opinion continued to harden against the British, in practice things became
much tougher and the guidelines were usually interpreted harshly. A report
appearing in the Evening Post
9 in New Zealand in 1916 describes the
observations of a native New Zealander trapped in Berlin on the outbreak of
war. He describes the humiliation of British nationals being ordered to report
themselves every day to the police station nearest their home. Men and
women alike had to report twice a day; they were restricted to a certain
district and compelled to return indoors by eight o’clock at night. Even so,
this was still regarded by some neutrals, such as the Americans, as ‘considerable liberty’.
10 Later, in autumn 1914 following the failure of the German
advance at the Battle of the Marne, things became worse as German policy
makers came to favour a mass internment of all British males between seventeen and fifty five, irrespective of their profession, police record, marital
status or residence. As a result, Robert Le Rossignol soon became one of the
5,500 Britons that Germany interned over the period from November 1914
to November 1918.
11
14.2.1 The German Decision for Internment
By late September, early October, a number of Anglo-German agreements
were in place that permitted the exchange of women, children, the elderly,
doctors and priests etc, but not ordinary men of ‘military age’, largely because
of objections raised by the British War Office and Admiralty. There were
accusations for example that the German army was calling up men as old as
fifty five, that British nationals of military age were being deported as prisoners of war from occupied Belgium and northern France—none of which
was true—but the British subsequently made it known that they would only
countenance an exchange of men over fifty five as opposed to those of forty
five to fifty five who had previously been considered. The Germans in turn
complained of the treatment of their citizens in Britain, of the violent
anti-German riots in Deptford south London in mid October, of the overcrowding in the Newbury detention camp, and of the arrest of reservists
returning home from various parts of the world on neutral ships docking at
British controlled ports, or even being taken on the high seas. As early as 17
October 1914 then, and as a result of the bad faith between the two nations
which severely taxed the mediating skills of the neutral American diplomats in
Berlin and London, the German State seriously considered the internment of
British subjects of military age. These considerations of course took into
account the reports of apparent ‘abuse’ of German civilians in the UK, but
14 Robert’s War 1914–1918
277
much tougher and the guidelines were usually interpreted harshly. A report
appearing in the Evening Post
9 in New Zealand in 1916 describes the
observations of a native New Zealander trapped in Berlin on the outbreak of
war. He describes the humiliation of British nationals being ordered to report
themselves every day to the police station nearest their home. Men and
women alike had to report twice a day; they were restricted to a certain
district and compelled to return indoors by eight o’clock at night. Even so,
this was still regarded by some neutrals, such as the Americans, as ‘considerable liberty’.
10 Later, in autumn 1914 following the failure of the German
advance at the Battle of the Marne, things became worse as German policy
makers came to favour a mass internment of all British males between seventeen and fifty five, irrespective of their profession, police record, marital
status or residence. As a result, Robert Le Rossignol soon became one of the
5,500 Britons that Germany interned over the period from November 1914
to November 1918.
11
14.2.1 The German Decision for Internment
By late September, early October, a number of Anglo-German agreements
were in place that permitted the exchange of women, children, the elderly,
doctors and priests etc, but not ordinary men of ‘military age’, largely because
of objections raised by the British War Office and Admiralty. There were
accusations for example that the German army was calling up men as old as
fifty five, that British nationals of military age were being deported as prisoners of war from occupied Belgium and northern France—none of which
was true—but the British subsequently made it known that they would only
countenance an exchange of men over fifty five as opposed to those of forty
five to fifty five who had previously been considered. The Germans in turn
complained of the treatment of their citizens in Britain, of the violent
anti-German riots in Deptford south London in mid October, of the overcrowding in the Newbury detention camp, and of the arrest of reservists
returning home from various parts of the world on neutral ships docking at
British controlled ports, or even being taken on the high seas. As early as 17
October 1914 then, and as a result of the bad faith between the two nations
which severely taxed the mediating skills of the neutral American diplomats in
Berlin and London, the German State seriously considered the internment of
British subjects of military age. These considerations of course took into
account the reports of apparent ‘abuse’ of German civilians in the UK, but
14 Robert’s War 1914–1918
277