to a wholesale arrest of British subjects in Germany, since, owing to the small number of them, the scattered condition in which they live, and the different character of the classes to which they belong, they could not, under any circumstances, be regarded as constituting the same danger to Germany that the masses of German subjects in Great Britain constituted to that country.22 On November 9, 1914, the American Ambassador at London received a telegram from Berlin, announcing that British subjects between seventeen and fifty-five had been interned, except clericals, doctors, and women, and British subjects from colonies or protectorates where Germans were not interned. Germany renewed its offer to release men over forty-five if England would do so. Sir Edward Grey, on November 12, replied, denying that there had been any general arrest of Germans over forty-five years of age, but that only individual suspects had been subjected to such treatment. Steps, he said, were being taken to release and send back to Germany all persons detained who were over fifty-five years of age, except a few suspects. Of the 27,500 male Germans above the age of seventeen in England, only 8,600 had been interned, leaving 18,900 at liberty, and of those interned 600 had been released within the last two or three weeks.23 The correspondence between the two governments regarding the matter continued throughout the years 1915 and 1916. 24 The German Government desired first of all a general release by each belligerent of all civilians without exception held by the other. The British Government took the position that it could not afford to exchange the entire German population resident in Great Britain for the British. population in Germany, owing to the very great disproportion in their numbers. Finally, all hope of reaching an agreement on the basis of the British proposal having passed, the British Government, "from motives of humanity," yielded and agreed to release all German male civilians over forty-five years of age, provided Germany would release all British 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. male civilians then held as prisoners. The British Government, however, insisted on a stipulation to the effect that each party to the agreement must have the right to detain for military reasons at least twenty persons who would otherwise be eligible for release. The German Government expressed regret that the British Government could not see its way clear to accept its proposal for the reciprocal release of all civilian prisoners, but nevertheless it agreed to accept the proposal for the release of all males over forty-five years of age as the only means of preventing the failure of the agreement. This agreement was definitely concluded in January, 1917. According to the London press dispatches, Germany obtained under this agreement the release of about 7000 of her subjects held as interned civilian prisoners in England and the Dominions, whereas Great Britain on her part secured the repatriation of some 600 or 700 British subjects held in Germany. It is unfortunate that an agreement for the release and repatriation of all interned civilians on both sides was never reached, but the very unequal numbers held by both belligerents made the problem a very difficult one. The British Government was quite aware that in case it released the entire German civilian population in return for the release of the comparatively small number of British subjects held in Germany, the effect would be to strengthen the military power of Germany out of all proportion to the military benefit which Great Britain herself would have derived from the repatriation of her own. civilians held in Germany. The British Government can hardly be reproached, therefore, for insisting on a system of exchange on a man for man basis. It would seem, however, that the difficulty might have been obviated by a system of parole under which all civilians held by each belligerent could have been released under a pledge not to reënlist in the army or take part in military operations upon their return home. It was quite apparent, however, that the British Government was not prepared to trust so much to German honor. An arrangement was early reached providing for the exchange of invalids and other persons who were incapable of performing military service, but Germany hesitated whether it should refuse to release retired military and naval officers who were at German health resorts at the outbreak of the war.25 After a protracted correspondence an agreement was also reached for the reciprocal exchange of such diplomatic and consular representatives as were detained in the two countries. An arrangement was early made between the British and AustroHungarian Governments by which male subjects under the age of seventeen and over fifty, together with physicians, clergymen, invalids, without regard to age, and of course women and children, were reciprocally released. Misc. No. 35 (1916) [Cd. 8352]. The controversy in regard to the age limit of persons capable of military service, which prevented for many months an agreement between the British and German Governments, did not arise between England and AustriaHungary. It appears that in other respects the policy of the British Government concerning the treatment of Austro-Hungarian nationals in England was marked by exceptional leniency owing to the liberal treatment by the Austro-Hungarian Government of British subjects in that country.258 The policy of the British Government in the beginning was to interfere as little as the public safety permitted with the liberty