German opinion, the third professed to express the opinion of a
Frenchman who had favoured the _Times_ with 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
upon _L'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.)
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 bombard Malines 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 York _Tribune_, 22nd October, 1914) representing a military
observation-post on the tower of Notre-Dame.
Even if we grant the picture a documentary value which 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 the _Wochenschau_
does 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. The _Algemeen 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, in
_De 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 a photograph of this infraction of the Hague Convention
in the _Berliner 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 the _Hamburger 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 posted
_on_ the 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
in _Panorama_, a Dutch illustrated paper which surreptitiously enters
Belgium.
Ypres: _Panorama_, 23_b_, 25_a_.
Dixmude: _Panorama_, 23_a_, 23_b_; _Berl. Ill. Zeit._, Nos. 2 and
3, 1915; _Kriegs-Echo_, Nos. 22, 24; _Zeit. im Bild_, No. 3, 1915.
Pervyse: _Panorama_, 21_a_, 21_b_, 23_a_.
Nieuport: _Panorama_, 22_a_.
Ramscapelle: _Panorama_, 23_b_.
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. Always _Kultur_!
_Pillage._
ARTICLE 28.
_The giving over to pillage of a town or place, even when taken by
assault, is forbidden._
ARTICLE 46.
_Family honour and rights, individual life, and private property as
well as religious convictions and worship, must be respected._
ARTICLE 47
_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
subject it 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 his _Kultur_.
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 newspaper _En 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 their furniture 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. The _Matin_ (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 secret of 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 German _Usages of War_. Articles 57, 58, 60, 61, and 62 prohibit
all destruction of private property. But we must suppose that their
_Usages of War_ are 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 characterizes _Kultur_.
_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._
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) (see _Belg.
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 Provincial Councils 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!
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.
We see, then, that in despite of Articles 43 and 48 of the Hague
Convention and Article 67 of their own _Usages of War_ the Germans have
shown no respect whatever for the legislation in force. We cite here
only the most flagrant of these illegalities, those which any person of
common sense can understand and judge.
ARTICLE 44.
_A belligerent is forbidden to compel the inhabitants of territory
occupied by it to furnish information about the army of the other
belligerent, or about its means of defence._
This article was not accepted by Germany; she remains faithful to her
_Usages of War_: Article 53, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th paragraphs, and applies
their principles with extreme severity.
Nothing better illustrates the severity with which the Germans
act than the little manual of conversation which terminates the
_Tornisterwörterbuch_, published by the Mentor publishing house in
Schöneberg, Berlin. It is a small dictionary, costing 60 pfennigs,
and intended, as the title indicates, to be carried in the soldier's
knapsack. The French dictionary and the English are conceived according
to the same method; after information concerning the country in
question they give a summary of the rules of grammar; then comes the
dictionary properly so-called, with phonetic pronunciation; finally,
a few common phrases, which to us are the most interesting part of
the book, since their choice naturally reflects the requirements of
those expected to employ them. Here are a few passages from paragraph
4: _Service of Outposts and Patrols_. In each passage we copy all the
phrases without exception, so as to avoid misrepresenting the spirit of
the work; and this spirit, as will be seen, is ferocious. The volume is
not dated; but the 42nd edition, from which we quote, describes (p. 44)
the French campaigning uniform of 1912. These phrases were therefore
printed at least five years after the second Hague Conference (18th
October, 1907). They show clearly that the acts of cruelty committed
by the patrols against those who refused to betray their country were
not improvised by the cavalry taking part in these reconnaissances, but
were systematically premeditated.
P. 175--
Silence! Speak only when I question you!
You seem to me a suspicious person.
Where is your pocket-book?
I must search it.
Remain here for the moment.
At the first attempt at flight you will be shot.
Sir, where does this road lead?
P. 176--
Is this village occupied by the French?
When did the troops arrive there?
What is roughly their composition?
Roughly? Two or three companies?
How many officers, roughly speaking?
