We cannot be expected to refute all these allegations. Many are utterly ridiculous: for example, the story of the narcotics at the Liége Post Office; that of the fingers cut off the dead and wounded and then carefully preserved in a bag (one may well ask why); that of the boiling oil is no better: try to imagine the incredible store of oil that must have been possessed by the women who killed and wounded therewith 2,000 Germans; moreover, either the German army does not march down the middle of the street, or else the women had special apparatus to throw jets of boiling liquid to a distance without danger to themselves.
Let us confine ourselves to examining the legend of the gouged-out eyes. It is that which crops up most frequently under the pens of the German publicists, so well calculated is it to arouse horror and indignation in the readers. Well! its falsity appears from an inquiry made by the Germans themselves. Not only have their newspapers—notably theKölnische VolkszeitungandVorwärts—on several occasions done justice upon this lie, but an official commission, instituted by the German Government, has also admitted that there is nota single casein which a wounded German soldier has been intentionally blinded (seeBelgian Grey Books, Nos. 107, 108).
The Germans themselves admit that the accusationis unfounded. Has their Press for that reason ceased to make use of it? We little know the Germans if we imagine that it has. The entire Press continues imperturbably to spread these abominable calumnies. TheKölnische Zeitungof the 15th February (four o'clock edition), referring to an article by Étienne Girau, pastor of the Walloon community of Amsterdam, once more declares that the Belgians have ill-treated the German wounded. It is enough to make one ask whether the Belgians have notmorallyblinded all the "intellectuals" of Germany.
Another example. In February 1915—that is, when no honest German could any longer believe in the legend of the gouged-out eyes—Vorwärtsprotested against a little work by a Pastor Conrad, of which 150,000 examples were printed and sold at 8 pfennigs per copy to school-children, in which the Belgians were still accused of having blinded their prisoners (N.R.C., 12th February, morning edition).
The Berlin Government also acts as though it was ignorant of the conclusions of its own commissions of inquiry. Wishing to refuse General Leman, a prisoner in Germany, the privilege of receiving a visit from his daughter, it based its refusal on the atrocities of which German soldiers have been the victims in Belgium, and on the inhuman fashion in which the Belgians have treated the wounded and prisoners in their hands. The second accusation is as ill-founded as the first. The German soldiers taken prisoner by the Belgians were interned in Bruges; they made no complaints, far from it (pp.56-8); as for the wounded in our hospitals, here are precise facts.
Let us quote, first of all, from the correspondence published in theNieuwe Rotterdamsche Courant,giving a few details from letters written by the German wounded under treatment in Antwerp.
How the Belgians treat their German Prisoners.A private correspondent writes to us from Antwerp:—The fact of knowing that the prisoners of war of the belligerent States are treated as well as possible should also touch the hearts of the Dutch.... I give you here some extracts from the letters of wounded Germans under treatment in the hospitals of Antwerp.I am in a very good Belgian hospital and they treat me very well.Karl Hintzman, Military Hospital, Antwerp.I am very well looked after and have very good food.Georg Storck.They treat us very well in Belgium. What the German papers said in the summer about the Belgians is utterly untrue. The Germans could not look after us better. Moreover, the nation is highly developed.Franz Crauwerski.A number of comrades are here. We are extraordinarily well looked after. Everybody is very kind to us.Richard Kustermann.Several comrades of my company are here. I am very well looked after. One could not look after us better in Germany.Peters.We could not hope for better care.Walter Schumann.The medical treatment is very good. We are sounded every day, and our wounds are dressed daily. The doctors are very capable here. We have food in abundance; all is excellent.Hossbach,Sölliger(Braunschweig).It must not be forgotten that the majority of these prisoners fell into the hands of the Belgians at Aerschot, where the Germans had imprisoned several hundreds of civilians in the church, at the time of the investment of the town. I can speak from experience. The German prisoners are treated with fully as much kindness in other parts of the country. At the house of the commandant of theservice de gardein Bruges I saw an assortment of German books and card games which had been sent by Mme. E. Vandervelde, who had visited the prisoners a few days earlier in the company of her husband, Minister of State and the Socialist leader of Belgium. The latter wished to make sure that the prisoners lacked for nothing.We can say that Belgium does not seek to avenge her unheard-of sufferings by maltreating the German victims of the war. Suffering evokes pity in a sane mind. I can only express the hope that these proofs may fall into the hands of German readers.(N.R.C., 8th October, 1914, morning edition.)
How the Belgians treat their German Prisoners.
A private correspondent writes to us from Antwerp:—
The fact of knowing that the prisoners of war of the belligerent States are treated as well as possible should also touch the hearts of the Dutch.... I give you here some extracts from the letters of wounded Germans under treatment in the hospitals of Antwerp.
I am in a very good Belgian hospital and they treat me very well.Karl Hintzman, Military Hospital, Antwerp.I am very well looked after and have very good food.Georg Storck.They treat us very well in Belgium. What the German papers said in the summer about the Belgians is utterly untrue. The Germans could not look after us better. Moreover, the nation is highly developed.Franz Crauwerski.A number of comrades are here. We are extraordinarily well looked after. Everybody is very kind to us.Richard Kustermann.Several comrades of my company are here. I am very well looked after. One could not look after us better in Germany.Peters.We could not hope for better care.Walter Schumann.The medical treatment is very good. We are sounded every day, and our wounds are dressed daily. The doctors are very capable here. We have food in abundance; all is excellent.Hossbach,Sölliger(Braunschweig).
I am in a very good Belgian hospital and they treat me very well.
Karl Hintzman, Military Hospital, Antwerp.
I am very well looked after and have very good food.
Georg Storck.
They treat us very well in Belgium. What the German papers said in the summer about the Belgians is utterly untrue. The Germans could not look after us better. Moreover, the nation is highly developed.
Franz Crauwerski.
A number of comrades are here. We are extraordinarily well looked after. Everybody is very kind to us.
Richard Kustermann.
Several comrades of my company are here. I am very well looked after. One could not look after us better in Germany.
Peters.
We could not hope for better care.
Walter Schumann.
The medical treatment is very good. We are sounded every day, and our wounds are dressed daily. The doctors are very capable here. We have food in abundance; all is excellent.
Hossbach,Sölliger(Braunschweig).
It must not be forgotten that the majority of these prisoners fell into the hands of the Belgians at Aerschot, where the Germans had imprisoned several hundreds of civilians in the church, at the time of the investment of the town. I can speak from experience. The German prisoners are treated with fully as much kindness in other parts of the country. At the house of the commandant of theservice de gardein Bruges I saw an assortment of German books and card games which had been sent by Mme. E. Vandervelde, who had visited the prisoners a few days earlier in the company of her husband, Minister of State and the Socialist leader of Belgium. The latter wished to make sure that the prisoners lacked for nothing.
We can say that Belgium does not seek to avenge her unheard-of sufferings by maltreating the German victims of the war. Suffering evokes pity in a sane mind. I can only express the hope that these proofs may fall into the hands of German readers.
(N.R.C., 8th October, 1914, morning edition.)
But we have something better than these documents of a private nature. The German authorities exhibited, at Spa, a statement that the German wounded there were perfectly well cared for. At the moment when the Germans dispensed with the collaboration of the clinical staff of the Red Cross in Brussels, they did homage to its devotion and competence.
Spa,18th August, 1914.To the Burgomaster of Spa.The Commander-General of the 10th Army Corps thanks the Burgomaster of Spa for the good reception accorded to his troops by the city of Spa on the 11th and 12th August, 1914. Thanks to his care and efforts, he recognizes that the wounded in the hospitals of Spa are particularly well cared for.Hoffmann,Lieutenant-General.Frederic-August,Grand Duke of Oldenburg.(Les Nouvelles, published under control of the German military authority, 22nd September, 1914.)
Spa,18th August, 1914.
To the Burgomaster of Spa.
The Commander-General of the 10th Army Corps thanks the Burgomaster of Spa for the good reception accorded to his troops by the city of Spa on the 11th and 12th August, 1914. Thanks to his care and efforts, he recognizes that the wounded in the hospitals of Spa are particularly well cared for.
Hoffmann,Lieutenant-General.
Frederic-August,Grand Duke of Oldenburg.
