•
60
59
PUBLIC RECORD
Į | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
OFFICE
Reference :--
885/25
PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON
| ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC- COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO
58
APPENDIX A.-REPORTS.
requisition, and the Committee observe that the opinion referred to recommended an application for permanent requisition in the case of the "Lucida.”
In any event the Committee respectfully beg to submit that the advantage to be derived from securing the orders for permanent requisition outweighs any dis- advantage which is likely to result from a discussion in the Prize Court of the precise meaning of Article 2 of the Convention. As, moreover, the Judicial Com- mittee of the Privy Council has already expressly refused to give a binding decision upon this article, it would seem unlikely that any Court of First Instance would attempt to deal with the subject, and, in this connexion, it may be observed that orders for the permanent requisition of detained vessels at first requisitioned temporarily have been made in a number of Oversea Prize Courts without, so far as the Committee are aware, entailing any pronouncement by a Court upon the con- struction to be placed upon the article in question.
In all cases in which vessels sentenced to detention have been, or may here- after be, requisitioned, the Committee would suggest that the Court should, where this has not already been done, be asked under Order XXIX., Rule 4, to fix the amount to be paid by the Crown in respect of the value of the ship for the purpose of such requisition as at the date of her first requisition. This would accord with "Germania," and the decision of the Prize Court at Sydney in the case of the s.8. certain other vessels, which was confirmed by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council.
The Committee would suggest that an application on the lines set out above should be made to the Prize Court in this country in the first instance and the position of the vessels dealt with in the various Oversea Prize Courts could then be reviewed (in case any further applications should be considered advisable in their cases) in the light of the decision of the Court in this country.
The Committee are of opinion that it would be convenient to all parties con- cerned that valuations, as British vessels, should be on record, in order that the maximum liability of the Government to the Prize Court may be ascertained, and that it is desirable that these valuations should be made as soon as may be possible. It is understood that this view is shared by the Ministry of Shipping. The Com- mittee have already concurred in a suggestion by His Majesty's Procurator- General that enemy vessels sentenced to detention by the Prize Court in this country which have been lost while under requisition should be appraised as at the date of their requisition.
The Committee, however, consider that the amount of the compensation to be paid to the enemy owner at the end of the War is not necessarily the amount of The value of the ship the requisitioned value as recorded in the Prize Court.
to which the enemy owner would be entitled should, in the Committee's opinion, be based upon the value at the date of her seizure and not on the value at any later date. This question is also referred to in paragraphs 59-62 of the First Report of the Enemy Claims Committee.
To sum up, we recommend :-
(a) That, except in the case of vessels which have been lost, the existing orders for the temporary requisition of vessels claiming the benefit of Article 2 of the Sixth Convention of the Second Peace Conference at the Hague should, if possible, be converted into orders for requisition under Order XXIX.. Rule 2;
(b) That the Prize Courts dealing with cases of requisitioning (including those in which orders for requisition under Order XXIX., Rule 2, have already been obtained) should, where this has not already been done, be asked to assess the values of the vessels for the purpose of the requisition as at the date of the first requisition in each case, and as British vessels, and that the valuations should be made as soon as may be possible; and
(c) That application in the sense of the foregoing recommendations should first be made to the Prize Court in this country. The position of the orders made in the Oversea Prize Courts in these matters might then be reviewed in the light of the decision of the Prize Court in this country.
EDMOND J. W. SLADE,
for the Committee.
G. JONES,
Acting Secretary.
30th September, 1918.
4359
APPENDIX A.-REPORTS.
Annexure to (1).
TREASURY to Oversea Prize Disposal COMMITTEE.
SIR,
Treasury Chambers, 1st November, 1918. I AM directed by the Lords Commissioners of His Majesty's Treasury to transmit herewith copy of a letter of to-day's date which they have caused to be addressed to His Majesty's Procurator-General.
Enclosure.
I am, &c.,
T. L. HEATH.
SIR,
Treasury Chambers, 1st November, 1918. I AM directed by the Lords Commissioners of His Majesty's Treasury to transmit herewith copy of the Seventh Interim Report of the Oversea Prize. Disposal Committee on the subject of the steps which might usefully be taken at the present time with a view to simplifying the settlement at the end of the War in respect of the enemy vessels sentenced to detention under Article 2 of the Sixth Convention of the Second Peace Conference at the Hague, in the event of it being decided that this article shall be put into force; and I am to request you to take appropriate action in accordance with the report with which you have expressed
concurrence.
I am to add that such action will, of course, be without prejudice to any more drastic steps which may be taken in connexion with the terms of Peace.
I am, &c.,
His Majesty's
Procurator-General.
4323
(2)
ROBERT CHALMERS.
EIGHTH INTERIM REPORT OF THE OVERSEA PRIZE DISPOSAL COMMITTEE.
MAY IT PLEASE YOUR LORDSHIPS,
THE Committee appointed by Treasury minute of 11th November, 1914, and further empowered by Treasury minute dated the 4th September, 1918, to consider and make recommendations as to the extent to which prize and detained enemy. vessels (including vessels dealt with in the Prize Court in this country) can be utilized for the replacement of requisitioned vessels lost through war risk, and as to the action necessary to effect transfer to the owners of lost vessels, and to advise upon the financial and other arrangements incidental thereto, beg to submit the following report upon their last reference. For the sake of convenience, a copy of a letter from the Ministry of Shipping, proposing the scheme about to be discussed, is appended.
The Committee assume that the responsibility for the policy of disposing of the vessels in this manner, and for the financial terms on which they are so disposed of, will rest with the Departments concerned, and that they are asked only to advise as to the practicability of the proposal and the steps necessary to enable it to be carried out.
Notwithstanding this view of their reference the Committee feel it is incum- bent upon them to draw attention to the possibility that the Allied Governments with which His Majesty's Government have entered into agreements concerning the admission of the subjects of the one to the sales of prizes by the other, may feel aggrieved if prize vessels are transferred to British subjects without subjects of the countries in question being given an opportunity of purchasing. Committee do not feel competent to dwell upon this aspect of the matter in any detail, but they would suggest that the point is one deserving of careful consideration. Although this is not definitely stated in the letter from the Ministry of Shipping, the Committee have assumed that it is not proposed to transfer vessels under the scheme to any but British subjects.
The
i