Tag: Session 12

Emily's posts

The Right to Asylum: Britain’s 1905 Aliens Act and the Evolution of Refugee Law- Alison Bashford and Jane McAdam

era00011 |

From the 1880s, states and self-governing colonies in America, Australasia and South Africa began to introduce laws to regulate entry of ‘undesirable immigrants’, and Britain followed this trend with the 1905 Aliens Act.

The 1905 Aliens Act was passed in response to the persecution of Eastern European Jews and their forced migration, during which around 120,000 to 150,000 European Jews settled in Britain between 1881 and 1914. The act has been framed as the original basis for further and more substantial restrictions in the 1960s. There was no comprehensive system of regulation or restriction in Britain before this act was passed, except for the Registration of Aliens Act 1836, which was thinly implemented.

The main focus of this article was the asylum provisions which the act gave, which permitted entry to the UK to those who were at risk of persecution or prosecution for political or religious reasons. The asylum clause made a change from previous legislation and inspired the development of future legislation. For example, successive acts were passed in 1914 and 1919.

The article looks at the idea of the ‘right to asylum’ through the interwar and mid-twentieth century period.

The act defined certain immigrants as ‘undesirable’ and detailed processes by which undesirable immigrants could be sent back to their country of origin at many ports, or be deported if already a resident. Undesirable immigrants were defined as those who could not ‘decently support’ themselves and any dependents they may have had, those who were a ‘lunatic or idiot’, or those who had been sentenced for a non-political crime in a foreign country.

The article states that it is not often remembered that the 1905 Aliens Act was the first time an individual’s right to asylum was written into a law, and the article believes that this could be because British officials distanced themselves from the principle.

Sophie's posts

John Stewart, “Angels or aliens? Refugee Nurses in Britain, 1938 to 1942”.

scc00026 |

John Stewart’s “Angels or aliens? Refugee Nurses in Britain, 1938 to 1942” analyses the topic of refugee nurses in Britain during the late 1930s until the early 1940s, examining experiences of the nurses as well as the policies that affected them. He demonstrates that transition from the strict attitude towards refugees to the more relaxed approach which increased in 1942.

Stewart begins the article by explaining that the historiography of refugee women remains relatively poor, therefore emphasises the importance of his discussion on the topic. He then goes on to examine the background to the refugee situation, explaining the push factors that led people to leave their homeland. This included those who fled Poland following German invasion in September 1939. Stewart then goes on to explain that before 1938, Britain was reluctant to take many refugees, operating a limited policy on accepting work permits with the number of foreigners per hospital being restricted to 3 percent of staff. In 1938, the policy remained difficult, however, it became more liberal, as Stewart argues. The approaching war problematised the situation, with certain refugees being classed as “enemy”, many of whom were interned in 1940. Some authorities, including the LCC dismissed their enemy alien staff during this year. However, eventually there was a reduction of restraints and altering of attitude towards refugees, partly due to increased sympathy towards refugees, as well concern over the labour market.

The author places emphasis on the fact that refugees were seen as one way of solving the increased demand for nurses during the war, therefore, the guidelines for refugees were relaxed in order to accommodate this. He notes that during mid-1940, the Nursing and Midwifery Department stated that 130 out of 914 trained nurses and midwives were Czechoslovakian, with the remainder of Austrian and German descent. There was some concern among the British that foreign nurses would “crowd out” nurses from the United Kingdom, however a leading article in 1939 explicitly rejected this claim. Furthermore, Stewart goes on to mention pre-war hostility toward refugee medical practitioners. He argues that one proposed resolution for this was to employ female refugee doctors as nurses.

A section of the article is devoted to producing first-hand evidence of experiences during this period, including Miss Powell, who was responsible for the nursing section of the Ministry of Labour’s International Branch, explaining that she was overwhelmed by the large number of aliens who wanted to contribute.

Stewart concludes the article by stating that “the history of refugee nurses in the late 1930s and early 1940s can be seen as an episode which reflected well on both the host community and the nurses themselves”. He notes the changing position of refugee women from low status domestic work to the higher status nursing sector.

Overall, Stewart provides a detailed account of nurses during this period, using an adequate range of primary sources from both government officials and those in the medical field.

 

Heather's posts

D. Laqua, ‘Belgian exiles, the British and the Great War: The Birtley Belgians of Elisabethville’

Heather |

Laqua’s article, Belgian exiles, the British and the Great War: The Birtley Belgians of Elisabethville, is a good article for understanding Belgian and English relations during the First World War. The article’s central focus is the Belgian colony of Elisabethville in Birtley, a small self-reliant gated community, built to house predominantly conscripted Belgian soldiers unfit for service who worked in the nearby National Projectile Factory. Laqua seeks to show the idea of a complex relationship between the Belgian exiles in Elisabethville and the surrounding Birtley area, and through frequently citing historians such as Kushner and the use of primary newspapers, this is clearly articulated. Laqua further shows Elisabethville as a diasporic Belgian home front due to its blurring of boundaries between the home and battlefront.

In the beginning, there was an outpour of kindness and generosity towards the Belgians. There was great sympathy expressed towards them and their situation, so much so that in November 1914 a fundraiser was held to raise funds for the Belgian relief fund. These charitable pursuits bonded the Belgians in Britain to their homeland, the immigrant community as well as areas of captivity. Belgians provided activities to raise money for English causes as well. Charity, therefore, was a central part of the Belgians role in the war effort and it was certainly not one-way.

However, in 1916 there were visible tensions. After accusations against Belgians Private Stephenson, on the frontline, had to remind readers of the great sacrifice of Belgians. Laqua argues that this showed a multi-layered intersection between Belgium and British home fronts. Furthermore, due to the Belgian Military Authority, Belgians had to wear their uniform during their leisure time. This culminated in riots amongst the Birtley Belgians and resulted in the British military authority stepping in to relax standards, showing victimhood and heroism as debated features within the exile community.

Laqua then points to the Belgians social life in showing their interactions with the rest of the Birtley population.  Sport became an interlinking aspect as it was linked with charity, for example, the Belgian Swimming club holding a fundraiser for Belgian prisoner of war. However, these events came with hostility, with English residents noting their focus on alien policy.  To this, Laqua argues that Belgians were heavily restricted through the Aliens Restriction Act of 1914 as well as the Belgian Military Authority. Despite the restrictions, the Elisabethville Belgians did leave the community. The biggest attraction was Newcastle. Yet there were complaints regarding Belgians and English girls. The courts were involved to tackle Belgian and English relations as there were questions of Belgians causing prostitution, it is here where anti-alien attitudes arose. Yet Laqua shows that binational relationships were not impossible as records show 30% of marriages in Elisabethville to be binational. Therefore, although Elisabethville was different from other Belgian communities it still saw a great degree of intermarriage.

Concerns about Belgian socio-economic impact emerged at various intersects and Lauqa focuses his third section on this topic. The Belgians were stereotyped as lazy and dishonest by many but yet others believed Belgians to be good people. The responses were so contradictory that a local newspaper had to publish an interview with a Belgian worker to address concerns. Belgian exiles were helping Britain by doing work that was needed but yet there were calls that work was being taken from the English. Paired with the suspicion of Belgians driving down wages, it prompted W.T Kelley to write of Belgian optimism in 1917. Tensions persisted and they developed to encompass several areas from healthcare to food. It was always found, however, that these fears were unjust as Elisabethville was a self-reliant community.