(Les Nouvelles, published under control of the German military authority, 22nd September, 1914.)
German Government,Headquarters, Medical Service.Brussels,31st August, 1914.To MM. the President and Members of the Red Cross of Belgium, Rue de l'Association, 24.Gentlemen,The German Government assures you of the expression of its grateful sentiments for the devoted care which you have given to all the wounded collected in the capital.Ambulances have been organized in great numbers, and the necessity of a concentration henceforth indispensable compels us immediately to take the following measures....In bringing these measures to your knowledge and in begging you to assist us to realize them promptly, we again express to you the thanks which we address to all the members of your association and especially to the ladies of the Red Cross, whose complete devotion we have appreciated.I beg you to accept, Gentlemen, the assurance of my high consideration.Prof. Dr.Stuertz,Oberstabarzt.
German Government,Headquarters, Medical Service.
Brussels,31st August, 1914.
To MM. the President and Members of the Red Cross of Belgium, Rue de l'Association, 24.
Gentlemen,
The German Government assures you of the expression of its grateful sentiments for the devoted care which you have given to all the wounded collected in the capital.
Ambulances have been organized in great numbers, and the necessity of a concentration henceforth indispensable compels us immediately to take the following measures....
In bringing these measures to your knowledge and in begging you to assist us to realize them promptly, we again express to you the thanks which we address to all the members of your association and especially to the ladies of the Red Cross, whose complete devotion we have appreciated.
I beg you to accept, Gentlemen, the assurance of my high consideration.
Prof. Dr.Stuertz,Oberstabarzt.
It is useful to observe that these declarations have been made spontaneously, since it is obvious that we were powerless to exert any pressure on the Germans. They have, therefore, nothing in common with those which the Germans have forced the Belgian wounded or prisoners to sign.
The Pretended Massacres of German Civilians.
There remain the famous massacres of Germans in Brussels, Antwerp, Liége, etc. According to witnesses "worthy of credence," inoffensive Germans, even women and children, were killed and martyred in various Belgian cities. At Liége alone more than 150 persons, of whom three-fourths were women and children, were said to have lost their lives.
As to Liége, we have inquired of inhabitants of the city, several of whom are closely connected withthe administration of justice; no one had any knowledge of any such occurrences. They have therefore been invented, lock, stock, and barrel, by the "witnesses worthy of credence," and we defy the Germans to mention the name of a single one of these 150 "victims."
At Antwerp we can oppose, to the testimony of those who were "present" on the occasion of murders and serious assaults upon German women, the official report, which admits that shops were broken into by the populace, but which at the same time attests that no German was wounded. Let us add that the German Weber wasnotassassinated, but is quietly living in Antwerp.
Let us proceed to the doings in Brussels; and let us quote, fromGreueltaten, the most serious occurrences there mentioned. We have a story, based on hearsay, which tells, of course, of gouged-out eyes, as well as three reports of ocular witnesses. The first is that of a witness "worthy of credence" who saw a child thrown from a window and a woman dragged by the hair until she was insensible; he also witnessed the murder of a German druggist, one Frankenberg, who was betrayed by his own wife, a Belgian. The second witness is the correspondent of the Wolff Agency. He saw only what the people of Brussels themselves witnessed: that is, that the populace pillaged the German shops and cafés on the 4th and 5th August. But he had not been able to discover any acts of violence against the person; those he mentions, in a couple of words, without insisting on them, had been related to him; but he does not even add that the witnesses were "worthy of credence."
Finally we have a priest, who complains that hewas arrested as a spy and beaten by the gendarmes. Perhaps he was a spy; in any case, not a few German spies disguised as priests have been discovered in Belgium.
If we confine ourselves to the really serious occurrences, to the cases in which Germans have been killed by the populace, we find that as against some 155 anonymous cases, which cannot be verified, there are only two in which names are mentioned. These names are Weber and Frankenberg. Now these two cases are apocryphal. Herr Weber has quietly reopened his hotel in Antwerp; Herr Frankenberg continues to breathe the air at Anderlecht, a suburb of Brussels. Compare with these two cases the three names of places mentioned inDie Wahrheit(p. 101).
Preventive and Repressive Measures taken by the Belgian Authorities.
The truth is that in the various cities of Belgium there was, quite at the beginning of hostilities, an intense popular effervescence, by which evildoers profited to pillage the German shops. These disturbances were so unexpected and assumed, with such rapidity, such large proportions, that the police were at first powerless to restrain them.
Moreover, it must be remembered that the police had just been reduced, a large proportion of the police agents and gendarmes having left for the front.
But measures were promptly taken, and by the 7th August there was no longer anywhere the least disorder of this kind. As for the "spy mania," it raged in Belgium as in all countries affected by thewar.[24]But the newspapers, and the official measures taken, got the better of this fresh cause of disturbance.
The newspapers of the neutral countries, for example theNieuwe Rotterdamsche Courant, also reported material damage, but they do not relate more serious occurrences in any part of Belgium.
We can consequently assert, in the most categorical fashion, basing our statement on the official data furnished by the courts, that no serious offence against the person has been proved either in Brussels or elsewhere. Does this mean that we excuse the fishers in troubled waters who sacked the German shops? Obviously not; but it must be owned that there are bad elements in all agglomerations, and that the populace of Berlin behaved no better than that of Brussels: witness the remarks of the British Ambassador in Berlin, and the excuses put forward by the German authorities when his windows were broken as the result of an article in theBerliner Tageblatt. Here we immediately perceive a contrast of mentalities: the German newspapers incite their readers against foreigners, while ours, on the contrary, do their utmost to calm popular manifestations.
A detail which we regard as symptomatic, and particularly revolting, in the German publications, is the fact that in these cases, as in the matter of the "francs-tireurs," our enemies seek to involve the legal administration of our country. Now, not only did our authorities immediately intervene to repress the disturbances and to provide a military guard for theDeutsche Bankand theDeutscher Vereinin Brussels, but they did more than their strict duty in protecting German families, and enabling them to return to their own country. Nothing is more characteristic in this respect than that which happened in Brussels on the nights of the 8th, 9th and 10th of August, at the time of the Germans' departure from the city. The latter assembled at night in a building belonging to the city; in the trams which took them thither every one hastened to render them every imaginable service; at the place of assembly the Civic Guards prepared hot drinks for them; then, during the short journey to the Gare du Nord, the same Civic Guards helped them to carry their children and their luggage. Mr. Brand Whitlock, United States Minister in Brussels, who was looking after the interests of Germany, was present in that quality at the departure of the German families, and he expressed his gratitude to the Belgians in a letter made public at the time.
The United States Minister does Honour to the Heroism and the Kindness of the Belgians.The German Minister, before leaving Brussels, requested the United States Minister, Mr. Brand Whitlock, kindly to take over the interests of Germany in Belgium.The United States Minister consented to protect the archives of the German Legation.It was in this capacity that Mr. Brand Whitlock was the witness, two days ago, of the goodness of the people of Brussels, who, with Mme. Carton de Wiart, the wife of the Minister of Justice, and our brave Chasseurs of the mounted Civic Guard at their head, provided hot drinks and refreshments for the four thousand Germans leaving Belgium who were assembled at the Royal Circus.The spectacle profoundly affected the eminent diplomatist.Thanking the Belgian Government, His Excellency, Mr. Brand Whitlock, writes to the Minister of Justice:—"The Belgians display a heroism in dying on the field of battle which is equalled by their humanity to non-combatants."(Le Soir, 11th August, 1914.)
The United States Minister does Honour to the Heroism and the Kindness of the Belgians.
The German Minister, before leaving Brussels, requested the United States Minister, Mr. Brand Whitlock, kindly to take over the interests of Germany in Belgium.
The United States Minister consented to protect the archives of the German Legation.
It was in this capacity that Mr. Brand Whitlock was the witness, two days ago, of the goodness of the people of Brussels, who, with Mme. Carton de Wiart, the wife of the Minister of Justice, and our brave Chasseurs of the mounted Civic Guard at their head, provided hot drinks and refreshments for the four thousand Germans leaving Belgium who were assembled at the Royal Circus.
The spectacle profoundly affected the eminent diplomatist.Thanking the Belgian Government, His Excellency, Mr. Brand Whitlock, writes to the Minister of Justice:—
"The Belgians display a heroism in dying on the field of battle which is equalled by their humanity to non-combatants."
