Onderstaande tekst is niet 100% betrouwbaar

§ 337.


that the claim for costs and damages in this case must be disallowed." § 338. L'expression „goods of enemy origin" a donné lieu aux réflexions suivantes dans le jugement du „Judicial Committee of the Privy Councü" relatif a certains fonds et coupons extra-européens saisis a bord des quatre vapeurs neutres (néerlandais) Noordam, Rotterdam, Zaandijk and Gelria (1339c):

„This appeal relates to various bearer securities found in the mails' • [comp. § 393 et ss.] carried on voyages from Hoüand to the United States by several neutral maü steamers which were stopped anddiverted under the Reprisals Order in Councü of March 11, 1915. They were aü issued by extra-European Governments or companies, although in some cases they were parts of the issues appropriated to Germany. The respondents are neutral claimants, to whom Lord Sterndale, P., sitting in Prize, released these securities. The Procurator-General appeals....

There remains the question of „enemy origin". Origin is a quality of the goods, not of the owners or of their intentions or dealings. To decide where a chattel originates may often be difficult — in the case of things of great durabüity, often impossible. Origin sometimes refers to the place where raw material was produced, but, ex hypothesi, the Reprisals Order goes beyond the general rules appücable to the produce of enemy soü [voir § 3°3] • since existing rules were found inadequate. Origin means sometimes the place of manufacture of an artificial commodity and sometimes it is a thing undiscoverable.

It is not inconsistent with the enemy origin of goods, which come from Germany, that they have previously come into being elsewhere than in Germany. After a certain lapse of time, or certain changes of circumstances, origin may be of üttle more than cürious or antiquarian interest. This Order could not be concerned, for example, with old German machinery, or old German books, or old German wine imported into Holland many years ago. For present purposes there is no utÜity in applying to „goods" ideas appropriate only to human beings, such as the effect of an individual's place of büth, or race, or nationality upon his subsequent rights or obligations.

The best guide is the language and context of the Order itself, and the purpose which it was intended to serve .... [suivent quelques remarques concernant la connexité entre les articles III et IV] . . . . To „origin" in such a connexion neither the place where the securities were printed or signed or sealed is reaüy material, nor the country in which the undertakings, or the debtors from whom the securities emanate, chance to carry on theh affairs .... It is clear, as a common characteristic, that no long time before they were diverted aü had formed part of the common financial stock of Germany's holding in foreign securities. What happened was that, as part of the üquidation of this stock, either to support foreign exchange or to estabüsh foreign credits or otherwise, these securities, no doubt along with many others, were separated from that common stock