Page 127
Page 127
Page 127
17
MR. RUNCIMAN pointed out that it also included marine risks. He knew cases where 12 per cent. was charged and paid against these alone.
THE PRIME MINISTER said that the conclusion seemed to be that the question of principle was, one for the Cabinet to decide. For the rest, Sir Hubert Llewellyn Smith's Scheme appeared to present points of superiority over those examined by Mr. Austen Chamberlain's Committee, and, without prejudice to the principle, he thought that they might accept the recommendation of the Standing Sub-Commi tee in paragraph 27 and refer it for examination and elaboration in detail to a purely technical Sub-Committee.
(Conclusion.)
1. The principle of a national guarantee or insurance of vessels and cargoes against war risks when the United Kingdom is a belligerent is reserved for the consideration of the Cabinet.
2. The Scheme for the National Insurance of vessels and cargoes in time of war in which the United Kingdom is a belligerent suggested by Sir Hubert Llewellyn Smith, should be examined and elaborated in detail by a technical Sub-Committee, without prejudice to the question of principle.
1
NEUTRAL
VII-GRANT OF CLEARANCE IN TIME OF WAR TO
VESSELS ENTERING A BRITISH PORT WITH ARMS, &c., ON BOARD INTENDED FOR A FOREIGN DESTINATION.
(C.I.D. paper 158--B.)
SIR EYRE CROWE said that a decision was taken at the 119th meeting of the Committee to the effect that-
*
"The Customs Officer should take notice of any cargo which is not to be landed in the United "Kingdom on board a neutral ship in port on the outbreak of war, or which comes into port after the outbreak of war, without regard to the time for which she remains in port. He should also "require contraband of war, or any goods prohibited by proclamation to be exported, which may be "found on board such a neutral ship to be unloaded."
The Customs officer was empowered to take action, after proclamation by "The Customs and Inland Revenue Act, 1879," and "The Exportation of Arms Act, 1900.” Prohibition of export might be required on two grounds, either that we wanted the particular articles ourselves or to prevent their reaching the enemy. Such articles could not be touched in this country until there was an attempt made to break the law by exporting them. The effect of the decision of the Committee as it stood was to place a presumably innocent neutral who had shipped the articles from oversea to a foreign destination in a worse position than a person in the United Kingdom.
Such action would provoke bitter resentment, and, except where goods were contraband, would violate the Declaration of Paris. In reality, most of the articles the export of which was likely to be prohibited, would come under the head of contraband if they had an enemy destination. In that case they would be liable to capture, but they would have to go before a Prize Court for condemnation.
SIR LAURENCE GUILLEMARD said that the Board of Customs and Excise had merely referred the matter to the Committee originally for instructions.
(Conclusion.)
The conclusion arrived at by the Committee at its 119th meeting, directing the Customs officer to require contraband of war or any goods prohibited by proclamation to be exported which may be found on board a neutral ship in port on the outbreak of war, or which comes into a port after the outbreak of war to be unloaded, should be limited to contraband and should exclude from its operation goods prohibited to be exported.
Page 127
Page 127