(Le Soir, 11th August, 1914.)
In Germany the United States Ambassador, Mr. Gerard, had also occasion to intervene; but there it was to protect the British Ambassador from the fury of the populace.
These examples will suffice, we think, to show that the Belgians were as thoughtful in their behaviour towards their non-combatant adversaries as the Germans were violent and brutal. And what was the result of our courtesy? Our enemies picked a groundless quarrel with us in order to inflame the minds of their soldiers against us.
Nothing would be easier than to show that our enemies have not respected a single one of the articles of the Hague Convention. But it is not our intention to draw up this inventory. We prefer to confine ourselves to a few facts which no one can dream of contesting, so patent are they and so well known to every one in Belgium. And we shall refer only to those which will enable us to compare the two mentalities: that of the German, crafty and tyrannical, and that of the Belgian population, refusing to bow the head to military despotism. We exclude from our list those data which have already been recorded in other publications: BelgianGrey Books,Reports of the Commission of Inquiry,La Belgique et L'Allemagne, etc. Lastly, we shall deal only with what has happened in Belgium itself,so that we shall speak neither of prisoners of war nor of the wounded.
These eliminations lead us to omit the whole of Section I:The Belligerents. The three first articles apply to "francs-tireurs," Articles 4 to 21 relate to prisoners, the wounded, etc.
Article 22.Belligerents have not an unlimited choice of means of injuring the enemy.Article 23.Besides the prohibitions established by special conventions, it is notably forbidden:—(a)To employ poison or poisoned weapons;(b)To kill or wound by treachery individuals belonging to the hostile nation or army;(c)To kill or wound an enemy who, having laid down his arms, or no longer having means of defence, has surrendered at discretion;(d)To declare that no quarter will be given;(e)To employ arms, projectiles, or material calculated to cause unnecessary suffering;(f)To make improper use of a flag of truce, of the national flag, or of the military insignia or uniform of the enemy, as well as of the distinctive signs of the Geneva Convention;(g)To destroy or seize enemy property, unless such destruction or seizure be imperatively demanded by the necessities of war;(h)To declare abolished, suspended, or inadmissible the right of the subjects of the hostile party to institute legal proceedings.A belligerent is likewise forbidden to compel the subjects of the hostile party to take part in the operations of war directed against their own country, even if they were in the service of the belligerent before the commencement of the war.
Article 22.
Belligerents have not an unlimited choice of means of injuring the enemy.
Article 23.
Besides the prohibitions established by special conventions, it is notably forbidden:—
(a)To employ poison or poisoned weapons;
(b)To kill or wound by treachery individuals belonging to the hostile nation or army;
(c)To kill or wound an enemy who, having laid down his arms, or no longer having means of defence, has surrendered at discretion;
(d)To declare that no quarter will be given;
(e)To employ arms, projectiles, or material calculated to cause unnecessary suffering;
(f)To make improper use of a flag of truce, of the national flag, or of the military insignia or uniform of the enemy, as well as of the distinctive signs of the Geneva Convention;
(g)To destroy or seize enemy property, unless such destruction or seizure be imperatively demanded by the necessities of war;
(h)To declare abolished, suspended, or inadmissible the right of the subjects of the hostile party to institute legal proceedings.
A belligerent is likewise forbidden to compel the subjects of the hostile party to take part in the operations of war directed against their own country, even if they were in the service of the belligerent before the commencement of the war.
The violations of this Article are numerous. The Germans themselves cannot deny that the employment of toxic gases, such as those which were used in the attack upon Ypres on the 22nd April, fallsunder the condemnation of paragraph (a). We shall recur to this matter further on. Let us remark for the moment that we are not speaking of gas released by the bursting of shells, but of clouds of gas intentionally produced.
As to paragraph (e), the7th Reportspeaks in a precise manner of the employment of dum-dum bullets. After the German occupation we shall be able to mention other irrefutable cases, of which it would now be too dangerous to speak.
The prescriptions of paragraph (f) have often been violated. At the fort of Boncelles, on the 7th August, and at Landelies, near Charleroi, on the 22nd, our enemies abused the white flag. At Ougrée and at Grez-Doiceau they wore Belgian uniforms to deceive their enemies. This action was repeated during the siege of Antwerp; but this time the Belgians were warned of the German mimicry, so that the "asses clad in lions' skins" were nearly all left on the battle-field.
We shall deal later on, when speaking of pillage, with the infractions of paragraph (g).
Military Employment of Belgians by the Germans.
The last paragraph of Article 23 forbids belligerents to compel their adversaries to take part in operations of war directed against their own country. Let us see how the Germans respect this principle where civilians are concerned. At Liége (N.R.C., 23rd August, evening), at Vilvorde (N.R.C., 27th August, morning), at Anderlecht (N.R.C., 28th August, evening), at Dilbeek (N.R.C., 31st August, evening), at Eppeghem (seephotograph in1914 Illustré, No. 5), at Soignies, and at Neder-Over-Heembeek, the inhabitants were compelled to dig trenches for theGermans. A Dutchman (an extreme Germanophile, however), saw peasants from the outskirts of Spa compelled to perform the same task.
Spa,15th August, 1914.... The man, who had to return home (it was about noon), accompanied us, and, while conversing, he pointed to the road to Creppe, parallel to that which we were following, and at some ten minutes' distance from the latter. They were working hard at entrenchments there, about a quarter of an hour from the city. There were some 150 Belgian workmen there, excavating the soil under the threat of the rifles of German soldiers placed behind them.(N.R.C., 22nd August, 1914, evening edition.)
Spa,15th August, 1914.
... The man, who had to return home (it was about noon), accompanied us, and, while conversing, he pointed to the road to Creppe, parallel to that which we were following, and at some ten minutes' distance from the latter. They were working hard at entrenchments there, about a quarter of an hour from the city. There were some 150 Belgian workmen there, excavating the soil under the threat of the rifles of German soldiers placed behind them.
(N.R.C., 22nd August, 1914, evening edition.)
At Bagimont, on the 24th August, 1914, the inhabitants were forced to prepare the ground for the landing of German aeroplanes. The same villagers were forced to build huts for their enemies.
We have the names (at the disposal of a commission of inquiry) of twenty-nine inhabitants of a village of Brabant, who were forced, with horses and carts, to follow the German troops for several weeks, transporting munitions and baggage. The Germans had the right to requisition horses and vehicles, but not to compel our countrymen to accompany their teams.
Let us remark, while dealing with these violations of Article 23 of the Hague Convention, that Germany signed this Convention. But on her part this was merely a comedy, for it is a rule with her rulers that they cease to follow its prescriptions as soon as they are in opposition to theUsages of War, according to the Great General Staff. Now among the duties which the occupier may impose on the inhabitants—according to Germany—is the supply of transport and the digging of trenches. In other words,Germany, though she readily approved of the Hague Conference, makes war according to her own principles, which are far less humane; but she none the less demands that her adversaries should observe the rules of the Convention.
Measures of Coercion taken by the Germans.
On several occasions our enemies have sought to force the Belgian population to manufacture explosives and munitions for them. But the Belgians have always refused, even when their resistance inevitably condemned them to starvation. The workers of the explosives factory of Caulille, in the north of Limburg, resumed their tasks only under the most terrible threats (K.Z., 21st December, morning edition).
The case of Caulille, announced to its readers by a German newspaper, shows the cynicism with which our enemies violate the Hague Convention, which is in part their own work.
The same effrontery appears in the placard of the 19th November, 1914; this threatens severe penalties against Belgians who dissuade their compatriots from working for Germany. One could understand that the Germans might punish those who used force or threats to prevent any one from working for them; but to punish those who "attempt" to act by simple persuasion!
This was a mere timid beginning. On the 19th June, 1915, our enemies posted about Gand a placard stating that severe measures were about to be applied to factories which, "relying on the Hague Convention, had refused to work for the German Army."
