, but the general course of enemy legislation on this subject (see enclosures
in your letters of the 8th July, of the 11th September, and of the 10th October! t)
would, subject to what is said immediatelv hereafter, appear designedly to have
followed the general lead given by the legislation enacted by the Imperial Parlia
ment, and to indicate a desire to avoid any appearance of initiating a confiscatory
policy. It is remarkable, however, that, so far as the German order of the 29th
August, 1916, is concerned Germany would seem actually to have adopted in the
occupied part of Belgium a more drastic policy than that hitherto adopted by this
country in German territory occupied by British forces.
5. In territories occupied by the British forces there have, as already
indicated, been only partial or conservative liquidations, and, so far as is known,
no sales of German real estate or other permanent assets have taken place. The
German Government, on the other hand, so far as British firms in Belgium are
concerned, would seem to have adopted the policy of complete liquidation, including
sale of land, goodwill, and other permanent assets. This policy the British
Government has only employed hitherto in British territory. The German policy
in Belgium is, therefore, actually more severe than that hitherto adopted by His
Majesty s Government in occupied territory. Moreover, it would seem, so far as
it is a policy of reprisal, to be founded on the procedure adopted by His Majesty’s
Government with reference to enemy firms on British territory, and, as the order
of the 29th of August, 1916, w r as issued at a date when the nature of the action
taken by His Majesty’s Government in occupied territory in Togoland and the
Pacific must hfHe been well known to the German Government, Mr. Long sees no
reason to apnrehend thnt that action will lead to retaliation on the occuoied
territory of Belgium and France.
• ^ ^ n -i^L Se c ^ rcunis ^ anres Long desires me to exnress the hope that no
necision will be come to at the proposed conference with the French and Belgian
xov^rnments which would conflict with the poliev hitherto adopted in enemy
terntory under the occupation of His Ma jestv’s forces, or would prevent the exten-
sion of that pohev to German East Africa should it become desirable, for reasons
of military necessity similar to those which arose in Togoland, so to extend it.
* Nos.
t No.
t No.
§ No.
II No.
T No.
No.
ft Nos.