1 Droit des Gens, Liv. III, Ch. IV, sec. 63. Vattel adds that in his time it was the practice to allow enemy subjects a period in which to withdraw with their effects.

2 Letters of Camillus, No. XIX.

3 International Law, Part II, p. 42.

4 Völkerrecht (1908), p. 474.

5 Cf. Bonfils, sec. 1053.

6 International Law, 6th ed., p. 386. Other writers who defend the right to detain such persons are Calvo, Droit Int. Pub., Vol. IV, p. 54; Bonfils, Manuel, p. 590; Lawrence, op. cit., p. 390; Twiss, Law of Nations, Vol. II, sec. 50; Rivier, op. cit., Vol. II, p. 230, and Liszt, Das Völkerrecht, sec. 39.

7 Compare Oppenheim in Roxburgh, The Prisoners of War Information Bureau in London, p. vii.

8 Compare Sir Ernest Satow in the Publications of the Grotius Society, Vol. II, p. 7; and Phillipson, International Law and the Great War, p. 30.

9 Sir Edward Grey to Mr. Page, Nov. 9, 1914, House of Commons Sess. Papers, Misc. No. 8 (1915), [Cd. 7857], p. 15.

10 Revue Générale de Droit Int. Pub., 1916, p. 353. Compare the returns of the French census of 1911, Bulletin du Ministère du Travail, Jan.-Feb., 1916, pp. 55 ff., and June, 1916, pp. 234 ff.

11 According to estimates published in Clunet’s Journal de Droit International (1916, p. 157), there were in Paris at the outbreak of the war almost 400,000 foreigners.

12 The total number of aliens registered in the United States on June 5, 1917, in pursuance of the terms of the draft law, was 1,239,179. Of these 111,933 were German subjects (Cong. Record, July 13, 1917, p. 5554). This number, of course, embraced only males between the ages of 21 and 30 years.

13 According to a census taken by the American Association of Commerce in Berlin, there were approximately 1200 Americans in Germany at the outbreak of war between the two countries. Many of these left shortly after the declaration of war, so that in September, 1917, there were hardly more than 700 American citizens in the Empire. New York Times, Sept. 13, 1917.

14 Text in Pulling’s Manual of Emergency Legialation, pp. 6–8, and in Baty and Morgan, War: its Conduct and Legal Results, pp. 470–2.

15 Bentwich in this Journal for July, 1915 (Vol. 9), p. 644.

16 Permits to reside in the prohibited areas appear to have been granted rather freely. In December, 1916, 4294 enemy aliens were reported as residing in these areas. Solicitors Journal and Weekly Reporter, Dec. 30, 1916, p. 162.

17 Many complaints were made of the hardships which the registration requirement entailed in particular cases, e.g., in the case of English women married to Germans. One case was reported of an English woman whose German husband had deserted her twenty years before, but who was required to register and report regularly to the police. Solicitors Journal and Weekly Reporter, Vol. 61, p. 732. By an Order in Council of Aug. 27, 1916, the Secretary of State was authorized to grant exemptions in special cases. Ibid., Vol. 61, p. 741.

18 Licenses were granted to certain German banks from time to time in accordance with the provisions of this order.

19 Sir Ernest Satow, in an article entitled “The Treatment of Enemy Aliens,” published in the Publications of the Grotius Society, Vol. II, p. 8.

20 The British Government stated that in fact it had from the first allowed women and children to leave England, although the German Government had not accorded reciprocity of treatment in respect to women of British nationality.

21 Correspondence between His Majesty’s Government and the United States Ambassador respecting the Release of Interned Civilians, etc., Misc. No. 8 (1915), [Cd. 7857], p. 13.

22 Ibid., p. 16.

23 Ibid., p. 24.

24 The additional correspondence is found in two British White Papers, — Misc. No. 35 (1916) and No. 1 (1917) — issued in continuation of the White Papers already cited.

25 Correspondence between His Majesty’s Government and the United States Ambassador Respecting the Release of Interned Civilians, etc. Misc. No. 8 (1915), [Cd. 7857], pp. 2–3.

25a Compare Williams, , “Treatment of Alien Enemies,” Quarterly Review, Oct., 1915, p. 425 Google Scholar; see also Phillipson, , International Law and the Great War, p. 88 Google Scholar.

26 See the London Weekly Times of July 4, 9, and 11, 1915.

27 London Times, May 11, 1915, p. 10.

28 Ibid., May 13, 1915, p. 9.

29 See the criticism in the London Solicitors Journal and Weekly Reporter, Vol. 60, p. 233, and the London Weekly Times of July 18, 1916.

30 A. C. 260 (1917). Lord Dunfermline dissented in a long opinion. The London Times severely criticized this decision. The decision is also criticized by the Law Quarterly Review of July, 1917, p. 205.