The Communal Administration of Gand has supplied us with the following notice:—
Notice.By order of His Excellency the Inspector de l'Étape,[25]I call the attention of the commune to the following:—"The attitude of certain factories which, under pretext of patriotism and relying on the Hague Convention, have refused to work for the German Army, proves that there are, in the midst of the population, tendencies whose object is to place difficulties in the way of the administration of the German Army."In this connection I make it known that I shall repress, by all the means at my disposal, such behaviour, which can only disturb the good understanding hitherto existing between the administration of the German Army and the population."In the first place I hold the Communal authorities responsible for the spread of such tendencies, and I call attention to the fact that the population will itself be responsible if the liberties hitherto accorded in the most ample measure are withdrawn and replaced by the restrictive measures necessitated by its own fault."Lieutenant-General Graf von Westarp,Commandant de l'Étape.Gand,10th June, 1913.
Notice.
By order of His Excellency the Inspector de l'Étape,[25]I call the attention of the commune to the following:—
"The attitude of certain factories which, under pretext of patriotism and relying on the Hague Convention, have refused to work for the German Army, proves that there are, in the midst of the population, tendencies whose object is to place difficulties in the way of the administration of the German Army."In this connection I make it known that I shall repress, by all the means at my disposal, such behaviour, which can only disturb the good understanding hitherto existing between the administration of the German Army and the population."In the first place I hold the Communal authorities responsible for the spread of such tendencies, and I call attention to the fact that the population will itself be responsible if the liberties hitherto accorded in the most ample measure are withdrawn and replaced by the restrictive measures necessitated by its own fault."
"The attitude of certain factories which, under pretext of patriotism and relying on the Hague Convention, have refused to work for the German Army, proves that there are, in the midst of the population, tendencies whose object is to place difficulties in the way of the administration of the German Army.
"In this connection I make it known that I shall repress, by all the means at my disposal, such behaviour, which can only disturb the good understanding hitherto existing between the administration of the German Army and the population.
"In the first place I hold the Communal authorities responsible for the spread of such tendencies, and I call attention to the fact that the population will itself be responsible if the liberties hitherto accorded in the most ample measure are withdrawn and replaced by the restrictive measures necessitated by its own fault."
Lieutenant-General Graf von Westarp,Commandant de l'Étape.
Gand,10th June, 1913.
Here, then, they declare that they are on the point of intentionally violating the Hague Convention.
Certain articles which appeared inHet Volk, a Christian-Democratic journal of Gand, on the 15th, 17th, 19th, and 22nd June, 1915, tell us what these measures are.
The workers of the Bekaert factory at Sweveghem having refused to make barbed wire for the Germans, the latter began by arresting three notables, of whom two were promptly released. Then, to force the men to resume work, they decided that the commune should be placed under a ban; it was forbidden to ride a bicycle or to use a wheeled vehicle, and the introduction of foodstuffs was prohibited. The men still persisted in refusing to make the barbed wire on which their sons and brothers were to be caught in the battles of the Yser. Sixty-one men were sent to prison. The rest hastened to leave the village. What did the Germans do then? They seized the wives of the fugitives, shut them up in two great waggons, and took them to Courtrai; at the same time they posted up the names of those who had fled, and enjoined them to return. Before the threat of seeing their wives remain in prison until their children perished in their empty homes, the workers, with death in their hearts, had to resume their fratricidal task. TrulyKulturis a fine thing!
In Brabant they went a different way to work. They had requested M. Cousin to make barbed wire for them in his factory at Ruysbroeck (in the south of Brussels). He refused. They offered to buy his factory. He refused. They requisitioned his works. He was forced to submit. They installed themselves in the factory and tried to begin making barbed wire. But the machinery was worked by electricity, and the electricity was provided by a central station situated in Oisquercq. Naturally the Oisquercq works refused to supply current. The Germans arrested M. Lucien Beckers, the managing director of the company, and kept him several weeks in prison.
Living Shields.
It remains to examine a final violation of Article 23; a violation so revolting that neither those presentat the Hague Conference nor the Germans themselves in theirKriegsbrauchhad been willing to consider it. We are referring to the use of "living shields" (7th Report).
A German Admission.
Belgians placed before the Troops at Charleroi.
Our enemies are aware of the abomination of which they are guilty in placing, in front of their troops, Belgians intended to serve as a shield. They are eager to deny such acts. Unfortunately for them one of their own officers has described a case of the kind (p.196). His first care on reaching the suburbs of Charleroi was to capture civilians in order to force them to walk in front of and among the cavalry. He waxes indignant over the lamentations uttered by the wives of these unfortunates. "If nothing happens to us," he told them, "nothing will happen to the civilians either." Could one more cynically express the idea that the Germans made use of these hostages in order to prevent their adversaries from firing on their troops? At the first volley fired by the French, who were posted behind a barricade, some of the hostages were killed. The Germans promptly replaced them by others, notably by priests.
At Nimy and Mons, the same method was employed. The burgomaster of Mons, M. Lescart, was himself placed before the German troops.
At Tirlemont, on the 18th August, 1914, during their march on Louvain, they seized upon certain "notables," including the burgomaster, M. Donny, and pushed them before them in order to obtainshelter from the Belgian bullets. They did not release them until the following day, at Cumptich.
Belgians placed before the Troops at Lebbeke, Tirlemont, Mons.
More significant still was their conduct at Lebbeke, near Termonde, on the 4th September, 1914. Scarcely had they entered the village, in the early morning, when they seized as many civilians as possible—about 300—and forced them to march before them. On passing through St. Gilles-lez-Termonde they requisitioned more men to serve as "living shields." When the Belgians attacked the German troops ten civilians were killed; many were wounded (9thand10th Reports).
The same evening the survivors were sent into Germany as "francs-tireurs."
Belgian Women placed before the Troops at Anseremme.
At Anseremme it was behind women that the Germans took refuge. They had committed the blunder of sending all the men to Germany, as civil prisoners, on the 23rd and 24th August, so that only the women were left. They placed these in a line along the river-wall on the bank of the Meuse, and prudently hidden behind their skirts they rested their rifles on the women's shoulders in order to fire at the French on the opposite bank.
The French ceased fire as soon as they saw that they were firing on women. At night the Germans herded the unhappy women, with their children, in a field; but on the following morning they broughtthem out again to serve as a protective screen along the river.
Such is German heroism! As we at present understand the real sense of the wordsDen Heldentod Gestorben(died a hero's death), which the Germans inscribe on the tombs of their soldiers, they mean that these soldiers were unable to avoid the bullets, although they heroically hid themselves behind Belgian women.
As far as we know one must go back to Cambyses, in the sixth centuryB.C., to find another example of the "living shield." At the time of his expedition into Egypt this prince, who was, the historians tell us, famed for his cruelty, conceived the idea of placing cats, which animals were worshipped by the Egyptians, in front of his troops. Thanks to his stratagem he prevented the Egyptians from attacking his soldiers. Neither Attila, nor Ghenghis Khan, nor Tamerlane made use of this method; it was left for the Germans of the twentieth century once more to put it into practice, with the increased ferocity suggested byKultur.
Belgians forcibly detained at Ostend and Middelkerke.
There are other circumstances also under which the Germans have made a rampart of the Belgians. From the middle of October 1914 they occupied that portion of the Belgian coast comprised between Lombartzyde and the Zeeland frontier. From time to time the British ships and aeroplanes bombarded the coast; they would undoubtedly have continued to do so if the Germans had not taken pains forcibly to retain numbers of Belgians in these localities. According to theNieuwe Rotterdamsche Courantofthe 1st November they forbade the people of Middelkerke and Ostend to leave those towns. Obviously the British were as far as possible sparing Ostend and Middelkerke, and directing their fire by preference on the road joining these two places, and on that running from Middelkerke to Westende. The Germans were perfectly aware of this, and had precisely for this reason forbidden any Belgian to leave Ostend or Middelkerke. An officer at theKommandantur, from whom our informant tried to obtain some favour for a couple of Belgians, replied as follows: "If we allowed the population to leave these places the English would hasten to bombard the two towns, and we should be the sufferers" (N.R.C., 1st November, 1914).
However, at the end of December they expelled all the men from Middelkerke, with the exception of four. But the means of transport placed at the disposal of the expelled inhabitants were insufficient to enable them to take their families with them, so that they had to leave many of their wives and children behind. Every time the British drop shells on the coast the Germans hasten to post up the news in Brussels, adding that the bombardment has resulted in fatalities among the Belgians.
