HC Deb 09 February 1900 vol 78 cc1042-4
MR. GIBSON BOWLES

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the. Colonies can he explain the scope and effect of the notice issued by Sir Alfred Milner, High Commissioner for South Africa, on 26th January, 1900, to the effect that Her Majesty's Government will not recognise as valid any forfeiture, charge, fine, encumbrance, conveyance, transfer, or transmission in respect of property situate in the territories of the South African Republic or the Orange Free State which may be declared, charged, levied, created, made, or carried into effect by the governments of those countries subsequent to the outbreak of war; is the word governments intended to include the legislative body, and also the judicial authorities of the two States mentioned, or only their executive governments; does the notice affect transfers of property made by the subjects of the South African Republic or the Orange Free State as between themselves; does it affect transfers of property made by British subjects as between themselves; does it affect transfers of property made between themselves by subjects of Foreign States other than the South African Republic or the Orange Free State, or between such foreign subjects and British subjects; is he aware of any precedent for a notice during war by one belligerent State declaring invalid the executive, legislative, or judicial acts of the other belligerent State in respect of property situate within its own territories to be invalid; and is it the intention of Her Majesty's Government to prosecute the war until the invalidity of the acts contemplated by the notice is recognised by the two States.

THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE COLONIES (Mr. J. CHAMBERLAIN,) Birmingham, W.

Her Majesty's Government has had reason to believe that it was the intention of the Republican Governments to impose burdens which it would be impossible to meet upon property within their territories owned by British subjects and the subjects of other Powers with the object of confiscating such property. It would be impossible for Her Majesty's Government to countenance such confiscation at the termination of the war, whether carried out by an Act of the Executive or under colour of legislation empowering the courts to declare such forfeiture. The text of the notice shows that it has no reference to transactions between individuals. It is not desirable to enter into a discussion of the points raised in questions 6 and 7.