31 Sir Herbert Samuel stated in the House of Commons in July, 1916, that at the outbreak of the war there were about 75,000 Germans and Austro-Hungarians living in England. At the time of his statement, all but 22,000, he said, had either been interned or repatriated. Of these, 10,000 were women, 4000 were friendly aliens, and 1500 were aged people, leaving 6500 to whom exemptions had been granted. London Weekly Times, July 7, 1916. According to a London press dispatch of November, 1916, there were then 32,000 German civilians interned in England, 23,000 of whom were in the Isle of Man camp.

32 London Weekly Times, February 23, 1917.

33 Sir John Simon, speaking near the end of July, 1915, of the work of this committee, stated that it had received 14,117 applications for exemption from internment. These came mostly from Poles, Czechs, Italians and Alsatians. In view of the somewhat lenient treatment accorded to British subjects by the Austro-Hungarian Government, the committee was disposed to show special consideration to the subjects of that country, and particularly to the above mentioned races, since their sympathies were understood to be more or less on the side of the Entente Allies. Sir John stated that the applications of more than 6000 such persons had been granted, and that most of them had been repatriated. Solicitors Journal and Weekly Reporter, July 31, 1915, p. 672.

34 Correspondence between His Majesty’s Government and the United States Ambassador Respecting the Release of Interned Civilians. Misc. No. 8 (1915) [Cd. 7857], p. 19.

35 Entitled, Ausnahmegesetze gegen devischen Private Recht in England Frankreich und Russland (Carl Heyman’s Verlag, Berlin, 1915), especially pp. 193 ff.

36 The German White Book complained especially of harsh and cruel treatment which Germans in the Cameroons are alleged to have received at the hands of the British.

37 See the Red Book entitled, “Collection of Evidence Respecting Violations of the Law of Nations by the Countries at War with Austria-Hungary.”

38 Eric Fisher Wood, The Note Book of an Attaché pp. 2–8. For a French view of the German spy system in France see an article by Georges Prade in the London Weekly Times of May 19, 1916.

39 Wood, op. cit., pp. 6 ff. and 33 ff. There is a deposition in the Austro-Hungarian Red Book, p. 30, which alleges that all German and Austrian shops in Paris were wrecked, but I know from personal knowledge that the statement is entirely without foundation.

40 Permits de séjour to reside at their homes were granted very sparingly, the recipients being for the most part foreigners who had sons in the French army or old men who had lived in France for many years and whose ties with the fatherland had been broken by long absence. The Minister of the Interior stated in the Senate, on March 23, 1916, that not more than 500 permits of the kind had been issued to enemy aliens in Paris and that the number granted in the provinces was very small.

41 Text of the decree in Dalloz, Guerre de 1914, Vol. I, p. 19; Législation de la Guerre, Vol. I, pp. 13–14; Clunet, 1915, pp. 95–96; and Rev. Gén. de Droit Int. Pub., 1915, pp. 7–8.

42 Valery, , De la Condition en France des Ressortissants des Puissances Ennemis, Rev. Gén. de Droit Int. Pub., 1916, p. 356 Google Scholar.

43 Valery, article cited, p. 359.

44 The original order provided for twelve camps, but the number was increased from time to time, until there were fifty-two in the latter part of the year 1915. Clunet, 1916, p. 156. The Minister of the Interior stated, in December, 1915 (Journal des Débats, Dec. 12), that the number of German and Austro-Hungarian subjects then interned in concentration camps was about 45,000. He also stated that the number of aliens who had been “chased” from France since the outbreak of the war was 4700; the number of arrests on the charge of espionage was 1125; the number of persons condemned to death by the councils of war was 55; the number condemned to forced labor was 34; to reclusion 14; to imprisonment 29. Aside from the condemnations by the councils of war, there were a considerable number of condemnations by the judicial courts.

45 Enemy aliens of this class were accorded specially favorable treatment in other respects. Thus, they were allowed the benefit of the moratorium and were granted permits de séjour more freely than were other enemy aliens. Moreover, the measures in respect to sequestration were enforced against them with less rigor. In these respects, also, Bulgarians and Ottomans not actively hostile appear to have been treated with more liberality than were Germans and Austro-Hungarians. See Clunet, 1915, p. 1091; and 1916, pp. 267 and 1634.

46 Valery, p. 362. Regarding the special leniency accorded to enemy aliens in the first group, see also Clunet, 1915, pp. 1091–3, and 1916, pp. 267, 814–16 and 1634. Conditions in a typical concentration camp (Château roux Bitry) are detailed in Clunet, 1916, pp. 478 ff.

47 It was announced in the press dispatches from Berlin on Nov. 24, 1916, that some 20,000 German civilians then interned in France would in accordance with this agreement be released and allowed to return to Germany. The number of Frenchmen in Germany who were repatriated in pursuance of the arrangement was, however, considerably smaller.