News published by the General German Government.Bombardment of Coast.Berlin, 24thNovember(official, noon to-day).—British vessels arrived yesterday off the French coast and bombarded Lombartzyde and Zeebrugge. Among our troops they caused only very slight damage. A certain number of Belgian citizens, on the other hand, were killed and wounded.The German Military Government.
News published by the General German Government.
Bombardment of Coast.
Berlin, 24thNovember(official, noon to-day).—British vessels arrived yesterday off the French coast and bombarded Lombartzyde and Zeebrugge. Among our troops they caused only very slight damage. A certain number of Belgian citizens, on the other hand, were killed and wounded.
The German Military Government.
Berlin, 28thDecember(official telegram, noon to-day).—Near Nieuport the enemy renewed his attempted attacks without success. In these he was supported by firing from the sea, which however did us no harm, but killed or wounded some inhabitants.The German Military Government.Berlin, 26thJanuary(official telegram, noon to-day).—The enemy yesterday fired as usual on Middelkerke and Westende. A considerable number of inhabitants were killed or wounded by this fire, among them the burgomaster of Middelkerke. Our losses yesterday were very insignificant.The German Military Government.Berlin, 13thFebruary(official telegram).—Along the coast enemy aviators yesterday again dropped bombs, which did very considerable damage among the civil population, while we suffered no appreciable damage from a military point of view.The General Government in Belgium.Berlin, 8thMarch(official telegram, noon to-day).—Enemy aviators dropped bombs on Ostend, which killed three Belgians.The General Government in Belgium.
Berlin, 28thDecember(official telegram, noon to-day).—Near Nieuport the enemy renewed his attempted attacks without success. In these he was supported by firing from the sea, which however did us no harm, but killed or wounded some inhabitants.
The German Military Government.
Berlin, 26thJanuary(official telegram, noon to-day).—The enemy yesterday fired as usual on Middelkerke and Westende. A considerable number of inhabitants were killed or wounded by this fire, among them the burgomaster of Middelkerke. Our losses yesterday were very insignificant.
The German Military Government.
Berlin, 13thFebruary(official telegram).—Along the coast enemy aviators yesterday again dropped bombs, which did very considerable damage among the civil population, while we suffered no appreciable damage from a military point of view.
The General Government in Belgium.
Berlin, 8thMarch(official telegram, noon to-day).—Enemy aviators dropped bombs on Ostend, which killed three Belgians.
The General Government in Belgium.
They therefore fully appreciate the advantage to be derived from retaining on the coast a population which serves as a living buckler.
Belgians imprisoned in the Lofts of the Ministries.
At Brussels they behaved in a similar fashion in order to prevent the Allied aviators from bombarding the premises which they occupy in the Ministries. Inhabitants of Brussels are sent to theKommandanturon the most impossible pretexts. They first remain for several days shut up in the lofts of the Ministries. Then, after trial—and, obviously, sentence—they are again confined in the lofts until there is room for them in the ordinary prisons. Every one in Brussels knows this, and of course the Allied aviators are aware of it.
Article 25.The attack or bombardment, by any means whatever, of undefended towns, villages, dwellings, or buildings is forbidden.
Article 25.
The attack or bombardment, by any means whatever, of undefended towns, villages, dwellings, or buildings is forbidden.
Bombardment of Open Towns.
Many violations of this Article have been discovered by the Commission of Inquiry (7th Report). Here again clearly appears the contradiction between the fashion in which the Germans make war and that which they require of their enemies. When their dirigibles drop bombs on open, undefended districts—as they did on the night of the 26th September, at Deynze, when they wounded an old man in the hospital of the Sisters of St. Vincent de Paule—their newspapers related this prowess exultingly (Düsseldorfer Tageblatt, 29th September;Düsseldorfer Zeitung, 29th September, 1914). They may do such things, but no one else. When the Allied aviators bombarded Freibourg in Brisgau on the 10th December, 1914, the Germans denounced them amid universal indignation. One can only agree with the writer in theTimeswho said: "If we want to know what conduct we should observe in this war it is useless to consult the laws; we must simply ask the Germans if our conduct is agreeable to them or not."
Article 26.The officer in command of an attacking force must do all in his power to warn the authorities before commencing a bombardment, except in case of assault.
Article 26.
The officer in command of an attacking force must do all in his power to warn the authorities before commencing a bombardment, except in case of assault.
General von Beseler followed the prescription of this Article during the siege of Antwerp; he announced on the 8th October that the bombardment of the city would commence at midnight (K.Z., 9th October, first morning edition). Everywhereelse the Germans have thrown their shells without previous warning. This was notably so in the attack upon Antwerp by a dirigible on the night of 24th August; the bombs found twenty victims. It is true that Herr Bernstorff has declared that previous advice is not necessary. In this he is in agreement with the laws of warfare according to the Germans.
Article 27.In sieges and bombardments all necessary steps must be taken to spare, as far as possible, buildings dedicated to public worship, art, science, or charitable purposes, historic monuments, hospitals, and places where the sick and wounded are collected, provided they are not being used at the time for military purposes.
Article 27.
In sieges and bombardments all necessary steps must be taken to spare, as far as possible, buildings dedicated to public worship, art, science, or charitable purposes, historic monuments, hospitals, and places where the sick and wounded are collected, provided they are not being used at the time for military purposes.
Not content with setting fire to our monuments, as they did at Louvain, Dinant, Termonde, and a host of villages, the Germans never hesitate to bombard those they cannot otherwise reach.
The most characteristic example is that of the Cathedral of Reims.[26]On Tuesday, the 22nd September, we learned of the bombardment from a placard. The telegram, dated Monday, the 21st, asserted that the monument would as far as possible be spared. That was enough; we knew then that it was destroyed. And sure enough, the French newspapers smuggled through to us on the following day—Wednesday—stated that the cathedral had been burning since Saturday, the 19th.
Little by little the information received grew more precise. The French certified that they had not placed any military post of observation on the towers; neither were there batteries near the cathedral. Moreover, they declared that the cathedral should have been doubly respected, since an ambulance had found asylum there—which, be it said in passing, is denounced as an infamy by the German newspapers (K.Z., 4th January, morning edition;Niederrheinische Volkszeitung, 4th January).
The Wolff Agency reported the bombardment of Reims Cathedral as quite a natural thing, a commonplace operation. But before the indignation of the entire civilized world (N.R.C., 22nd September, 1914, evening edition) the Germans were forced to display a hypocritical regret and to justify their aggression.
Then official telegrams were posted up the same day; two reflected German opinion, the third professed to express the opinion of a Frenchman who had favoured theTimeswith his confidences (placard dated 23rd September, 1914).[27]The conclusion, naturally, was that the Germans had nothing to reproach themselves with: their conscience was clear as on the first day; they bombarded the Cathedral of Reims because they were forced to do so, despite their admiration for this marvel of Gothic architecture ... but the presence of a military observation-post on the towers had left them no alternative.
Three weeks later, a fresh bombardment (placard dated 15th October). Then, after two weeks' quiet, they once more began to throw shells on what still remained standing (placard of 30th October). On the following day they announced that they had protested to the Roman Curia. A few days later they applied themselves to the destruction of the Cathedral of Soissons, but once again because the French forced them to do so.
What respect for the Hague Convention! How touching the solicitude displayed toward monuments of art and religion! Only in the very last extremity do the Germans resolve to smash them to bits; still protesting, of course, against the violence done to their æsthetic feelings! Still more touching is their sincerity. On the 10th November they announce that the Vicar-General of Reims has admitted that the towers have been used for military operations, and that the Chancellor has communicated this avowal to the Vatican (Le Réveil, 11th November, 1914); on the 17th they are forced to note the Vicar-General's denial, but they maintain their accusations.