of enemy aliens. Only suspects, those likely to prove dangerous in case they were left at large, and persons likely to become a public charge, were arrested and interned. Naturally, in consequence of the excitement and general confusion, many persons were hastily arrested and sent off to concentration camps on unfounded suspicion, only to be subsequently released.26 According to a statement made in the House of Commons by the Prime Minister in May, 1915, about 19,000 Germans and Austro-Hungarians were then interned in various camps, leaving some 40,000 still at liberty. There was no thought at first of interning the entire enemy alien population, but in consequence of various acts of the Germans, such as the bombardment of West Hartlepool, Scarborough, and Whitby; the dropping of Zeppelin bombs on undefended towns; the use of 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; see also Phillipson, International Law and the Great War, p. 88. 26 See the London Weekly Times of July 4, 9, and 11, 1915. asphyxiating gases; the reports of ill-treatment of British prisoners, and the like, public opinion in England was gradually aroused, and it was turned to wrath by the sinking of the Lusitania in May, 1915. The growing indignation against the Germans manifested itself in various forms, such as the exclusion of persons of German origin from the commercial exchanges, 27 the boycotting of German shops, maltreatment of unoffending individuals, and the like. The sinking of the Lusitania caused wave of indignation to sweep over England which was speedily followed by mob outbreaks in various parts of the United Kingdom and in the overseas Dominions, in which many German houses and shops were wrecked or looted. In the east end of London, especially, the damage done by the rioters was very great. In Liverpool the value of property destroyed was estimated at $2,000,000. In various other places the losses reported were large. In the town of West Ham the riots lasted for several days and the damage done was estimated at a half million dollars. Mr. McKenna stated in the House of Commons that 257 persons, of whom 107 were police or special constables, were injured in the riots at London. In some communities the rioters made no distinction between unnaturalized Germans and British subjects of German origin,28 but proceeded on the assumption that once a German, always a German. Occasionally also native-born British subjects were made the object of attack through mistake, and instances were reported of the destruction of houses belonging to persons of English, Swiss, and Russian nationality, who bore Teutonic names. In Victoria, British Columbia, the sinking of the Lusitania was followed by an outbreak against German establishments, and the city had to be put under martial law. At Johannesburg a series of violent anti-German demonstrations took place, which culminated in the wrecking, wholly or in part, of some fifty German and Austrian houses and the destruction of their contents. The total damage done was estimated to exceed $1,000,000. At Cape Town, Port Elizabeth, Pretoria, Maritzburg, Kimberley, Bloemfontein, and other places serious disorders took place and considerable damage was done. The occur27 London Times, May 11, 1915, p. 10. 28 Ibid., May 13, 1915, p. 9. rence of these outbreaks was deeply deplored by the great majority of the English people, although, in view of the strong provocation occasioned by the barbarities of the German army and navy, they were regarded as the natural manifestations of an outraged public opinion. In consequence of the intense anti-German feeling throughout the empire, a widespread popular demand was made for the internment of the entire German population, partly in their own interest, since it was impossible to protect them against mob violence so long as they remained scattered or isolated among the English population, and partly in the interest of the national defense, since they constituted a danger to the realm so long as they were left at large. Popular meetings were held in various places at which addresses were made and resolutions adopted calling on the government to adopt vigorous measures. At a meeting at the Mansion House, called "to formulate a protest by the women of Great Britain and Ireland," a resolution. was adopted demanding that steps be taken "to free the country from the menace of the alien enemy in our midst." On the same day a great public demonstration was held in which thousands of the general public are said to have stood in a drenching rain and cheered speeches calling for the internment of the Germans. The following resolution was then adopted: Thousands of citizens of London, gathered together at a mass meeting, unanimously protest against any kith and kin of German mutilators, poisoners, and murderers of men, women, and children being any longer allowed to be at large in the English islands, and, fearing riots, fires, and spread of disease germs and poisoned water, hereby unanimously demand that the government take immediate steps to intern or deport all alien enemies, male or female, whatever their nationality, naturalized or otherwise. Deputations from the Stock Exchange, the Baltic Exchange, Lloyds, and the Corn Exchange, after meeting on the steps of the Royal Exchange, marched to the House of Commons and presented a petition to the Attorney General, which called attention to "the grave danger that exists by allowing alien enemies to remain at large in the country." The popular demand for wholesale internment of the enemy population was so great that the government was compelled to yield, and |