48 Text in Clunet, 1916, p. 515.

49 Text in Législation de la Guerre, Vol. I, p. 206, and Rev. Gén., 1915, Docs, p. 38.

50 Inhabitants of Alsace-Lorraine who were French citizens prior to 1871, or descendants of such persons, were excepted.

51 Législation de la Guerre, Vol. II, p. 101; Dalloz, Vol. IV, p. 114.

52 Satow, Treatment of Enemy Aliens, Publications of Grotius Society, Vol. II, p. 8. Serious charges were also made by the French Government against the German authorities for the rough and brutal treatment to which its consuls at Manheim, Düsseldorf, Stuttgart, and other places were subjected. See the reports made by these consuls to their government, Rev. Gén. de Droit Int. Pub., July-Oct., 1915, Docs. pp. 62–64 and pp. 72–73.

The Russian Government also complained of various brutalities to which its nationals in Germany were subjected. See text of a circular communicated to the press by the Russian Embassy at Paris on Jan. 13, 1915, Rev. Gén. de Droit Int. Pub., July-Oct., 1915, Docs. pp. 105–109. Ambassador Gerard says all Japanese in Germany were immediately imprisoned upon the outbreak of war between the two countries. Popular hostility toward Japanese residents, he says, was very strong. No restaurant in Berlin would admit them and they had to be supplied with food by the American Embassy. When Mr. Gerard finally obtained permission for them to leave Germany, he had to send an escort with them to the Swiss frontier to protect them against attack. Gerard, My Four Years in Germany, Philadelphia Public Ledger, Sept. 9, 1917, p. 1.

53 Misc. No. 8 (1915), [Cd. 7857], p. 19.

54 Regarding the legal status of interned civilians in Germany, the Reichsgericht held, in August, 1915, that they were not prisoners of war in the sense in which the term is used in the Hague Convention. They were not, therefore, liable to trial by a military tribunal. Text in Clunet, 1917, pp. 257 ff.

55 Americans in Germany have not as yet been interned. According to an official announcement from Berlin on April 14, 1917, they were to be treated along the same lines as laid down in President Wilson’s proclamation concerning the treatment of Germans in the United States. They appear to have been allowed substantially the same freedom of movement and business activity as was allowed neutral persons, except as to residence in fortified places. According to a press dispatch of April 24, 1917, however, American newspaper correspondents were notified that their presence was no longer “desirable,” and they accordingly transferred their residences to neutral countries.

56 For an elaborate description of life in the Ruheleben Prison camp and the treatment received by the prisoners, see the remarkable book of Israel Cohen entitled, The Ruheleben Prison Camp (New York, 1917). The author was a prisoner in the camp for nineteen months. For the first two years of the war between 4000 and 5000 British subjects were confined in this camp. The number was reduced to some 3000 in 1917 in consequence of the exchange arrangement referred to above. See also the report of an investigation into the conditions of this camp by representatives of the American Embassy in a British White Paper, Misc. No. 3 (1915), [Cd. 8161].

57 These and other charges are contained in a report issued by the Russian Government, the text of which may be found in the Rev. Gén. de Droit. Int. Pub., July-Oct., 1915, Docs. pp. 105–109. See also Coleman Phillipson, International’ Law and the Great War, p. 89.

In December, 1917, an arrangement was entered into between the German and Russian Governments, through the medium of the American Minister at Stockholm and the American Ambassador at Petrograd, for the reciprocal repatriation of all’ women, children, and men over forty-five years of age held as civilian prisoners in both countries. It was stated that the agreement embraced about 100,000 Germans in Russia, although the number of Russians in Germany affected was inconsiderable .

58 Notebook of an Attaché, p. 284. There is reason to believe, however, that the policy of the Austro-Hungarian Government toward Italians was much less liberal, partly, no doubt, because the very large number of Italians in Austria-Hungary, especially in the region which became the theater of hostilities, made the problem of their treatment a more serious one. The Italian Government complained that some 30,000 of its nationals were expelled from Trieste, Gorizia, and Gradisca, none of whom were allowed to return to Italy. They were, instead, loaded on freight cars, it is charged, deported to the interior, and interned in concentration camps, without distinction as to age or sex.

59 Text in Reulos, Manuel des Sequestrés, pp. 444–5, and Clunet, 1916, p. 357.

60 Text in Clunet, 1916, pp. 407–408.

61 Valery, , Condition des Allemands en Italie Postérieurement à la Déclaration de Guerre à l’Autriche, Clunet, 1916, pp. 405–415 Google Scholar.

62 Valery, , La Condition Juridique des Allemands en Italie depuis la Déclaration de Guerre à l’Autriche jusqu’à la Déclaration de Guerre à l’Allemagne et postérieurement à celle-ci, Clunet, 1917, pp. 69 Google Scholar ff.

63 In consequence of the alleged refusal of the German Government to allow Italians access to the German courts, the Bar of Milan addressed a circular to the Bar of the rest of Italy expressing the opinion that it was the duty of all Italian lawyers to refrain from taking cases in which Germans were plaintiffs. Text of the circular in Clunet, 1916, pp. 413 ff.

64 Text of the decree in Clunet, 1916, pp. 1424 ff.; see also ibid., pp. 1074 and 1468.

65 Clunet, 1916, pp. 1712 ff.

English and French subjects in Japan are said to have protested against the exceptional liberality with which the Germans were treated, but the Japanese Government does not appear to have modified its policy.