To estimate at their true value the German declarations concerning Reims Cathedral, it is enough to compare one of the three placards of the 23rd September with the "official communiqué" which they forced uponL'Ami de l'Ordre. Here are these two documents:
News published by the German General Government.Berlin,23rd September(official telegram, yesterday evening).—In spite of these facts we have been able to verify the presence on the tower of a post of observation, which explains the excellent effect of the fire of the enemy's infantry opposing our infantry....The German Military Government.Military Operations in France.(Official Communiqué.)Antwerp,27th September(communicated by the French Legation).—The French Minister has received from M. Delcassé the following telegrams....II. The German Government having officially declared to various Governments that the bombardment of the Cathedral of Reims was undertaken only because of the establishment of a post of observation on the basilica, General Joffre asserts, in a telegram communicated by the Ministry of War, that no French observation-post was placed on this building.P.S.—The German Government did not invoke the presence of an observation-post on the cathedral, but the presence of pieces of artillery behind this church, so that it was impossible to reach these guns without firing in the direction of the cathedral and hitting the latter.This was necessary to dislodge the French artillery.(L'Ami de l'Ordre, 29th September, 1914.)
News published by the German General Government.
Berlin,23rd September(official telegram, yesterday evening).—In spite of these facts we have been able to verify the presence on the tower of a post of observation, which explains the excellent effect of the fire of the enemy's infantry opposing our infantry....
The German Military Government.
Military Operations in France.(Official Communiqué.)
Antwerp,27th September(communicated by the French Legation).—The French Minister has received from M. Delcassé the following telegrams....
II. The German Government having officially declared to various Governments that the bombardment of the Cathedral of Reims was undertaken only because of the establishment of a post of observation on the basilica, General Joffre asserts, in a telegram communicated by the Ministry of War, that no French observation-post was placed on this building.
P.S.—The German Government did not invoke the presence of an observation-post on the cathedral, but the presence of pieces of artillery behind this church, so that it was impossible to reach these guns without firing in the direction of the cathedral and hitting the latter.
This was necessary to dislodge the French artillery.
(L'Ami de l'Ordre, 29th September, 1914.)
On the 23rd September they pretended that there was an observation-post on the tower. On the 27th they declared that they had never made any such statement. German sincerity!
On the 7th July they placarded Brussels with a document in which they made a display of their artistic feeling. We asked ourselves what fresh crime they were about to commit. Next day our curiosity was satisfied; the newspapers informed us that the German army had set fire to the cathedral at Arras.
Bombardment of the Cathedral at Malines.
Let us now consider how they behaved in Belgium. The commander of the army besieging Antwerp three times bombarded Malines without any strategical excuse, for the town was absolutely empty of Belgian troops. He had informed the Belgian authorities that his troops would not fire upon monuments so long as these latter were not serving any military purpose (N.R.C.13th September, 1914, evening edition). Better still, he published, in the German newspapers, a statement that he could not bombardMalines for fear of touching the Cathedral of Saint-Rombaut, but that the Belgians had not the same scruples. What truth was there in the last assertion? None, of course; if the Belgians dropped shells on the outskirts of the town it was while the German troops were there, a fact which our enemies themselves recognized. For the rest, it is easy to discover whether the damage done to the cathedral was the work of Germans or Belgians. The Belgians were to the north and west of the town; the Germans to the south and east. Now all the damage done to the cathedral is without exception on the south and east faces. The reader may draw his own conclusion. Here we have a reappearance of the usual German system, which consists in blaming others for their own misdeeds. At Dinant, too, they pretended that the collegiate church was destroyed not by them but by the French.
The Pretended Observation-post on Notre-Dame of Antwerp.
Of course they accused the Belgians of using their belfries as observation-posts. The accusation is false. We may cite Malines as an example (N.R.C., 25th November, evening edition), and Courcelles (Die Wochenschau, No. 46, 1914); but the most typical case is that of Antwerp. They reproduced in their illustrated journals (Die Wochenschau, No. 48, 1914;Kriegs-Kurier, No. 7) a photograph—or properly speaking, a drawing—published by an American newspaper (New YorkTribune, 22nd October, 1914) representing a military observation-post on the tower of Notre-Dame.
Even if we grant the picture a documentary valuewhich it does not possess, it proves nothing, for according to the American journalist (N.R.C., 15th November, evening edition), the military post existed on the tower at a period when Antwerp was not besieged, nor even in danger of being so; the city had then to defend itself only against dirigibles, which on two occasions paid it nocturnal visits, with the accompaniment of bombs. It will be understood that theWochenschaudoes not inform us of this; it pretends that the soldiers were on the tower to observe the German troops and their heavy artillery during the siege.
German Observation-posts admitted by the Germans.
Let us now see whether our enemies have abstained from employing monuments for military operations. TheAlgemeen Handelsblad(Amsterdam) of the 3rd January states that machine-guns are placed on the belfry of Bruges and on other towers of the city. This fact is confirmed by M. Domela Nieuwenhuys Nyegaard, a pastor of Gand, a convinced Germanophile, who witnessed an attack by British aviators, upon whom the machine-guns installed on the tower of the Halles opened a violent but ineffectual fire (Uit mijn Oorlogsdagboek, p. 319, inDe Tijdspiegel, 1st April, 1915).
Perhaps the Germans will contest this statement. Here is another. Those who require of their adversaries so scrupulous a respect for Article 27 of the Hague Convention placed an observation-post on the tower of St. Rombaut, during the siege of Antwerp, in order to control their fire upon the Waelhem fort. And this at least is indisputable, for in their cynicism or lack of conscience (let them choose whichever they please) they published aphotograph of this infraction of the Hague Convention in theBerliner Illustrierte Zeitung(No. 44, 1914, p. 752).
This is not the only case admitted by them.Zeit im Bild(No. 43, 1914) reproduces on its cover a photograph of a "military post on the tower of an Hôtel de Ville." In this we see German soldiers armed with rifles, watching an imaginary enemy. This photograph was taken at the Palais de Justice in Brussels, as is proved, without possibility of error, by the church of La Chapelle, whose very characteristic tower rises in the distance. The Germans were so delighted with this violation of the Hague Convention that they reproduced the photograph in the illustrated supplement of theHamburger Fremdensblatt. And what is most curious in this affair is that they boasted of an offence which they knew they had not committed. For, firstly, the soldiers were not posted "on an Hôtel de Ville"; secondly, they were not even postedonthe Palais de Justice, but to one side of it, as may easily be determined on the spot; thirdly, German soldiers have never been placed there to overlook an enemy!
Since mid-October of 1914 it is in Western Flanders that the fighting has taken place. Did the Germans eventually, before the universal reprobation which greeted their exploits at Louvain, Reims, and so forth, determine to respect the international agreement to which they are parties? By no means. They are far too contemptuous of conventions, as is proved by the photographs of monuments bombarded in the region of the Yser, which are published in the illustrated newspapers, notably inPanorama, a Dutch illustrated paper which surreptitiously enters Belgium.
Ypres:Panorama, 23b, 25a.Dixmude:Panorama, 23a, 23b;Berl. Ill. Zeit., Nos. 2 and 3, 1915;Kriegs-Echo, Nos. 22, 24;Zeit. im Bild, No. 3, 1915.Pervyse:Panorama, 21a, 21b, 23a.Nieuport:Panorama, 22a.Ramscapelle:Panorama, 23b.
Ypres:Panorama, 23b, 25a.
Dixmude:Panorama, 23a, 23b;Berl. Ill. Zeit., Nos. 2 and 3, 1915;Kriegs-Echo, Nos. 22, 24;Zeit. im Bild, No. 3, 1915.
Pervyse:Panorama, 21a, 21b, 23a.
Nieuport:Panorama, 22a.
Ramscapelle:Panorama, 23b.
Among the monuments destroyed artists especially deplore the marvellous Halles of Ypres, and the churches of Nieuport, Ypres, and Dixmude. This last contained a very remarkable Gothic rood-screen, of which Herr Stübben, one of the most eminent architects of modern Germany, stated that its loss would be irreparable. It escaped the shells, but not the German soldiery, who destroyed it with the butts of their rifles, after the capture of the town. AlwaysKultur!
Pillage.
Article28.The giving over to pillage of a town or place, even when taken by assault, is forbidden.Article46.Family honour and rights, individual life, and private property as well as religious convictions and worship, must be respected.Article47Pillage is expressly forbidden.
Article28.
The giving over to pillage of a town or place, even when taken by assault, is forbidden.
Article46.
Family honour and rights, individual life, and private property as well as religious convictions and worship, must be respected.
Article47
Pillage is expressly forbidden.
"Family honour and rights!" The cases of rape prove the respect of the German army for these prescriptions!
