"These requisitions and services shall only be demanded on the authority of the Commander in the locality occupied.
"The contributions in kind shall, as far as possible, be paid for in ready money ; if not, their receipt shall be acknowledged and the payment of the amounts due shall be made as soon as possi ble" (Article 52).
In another Article provision, moreover, is made for the utiliza tion of property in kin-I belonging to private persons:— "An army of occupation can only take possession of the cash, funds and property liable to requisition belonging strictly to the state, depots of arms, means of transport, stores and supplies, and, generally, all movable property of the state which may be used for military operations.
"All appliances, whether on land, at sea, or in the air adapted for the transmission of news, or for the transport of persons or things, exclusive of cases governed by naval law, depots of arms, and generally, all kinds of ammunition of war, may be seized, even if they belong to private individuals, but must be restored and compensation fixed when peace is made." (See the Bellot rules referred to infra.) The converse subject of the treatment of subjects of the one belligerent who remain in the country of the other belligerent also was not dealt with at the Hague. British practice in this matter was formerly indulgent, the protection to the persons and property of non-combatant enemies on British soil dating back to Magna Carta (s. 48). The practice on the continent of Europe varied according to circumstances.
In the Great War, however, the property of non-resident enemy subjects was seized and realized and, under the Treaties of Peace, the proceeds were pro tanto applied to compensate for similar treatment of the property of subjects confiscated in enemy states.
Enemy property at sea is subject to different rules from those which govern it on land. It is liable to capture and confiscation wherever found on the high seas or in enemy waters. The United States has made strenuous efforts to get this rule of maritime warfare altered, and immunity from capture accepted as the law of the sea. It has even made this a condition of its accession to the Declaration of Paris. (See NEU TRALITY.) At the Hague Conferences the United States raised the question again, but thus far all that has been done has been to ratify existing exemptions. Exemption from capture is now allowed by belligerents to enemy merchant ships which, at the out break of war, are on the way to one of their ports, and they also allow enemy merchantmen in their ports at its outbreak a certain time to leave them. This is confirmed by the Hague Convention of 1907 No. vi. A somewhat similar practice exists as regards pursuit of merchant ships which happen to be in a neutral port at the same time with an enemy cruiser. Under the Hague Con vention of 1907 No. xiii. respecting the rights and duties of
neutral powers in naval war (Art. 16), this, too, is confirmed. Lastly, there has grown up, on grounds similar to those which have led to the indulgence shown to private property on land, a now generally recognized immunity from capture of small vessels engaged in the coast fisheries, provided they are in no wise made to serve the purposes of war, which also has been duly confirmed in the Hague Conventions of 1907 by Art. 3 of the convention. No. xi. Art. 4 of the same Convention also exempts from bel ligerent interference vessels employed on religious, scientific or philanthropic missions.
The Hague War-Regulations deal fully with the treatment of prisoners, and though they add nothing to existing practice, such treatment is no longer in the discretion of the signatory Powers, but is binding on them. These regulations provide as follows:— They must be humanely treated. All their personal belongings, except arms, horses and military papers, remain their property (Article 4). They can only be confined as an indispensable meas ure of safety, and only so long as circumstances necessitating this measure shall endure (Article 5). The state may utilize the labour of prisoners of war according to their rank and aptitude, with the exception of officers. Their tasks shall not be excessive, and shall have nothing to do with the military operations. Prisoners may be authorized to work for the public service, for private persons, or on their own account. Work done for the state shall be paid for according to the tariffs in force for soldiers of the national army employed on similar tasks, or if there are none in force, then according to a tariff suitable to the work executed. When the work is for other branches of the public service or for private persons, the conditions shall be settled in agreement with the military authorities. The wages of the prisoners shall go towards improv ing their position, and the balance shall be paid them at the time of their release, after deducting the cost of their maintenance (Article 6). The government into whose hands prisoners of war have fallen is bound to maintain them. Failing a special agree ment between the belligerents, prisoners of war shall be treated, as regards food, quarters and clothing, on the same footing as the troops of the government which has captured them (Article 7). Prisoners of war shall be subject to the laws, regulations and orders in force in the army of the state into whose hands they have fallen. Any prisoner of war who is liberated on parole and recaptured, bearing arms against the government to whom he had pledged his honour or against the allies of that government, for feits his right to be treated as a prisoner of war, and can be brought before the courts (Article 12).