ECONOMIC WAR

Dominion, Volume 33, Issue 92, 12 January 1940, Page 9

ECONOMIC WAR

British Action Against Nazi Exports

EFFECTIVE ALREADY

Neutrals Cancel Orders For Goods

(British Official Wireless.) (Received January 11, 7 p.m.) RUGBY, January 10.

Information reaching official circles here from all over the world indicates that the effect of British reprisals against German exports is already being felt after the scheme has been in operation only one month. Many orders for German goods from overseas neutrals have been cancelled, and it is clear that the cause for this is difficulty of shipment of German goods, when shipping and insurance agencies demand certificates of origin, verified by British or French control. Authorities in London have taken precautions to meet attempts to export goods from Germany under cover of neutral agencies. It is also realized that attempts may be made to establish German-owned and operated factories in neutral countries, to manufacture goods which would, in fact, be of German origin, but which would bear neutral trade marks. In official quarters in London it is confirmed that such goods would not Ibe recognized as genuine neutral goods, and would be liable to ■the same treatment as other German exports. Action Held Legal. Dr. J. L. Brierley, Professor of International law at Oxford, in a broadcast talk, discussed the legal aspect of the British blockade of German exports as it affected neutrals. The German violation of the Declaration of Paris by the sinking of both Allied and neutral merchant ships regardless of their nature, ownership, or the destination of their cargoes, the violation of the submarine protocol by which she undertook as recently as 1936 not to sink merchant ships without assuring the safety of their crews, the violation of the eighth Hague Convention, which bound her not to lay mines without taking every possible precaution for the security of peaceful shipping, he said, rendered perfectly justifiable, according to international law, the British retaliatory action of seizing German exports. Admittedly neutrals were adversely affected, but the British Prize Court was laying down good Au-w when in similar circumstances during the last war it stated: “The right of retaliation is the right of the'belligerent and not a concession by a neutral.” Retaliation was a legal right which could not always be exercised without affecting neutrals, and for the law to lay down that in no circumstances must it do so would be to take away with one hand what.the law had given with the other. It was the definite policy of the Germans to attack ‘Britain through neutrals by illegally sinking neutral ships so as to prevent them trading with Britain. All that could be done was to ensure that retaliatory action inflicted as little inconvenience as possible on neutrals. That certainly was being done in the present British retaliatory action. Under the Order in Council a neutral ship incurred no penalty, but was merely required to discharge goods laden in a: German port or which were of German origin. Contraband Control. During the week ended January 6 the British contraband control intercepted and detained 6200 tons of contraband goods, of which there was evidence that they were destined for Germany. The total included 2400 tons of petroleum and allied products, 1000 tons of pig lead, 1400 tons of miscellaneous foodstuffs, 800 tons of non-metallic products, 150 tons of oils and.fats, 100 tons of various ores, metals and other commodities. British contraband control has in the first 18 weeks of war detained a total of 544,000 tons. On January 9 48 neutral ships were in the three United Kingdom contraband control bases, of which 24 had been in five days or lees. During the week ended January 6 the contraband committee considered the cargoes of 105 ships, which arrived since December 30 and 36 outstanding cargoes from the previous week. In 84 cases the entire cargoes were released. The system under which manifests of cargoes are received and considered before a ship’s arrival resulted during the week in 43 cases being so dealt with, and in 31 cases the ships concerned were released subject merely to formal checking. The Ministry of Economic Warfare states that since the navicert system was introduced over 5000 navicerts have already been approved. The largest number of applications come from the United States, while Argentina takes second place, followed by Brazil and Uruguay. A Press Association message states that cargoes examined last week were: Norwegian 25, Netherlands 28, Italian 26, Swedish 12, Belgian 7, Danish 8, British 5, Greek 7, American 5. Eighty-four complete cargoes were released. Only one Italian and one American ship were detained longer than five days.

FISHERMAN’S TALE

Submarine Caught In Net,

But It Got Away

The story comes from .Denmark of how a Danish fisherman caught a submarine in his net.

Ho was fishing off the north coast of Jutland when something caught his boat and pulled it with tremendous force. lie saw the periscope and shape of a submarine. His boat was towed for from five to ten minutes till the net broke.

The fisherman reported, regretfully, stated a Davcntry broadcast, that (lie submarine got away.—By radio.

CANADIAN WHEAT

Big Sale To Allies

WINNIPEG, January 10.

It is understood tiiat 22.000.000 bushels of wheat and Hour were Sold today to overseas countries, mostly to the Allied Cereals Board. This is fihe largest sale wirns 1P35.