"Individual life!" By the end of September 1914 the Germans had killed more civilians than soldiers. This simple statement says more than could a long exposition.
"Private property!" Theft and pillage are phenomena so commonplace that the inhabitants no longer insist upon them; if they mention the subjectit is to say: "The Germans behaved well here; they only took all we had." We shall therefore confine ourselves to citing a few cases particularly typical of the German mentality.
It is indisputable that the conflagrations started under the pretext of chastising "francs-tireurs" were in reality designed to conceal the pillage committed by the German army. This was certainly the case at Aerschot (4th Report) and at Louvain. The officers who gave orders to start these fires were therefore accomplices of the pillaging soldiery. For that matter, how could they have disavowed the thefts of their men, seeing that they themselves largely took part in the scramble? Whole trains left Brussels, Louvain, Malines, and Verviers for Germany, loaded with "war booty for officers." During their journey to Belgium, Herren Koester and Noske, on the 23rd September, at Hubesthal, saw numerous trains passing which were laden with war booty (Kriegsfahrten, p. 8); there were at that time no serious battles either in France or in Belgium, so that there was no capture of war booty in the Western sense of the term.[28]The trains observed by the Socialist authors could only have been carrying the fruits of pillage; they came probably from Malines, which the Germans at this time were scrupulously emptying, as well as the numerous châteaux of the neighbourhood.
Not a district has been visited by the Germans that has not been totally despoiled. Of course, the silver was taken first. One officer, after plundering the entire store of silver of a villa at Francorchamps, confided to a neighbour that he was going to have it melted down in Germany, with the exception of one spoon, which he would keep as a "souvenir." Is it not typical and delightful, this German cult of the "souvenir" as a veneer of sentimentality on a basis of rapacity? According to the definition given by the Kaiser, this officer displayed his civilization but not hisKultur.
Another "requisition" of plate. In the railway station of Mons, towards the middle of February 1915, a merchant unloading a truck-load of merchandise had his attention attracted by a coffin which was being removed from a neighbouring van; suddenly he heard a metallic clink: the bottom of the coffin had given way, and an avalanche of spoons, forks, napkin-rings, and other articles of silver tumbled out!
Nothing is sacred to the Huns. They smash the tabernacles, treasuries, and poor-boxes of the churches as readily as the coffers of the People's Banks (Maisons du Peuple). At Auvelois they seized upon 43,000 frs. in the Maison du Peuple, this being the entire capital of the Socialist Young Guard, the Freethinkers, the newspaperEn Avant, the Miners' Union (syndicat), and other mutual aid societies.
At Beyghem, near Grimberghen, before setting fire to the church, they broke open the safe in the sacristy. Being unable to perforate it, they demolished the wall dividing the church from the sacristy, in which it was imbedded, so that they were able to attack it from behind.
In most of the churches which were burned in the north of Brabant (p.73) the strong-box and the tabernacle were broken open. It was the same in the province of Namur.
As soon as the approach of the Germans was signalled, many people hastened to pack up theirfurniture and valuables, in order more readily to transport them in case of evacuation. This foresight almost always failed in its object, owing to the impossibility of finding a horse and cart at the moment of departure. These packing-cases and hampers, all ready corded, presented an insurmountable temptation; the officers were never able to resist it, and the goods were sent straight to the railway station.
We are informed that at the beginning of the German occupation officers were frequently mistaken as to the actual value of the articles which they removed; so that they sent their families worthless rubbish "made in Germany." To avoid these unpleasant misconceptions, they made their inspections in the company of experts who directed their choice.
Need we add that the wine-cellars were always methodically exploited? The bottles which could not be drunk on the spot were packed for later consumption, or to be sent to Germany. In a château near Charleroi the officers had the doors—which were beautiful examples of joinery—taken off their hinges, and used to make packing-cases for the bottles.
We must not forget that drunkenness has played an important part in the atrocities committed by the German army.
The Germans were not content with making a clean sweep of the private houses and châteaux; they also stripped the Governmental offices which they occupied in Brussels of their furniture. In the Ministry of Public Works a portion of the maps of bridges, buildings, etc., was burned, and a portion sent to Germany.
Thefts of Stamps.
As to those who despoiled the Ministries, we will give them the credit of supposing that they acted by order and in the interest of their Government; but we cannot thus excuse the conduct of one officer who, having possessed himself, goodness knows how, of a number of Belgian stamps, attempted, in a stationer's shop, to pay for 80 frs.' worth of goods by means of these stamps. Meeting with a refusal from the shopkeeper, he had to content himself with paying for only a portion of his purchases in this manner. In a neighbouring watchmaker's he did better, for he was able to get rid of 100 frs. in stamps; at a discount, of course.[29]He informed the watchmaker that he possessed 4,000 frs.' worth of Belgian stamps. The latter was not so indiscreet as to ask how he obtained them.
Better still: the Germans do not conceal the fact that they are thieves. TheMatin(Paris, 9th June, 1915) reproduced the photograph of an announcement published by a Swiss newspaper.
"It informs us that a thief of the German army, desiring to realize the 'war booty' which he collected in Antwerp, offers for sale unused stamps of values between 10 centimes and 10 frs. In his 'stock' of booty are 19 different stamps of a total value of 29 frs. 70 (oh, that 70 centimes of pillage!) which he offers for 3 frs. 50.—All Germany—philosophical, political, military, and commercial—is contained in this little advertisement."
At Tamines, having burned about 250 houses, on the 21st and 22nd August, 1914, and having forced the living to bury the 416 unhappy people shot on the evening of the 22nd, they sent all the survivors to Velaines-sur-Sambre. There they were given their liberty, and told that they might go to Namur or to Düsseldorf, but not to Tamines. Why not to Tamines? They understood a few days later, when they were bold enough to return despite the prohibition. The Germans had completely emptied all the shops and all the private houses in the place. It is evident that this operation can be effected in a more methodical and comfortable manner when there are no children running between your legs, or women begging you to leave them some souvenir for which they have a particular affection.
At Louvain they acted in the same manner; they proceeded to wholesale pillage only after the 27th, when they had sent all the inhabitants away.
Sometimes the love of pillage got the better of discipline. At Jumet, on the road from Brussels to Charleroi, on the 22nd August, 1914, the troops were ordered to burn all the houses, because the French of the 110th Infantry had dared to attack them with machine-guns. But some soldiers who had entered a tobacconist's amused themselves by stealing cigars and cigarettes, and were so absorbed that they forgot to set fire to the shop, so that it has remained intact in the midst of a long row of burned-out buildings.
What disgusts us most in all this pillage is not that the German troops should have marked our unhappy country for pillage; it is the indisputable complicity of the leaders of the army. Nothing more clearly proves the benevolent intervention of the military and civil authorities in the operations of brigandage than the regular transport of "war booty" into Germany. The officers make no secretof sending to their homes such things as pianos, pictures, jewels, furniture, glass, etc. They do it openly, with the obvious complicity of the railway officials. The latter are entrusted with the organization of the rapid transportation to the Fatherland of mountains of cases, containing the results of the methodical exploration of our houses and châteaux and shops and warehouses. It is a vast organization of brigandage, hierarchically regulated, in which every one steals without hiding the fact from his fellows. Who knows whether the coffin full of silver-plate which burst in the Mons railway station did not belong to some officer who had swindled his accomplices? We in Belgium have witnessed the regular working of a system of "co-operative brigandage under the august protection of the authorities."
Let us note, finally, that theft and pillage are expressly forbidden by the GermanUsages of War. Articles 57, 58, 60, 61, and 62 prohibit all destruction of private property. But we must suppose that theirUsages of Warare applicable only in times of peace, since from the very first days of the war the German army began to pillage the regions which it occupied. This spoliation has been pursued with the systematic spirit which characterizesKultur.
Illegal Taxation.
Article 43.The authority of the power of the State having passed de facto into the hands of the occupant, the latter shall do all in his power to restore, and shall ensure, as far as possible, public order and safety, respecting at the same time, unless absolutely prevented, the laws in force in the country.Article 48.If, in the territory occupied, the occupant collects the taxes, dues,and tolls payable to the State, he shall do so, as far as is possible, in accordance with the legal basis and assessment in force at the time and shall in consequence be bound to defray the expenses of the administration of the occupied territory to the same extent as the national Government had been so bound.Article 49.If, in addition to the taxes mentioned in the above Article, the occupant levies other money contributions in the occupied territory, they shall only be applied to the needs of the army or of the administration of the territory in question.
