Volume Ii Part 20 (1/2)

[Footnote 285: The case of enemy merchantmen seized in a belligerent's territorial waters is, of course, an exception.]

VII

REQUISITIONS AND CONTRIBUTIONS

Vattel, III. -- 165--Hall, -- 140-140*--Lawrence, -- 180--Westlake, II. pp. 96-102--Maine, p. 200--Twiss, II. -- 64--Halleck, II. pp.

68-69--Taylor, ---- 538-539--Moore, VII. -- 1146--Bluntschli, ---- 653-655--Heffter, -- 131--Lueder in Holtzendorff, IV. pp.

500-510--Ullmann, -- 183--Bonfils, Nos. 1207-1226--Despagnet, Nos.

587-590--Pradier-Fodere, VII. Nos. 3048-3064--Rivier, II. pp.

323-327--Nys, III. pp. 368-432--Calvo, IV. ---- 2231-2284--Fiore, III. Nos. 1394, 1473-1476--Martens, II. -- 120--Longuet, ---- 110-114--Merignhac, pp. 272-298--Pillet, pp. 215-235--Zorn, pp.

283-315--_Kriegsbrauch_, pp. 61-63--Holland, _War_, Nos.

111-112--Bordwell, pp. 314-324--Meurer, II. ---- 56-60--Spaight, pp.

381-408--Ariga, ---- 116-122--_Land Warfare_, ---- 416-425--Thomas, _Des requisitions militaires_ (1884)--Keller, _Requisition und Kontribution_ (1898)--Pont, _Les requisitions militaires du temps de guerre_ (1905)--Albrecht, _Requisitionen von neutralem Privateigentum, etc._ (1912), pp. 1-24:--Risley in the _Journal of the Society of Comparative Legislation_, new series, vol. II.

(1900), pp. 214-223.

[Sidenote: War must support War.]

-- 146. Requisitions and contributions in war are the outcome of the eternal principle that war must support war.[286] This means that every belligerent may make his enemy pay as far as possible for the continuation of the war. But this principle, though it is as old as war and will only die with war itself, has not the same effect in modern times on the actions of belligerents as it formerly had. For thousands of years belligerents used to appropriate all private and public enemy property they could obtain, and, when modern International Law grew up, this practice found legal sanction. But after the end of the seventeenth century this practice grew milder under the influence of the experience that the provisioning of armies in enemy territory became more or less impossible when the inhabitants were treated according to the old principle. Although belligerents retained in strict law the right to appropriate all private besides all public property, it became usual to abstain from enforcing such right, and in lieu thereof to impose contributions of cash and requisitions in kind upon the inhabitants of the invaded country.[287] And when this usage developed, no belligerent ever thought of paying in cash for requisitions, or giving a receipt for them. But in the nineteenth century another practice became usual.

Commanders then often gave a receipt for contributions and requisitions, in order to avoid abuse and to prevent further demands for fresh contributions and requisitions by succeeding commanders without knowledge of the former impositions. And there are instances of cases during the nineteenth century on record in which belligerents actually paid in cash for all requisitions they made. The usual practice at the end of the nineteenth century was that commanders always gave a receipt for contributions, and that they either paid in cash for requisitions or acknowledged them by receipt, so that the respective inhabitants could be indemnified by their own Government after conclusion of peace.

However, no restriction whatever was imposed upon commanders with regard to the amount of contributions and requisitions, and with regard to the proportion between the resources of a country and the burden imposed.

The Hague Regulations have now settled the matter of contributions and requisitions in a progressive way by enacting rules which put the whole matter on a new basis. That war must support war remains a principle under these regulations also. But they are widely influenced by the demand that the enemy State as such, and not the private enemy individuals, should be made to support the war, and that only so far as the necessities of war demand it should contributions and requisitions be imposed. Although certain public moveable property and the produce of public immoveables may be appropriated as heretofore, requisitions must be paid for in cash or, if this is impossible, acknowledged by receipt.

[Footnote 286: Concerning the controversy as to the justification of Requisitions and Contributions, see Albrecht, _op. cit._ pp. 18-21.]

[Footnote 287: An excellent sketch of the historical development of the practice of requisitions and contributions is given by Keller, _Requisition und Kontribution_ (1898), pp. 5-26.]

[Sidenote: Requisitions in Kind, and Quartering.]

-- 147. Requisition is the name for the demand for the supply of all kinds of articles necessary for an army, such as provisions for men and horses, clothing, or means of transport. Requisition of certain services may also be made, but they will be treated below in -- 170 together with occupation, requisitions in kind only being within the scope of this section. Now, what articles may be demanded by an army cannot once for all be laid down, as they depend upon the actual need of an army.

According to article 52 of the Hague Regulations, requisitions may be made from munic.i.p.alities as well as from inhabitants, but they may be made so far only as they are really necessary for the army. They may not be made by individual soldiers or officers, but only by the commander in the locality. All requisitions must be paid for in cash, and if this is impossible, they must be acknowledged by receipt, and the payment of the amount must be made as soon as possible. The principle that requisitions must be paid for by the enemy is thereby absolutely recognised, but, of course, commanders-in-chief may levy contributions--see below, -- 148--in case they do not possess cash for the payment of requisitions. However this may be, by the rule that requisitions must always be paid for, it again becomes apparent and beyond all doubt that henceforth private enemy property is as a rule exempt from appropriation by an invading army.

A special kind of requisition is the quartering[288] of soldiers in the houses of private inhabitants of enemy territory, by which each inhabitant is required to supply lodging and food for a certain number of soldiers, and sometimes also stabling and forage for horses.

Although the Hague Regulations do not specially mention quartering, article 52 is nevertheless to be applied to it, since quartering is nothing else than a special kind of requisition. If cash cannot be paid at once for quartering, every inhabitant concerned must get a receipt for it, stating the number of soldiers quartered and the number of days they were catered for, and the payment of the amount must be made as soon as possible.

[Footnote 288: See above, -- 143.]

But it must be specially observed, that neither in the case of ordinary requisitions nor in the case of quartering of troops is a commander compelled to pay the prices asked by the inhabitants concerned. On the contrary, he may fix the prices himself, although it is expected that the prices paid shall be fair.

[Sidenote: Contributions.]

-- 148. Contribution is a payment in ready money demanded either from munic.i.p.alities or from inhabitants, whether enemy subjects or foreign residents. Whereas formerly no general rules concerning contributions existed, articles 49 and 51 of the Hague Regulations now enact that contributions may not be demanded extortionately, but exclusively[289]

for the needs of the army, in order, for instance, to pay for requisitions or for the administration of the locality in question. They may be imposed by a written order of a commander-in-chief only, in contradistinction to requisitions which may be imposed by a mere commander in a locality. They may not be imposed indiscriminately on the inhabitants, but must so far as possible be a.s.sessed upon such inhabitants in compliance with the rules in force of the respective enemy Government regarding the a.s.sessment of taxes. And, finally, for every individual contribution a receipt must be given. It is apparent that these rules of the Hague Regulations try to exclude all arbitrariness and despotism on the part of an invading enemy with regard to contributions, and that they try to secure to the individual contributors as well as to contributing munic.i.p.alities the possibility of being indemnified afterwards by their own Government, thus s.h.i.+fting, so far as possible, the burden of supporting the war from private individuals and munic.i.p.alities to the State proper.[290]

[Footnote 289: As regards contributions as a penalty, see article 50 of the Hague Regulations. See also Keller, _op. cit._ pp. 60-62.]