Evening star., 1939-12-09
Military Occupation
Law Explained !
To Bar Unit
Conquered Owe
Invoder Co Operation
For Order, Soys Speaker

Inhabitants of . conquered area
should cooperate with the author
ity of the conquering government
in maintaining an orderly society
In that territory, 1t. Col. E. G. Belts,
professor Of law at the United States
Military Academy, last night told .
joint session Of the Committee on
Military and Naval Law of the Fed
eral Bar Association and the section
on international and comparative
law of the American Bar Associa-
ton at the Mayflower Hotel.
Speaking on "The Law Of Mill
tary Occupation" 1t. Col. Belts
said it becomes the duty and obli-
cation Of the invading government
to maintain an orderly society In
occupied territory. He added, how
ever, that residents in the area also
owe their collaboration and support
to the occupying military authority
in establishing such q society.
Explaining that he was referring
only to military government as ex-
ercised by the United States, the
speaker emphasized that the CO.
operation Of the citizens over whom
military authority Is being exercised
can in no way be treasonous to the
vanquished government.
"A victorious state takes the place
of the sovereignty of the van
quished," he declared, "and endures
until the occupying force exercising
it Is driven out or withdrawn from
the territory in question, or the
civil authority of the government Of
the occupying force, or the authority
of the vanquished enemy is re-
established by treaty and takes over
In fact"
Sees Restrictions ON Invaders.
On the other hand, he asserted,
the occupying military authority
should not be there as an avenging
angel, but has as its principal aim
the preservation of society as 1t is
found in that community and also
the preservation Of property rights
and values as well.
He recalled that during the War
of 1912 between the United States
and Great Britain, the latter had
occupied a section OF what is now
the State of Maine and during the
occupation an American citizen in
the occupied territory had imported
English goods. After the British
Army had withdrawn and the
United States Government had re-
asserted its sovereignty, the Gov
ernment sued the citizen for the
recovery Of import duties on the
goods it claimed he should have
paid to the American Government.
The Supreme Court ruled, how
ever, that the duties were not due
this Government because at the
time the goods were imported the
section Of Maine in which the citi-
zen lived was not American terri
tory.
"By the conquest and military
of portion of the terri
tory of the United States by pub
lic enemy, that portion is to be
deemed q foreign country, so far as
respects our revenue laws" the
court declared. Goods imported
into it are not imported into the
United States and are subject to
such duties only as the conqueror
may impose. The subsequent evac-
uation of the conquered territory
by the enemy and resumption of
authority by the United States can
not change the character of past
Military occupation has two objec-
tives, 1t. Col. Belts said-first, to
promote the military aims of the
occupying force and second, to
maintain the safety of society in
the occupied area.
Military Courts Created.
To aid the occupying force in
carrying out these aims, military
courts are established, he continued.
These tribunals are usually absolute
in character and are not governed
by statutory provisions. They are
not part of the Federal law system.
These courts, he explained, exer-
else no civil Jurisdiction but rule on
only criminal cases, that is, on viola
tions of the laws of war and for
crimes against the civil laws. They
may, moreover, levy assessments
without being compelled to pay
damages to the person whose prop
erty is taken.
For instance, he said, a case in
which. such situation arose dur
ing the Civil War came before the
Supreme Court. The case involved
q suit for damages by an owner of
a Louisiana plantation who had been
forced to deliver over to the military
court in that State a quantity of
livestock and food.
There would be something
absurd in permitting an
officer or soldier of an invading
army to be tried by his enemy, whose
country it had invaded" the
Supreme Court ruling declared.
At the conclusion of his talk, 1t.
Col. Belts was questioned by q
panel including William r. Valance,
chairman of the Section on Inter-
national Comparative Law; Will
liam N. Morell. president of the
Federal Bar Association; Repre-
sentative Duncan, Democrat, of
Missouri; Col. Hugh G. Smith, and
Maj. Gen. Allen w. Gullion, Judge
advocate general of the Army.
Mr.. Valance announced that r.
Regis Noel, former president Of the
Bar Association of the District of
Columbia, had donated a set Of law
books to the United States Military
Academy to be awarded to the
student in international law at the
academy receiving the highest grade
in that subject during the 1939-40
academic year.