Article 43.
The authority of the power of the State having passed de facto into the hands of the occupant, the latter shall do all in his power to restore, and shall ensure, as far as possible, public order and safety, respecting at the same time, unless absolutely prevented, the laws in force in the country.
Article 48.
If, in the territory occupied, the occupant collects the taxes, dues,and tolls payable to the State, he shall do so, as far as is possible, in accordance with the legal basis and assessment in force at the time and shall in consequence be bound to defray the expenses of the administration of the occupied territory to the same extent as the national Government had been so bound.
Article 49.
If, in addition to the taxes mentioned in the above Article, the occupant levies other money contributions in the occupied territory, they shall only be applied to the needs of the army or of the administration of the territory in question.
Two placards exhibited in Brussels on the evening of the 12th December (Saturday) attracted general attention.
They first convoked the Provincial Councils for the 19th December, and imposed upon them, not simply a general "order of the day," but an imperative mandate to vote a war-tax. The second gave details of this tax: 480,000,000 frs. was to be paid in monthly instalments of 40,000,000 (£19,200,000 in twelve payments of £1,600,000) (seeBelg. Allem., p. 120).
Baron von Bissing thus advertised, seven days in advance, the decisions to be taken by the Provincial Councils. Doubtless he was made to understand that the proceeding was a little extreme, and contrary both to the law and to common sense; for on the following morning the second placard was covered with a blank sheet of paper. Better still, the "Official Bulletin of Laws and Decrees for the occupied Belgian Territory" gave in its issue of the 19th the text of the two decrees; but this number was suppressed, and in its place another placard, numbered 19, was distributed, which included only the first decree.
On the 19th December our nine ProvincialCouncils assembled. They could not do otherwise than vote the crushing tax of 480 millions; but several of them protested eloquently against the illegality of this proceeding.
Speech delivered by M. François André at the meeting of the Provincial Council of Hainaut, on the 19th December, 1914, in the presence of the German Governor and Dr. Daniest, President.... We have met by order of the German authorities to vote a war-tax; to make one word of many, we have met to furnish arms to the formidable invader of our country, to be used against our heroic little Belgian army....We are thus assembled to vote,by order, a war-tax.I wish to protest—against both the form and the substance of this tax.As to the form, I regard this extraordinary session as absolutely illegal; the Provincial Councillors are not qualified to vote war-taxes affecting the whole country; moreover, the councillors of the various provinces, in concerting as to the measures to be taken in common, so to speak, which are matters beyond the scope of their jurisdiction, are committing an offence in Belgian law, which law no German decree has abrogated. As to the substance: Admitting that the German authorities have the right to levy taxes on the whole country, while our 120,000 soldiers are still in occupation of our territory, it is very certain that according to the terms of the Hague Convention no tax may be levied except for the needs of the army of occupation.What is an army of occupation?It is that which, finding itself in a conquered territory, undertakes the policing and safeguards the security of that territory.This is why it may appear legitimate for the army to force the occupied territory to support it.But our country—as Field-Marshal von der Goltz has declared, and as is perfectly obvious—our country has become the basis of military operations against the Allies. According to the spirit of the Hague Convention, there is no army of occupation, properly speaking, in our country, and in any case the 35,000 men concentrated in Namur and the artillery assembled at Liége cannot in any respects be regarded as making part of an army of occupation.It is, therefore, contrary to law and contrary to reason that these 480,000,000 frs. are demanded from the country.Are we then going to vote this formidable war-tax?Assuredly if we listened only to our hearts we should reply: No, no; 480,000,000 times no.For our hearts would tell us:We were a small nation, happy to live by its labour; we were an honest little nation, having faith in treaties and believing in honour; we were a confident little nation, and unarmed, when suddenly, violently, Germany hurled two million men upon our frontier, the greatest army that the world has ever seen, and she told us: "Betray your given word; let our armies pass that I may crush France, and I will give you gold." But Belgium replied: "Keep your gold; I would rather die than live without honour."History will one day reveal the greatness of the action which forever magnifies us in the eyes of the future. For nothing in the annals of the past equals the sacrifice of this people, which, having nothing to gain and all to lose, preferred to lose all in order that honour should be saved, and deliberately cast herself into an abyss of distress, but also of glory.The German army thus invaded the country in violation of solemn treaties."It is an injustice," said the Chancellor of the Empire; "the destinies of the Empire forced us to commit it; but we shall repair the wrong done to Belgium by the passage of our armies...."This, then, is how they mean to repair that wrong:Germany will pay——But no! Belgium will pay Germany 480,000,000 frs.! Vote this money!
Speech delivered by M. François André at the meeting of the Provincial Council of Hainaut, on the 19th December, 1914, in the presence of the German Governor and Dr. Daniest, President.
... We have met by order of the German authorities to vote a war-tax; to make one word of many, we have met to furnish arms to the formidable invader of our country, to be used against our heroic little Belgian army....
We are thus assembled to vote,by order, a war-tax.
I wish to protest—against both the form and the substance of this tax.
As to the form, I regard this extraordinary session as absolutely illegal; the Provincial Councillors are not qualified to vote war-taxes affecting the whole country; moreover, the councillors of the various provinces, in concerting as to the measures to be taken in common, so to speak, which are matters beyond the scope of their jurisdiction, are committing an offence in Belgian law, which law no German decree has abrogated. As to the substance: Admitting that the German authorities have the right to levy taxes on the whole country, while our 120,000 soldiers are still in occupation of our territory, it is very certain that according to the terms of the Hague Convention no tax may be levied except for the needs of the army of occupation.
What is an army of occupation?
It is that which, finding itself in a conquered territory, undertakes the policing and safeguards the security of that territory.
This is why it may appear legitimate for the army to force the occupied territory to support it.
But our country—as Field-Marshal von der Goltz has declared, and as is perfectly obvious—our country has become the basis of military operations against the Allies. According to the spirit of the Hague Convention, there is no army of occupation, properly speaking, in our country, and in any case the 35,000 men concentrated in Namur and the artillery assembled at Liége cannot in any respects be regarded as making part of an army of occupation.
It is, therefore, contrary to law and contrary to reason that these 480,000,000 frs. are demanded from the country.
Are we then going to vote this formidable war-tax?
Assuredly if we listened only to our hearts we should reply: No, no; 480,000,000 times no.
For our hearts would tell us:
We were a small nation, happy to live by its labour; we were an honest little nation, having faith in treaties and believing in honour; we were a confident little nation, and unarmed, when suddenly, violently, Germany hurled two million men upon our frontier, the greatest army that the world has ever seen, and she told us: "Betray your given word; let our armies pass that I may crush France, and I will give you gold." But Belgium replied: "Keep your gold; I would rather die than live without honour."
History will one day reveal the greatness of the action which forever magnifies us in the eyes of the future. For nothing in the annals of the past equals the sacrifice of this people, which, having nothing to gain and all to lose, preferred to lose all in order that honour should be saved, and deliberately cast herself into an abyss of distress, but also of glory.
The German army thus invaded the country in violation of solemn treaties.
"It is an injustice," said the Chancellor of the Empire; "the destinies of the Empire forced us to commit it; but we shall repair the wrong done to Belgium by the passage of our armies...."
This, then, is how they mean to repair that wrong:
Germany will pay——
But no! Belgium will pay Germany 480,000,000 frs.! Vote this money!
As a matter of penal legislation, the Germans have systematically ignored Article 48, as is proved by the eloquent protest of the President of the Bar of Brussels.
Yet another typical instance of the manner in which Germany disregards our laws. At Aerschot the Germans provisionally invested a German, Herr Ronnewinkel, who had inhabited the district for several years, with the functions of Burgomaster.On the 6th November, 1914, they proclaimed him permanently burgomaster.
Here was a German appointed burgomaster by the will of the district commander, although by the terms of the law only a Belgian appointed by the Government could be burgomaster. Moreover, they did the same at Andenne. The communal autonomy of which Belgium was so proud was thus trampled underfoot.