Have they any artillery?
How many guns?
Have you seen cavalry too?
Tell us the truth. The least lie might cost you your life!
P. 177--
Has the village been placed in a state of defence?
Are there no cross-roads leading to the windmill?
Remain by my horse.
On the first attempt at flight, or if you try to mislead
me, I shall send a bullet after you.
Stop here! I will call the miller myself.
Hey! Miller!
Have any French troops passed this way?
You lie! Here are visible traces, and quite fresh ones.
A little manual of conversation costing 20
pfennigs--_Deutsch-Französischer-Soldaten-Sprachführer_, by Captain S.
Th. Hoasmann, is conceived on the same lines. Here are a few examples.
The soldier, making a reconnaissance, declares: "Speak the truth or you
will be killed!" In the chapter on "Posts and Telegraphs" we find the
phrase: "It is forbidden (on pain of death) to send telegrams." And the
sentinel should be able to say: "If you lie you will be shot," etc.
ARTICLE 50.
_No collective penalty, pecuniary or otherwise, shall be inflicted
upon the population on account of the acts of individuals for which
it cannot be regarded as collectively responsible._
This article proclaims the principle that in no case must the innocent
suffer with the guilty, nor in their place. We have already seen that
our enemies oppose this idea; they maintain that the innocent should
suffer with the guilty, and even that if one cannot lay hands on the
guilty one may punish the innocent in their place (p. 84). It was by
the application of this German principle of collective punishment that
Louvain, Dinant, Termonde, and other towns were burned.
The placard of 1st October, 1914, clearly displays the German
mentality; it states that villages will be punished without mercy,
whether guilty or not.
NOTICE.
On the evening of the 25th September the railway and telegraph
lines were destroyed between Lovenjoul and Vestryck. In consequence
of which the two localities mentioned were, on the morning of the
30th September, called to account and forced to supply hostages.
In future the localities nearest the spot at which such acts have
been committed--no matter whether they are guilty of complicity
or not--will be punished without pity. To this end hostages have
been taken from all localities adjacent to railway lines threatened
by such attacks, and at the first attempt to destroy the railway
lines, or telegraph or telephone wires, they will immediately be
shot.
Moreover, all troops charged with the protection of railways have
received orders to shoot any person approaching railway lines or
telephone or telegraph wires in a suspicious manner.
THE GOVERNOR-GENERAL IN BELGIUM,
BARON VON DER GOLTZ,
_General Field-Marshal_.
BRUSSELS, _1st October, 1914_.
Fully to appreciate the horrible nature of this placard we must recall
the fact that during the siege of Antwerp (which terminated only on
the 9th) Belgium patrols were penetrating into the midst of the German
troops, venturing thirty-five miles and more from Antwerp, their
mission being to harass the enemy's communications and to destroy the
railways and the telegraph and telephone line. It was one of these
bodies of Belgian cyclists which cut the railway and telegraph line
between Louvain and Tirlemont on 25th September, 1914. Von der Goltz
was evidently aware that this destruction was a perfectly legitimate
military operation, so that his placard was intended simply to
embarrass our military authorities by showing them that in defiance
of all justice Germany intended to hold the Belgian civilians
responsible for the activity of our army. In short, instead of saying
"no matter whether these localities are guilty of complicity or not,"
von der Goltz would have given a greater proof of sincerity had he
said, "although I know that these localities are in no way guilty of
complicity."
Here are two other placards, printed in Germany, which show plainly
that it is according to a system that our oppressors hold the entire
community responsible for the act committed by a single person; or
rather, as we shall see, for the acts of the Belgian army.
PLACARD PRINTED IN GERMAN, FRENCH, RUSSIAN, AND POLISH, SURROUNDED
BY A BORDER OF THE GERMAN COLOURS.
NOTICE.
Any person who shall have damaged a military telephone or telegraph
will be shot.
Any person removing this notice will also receive the severest
punishment. If the guilty person is not found, the severest
measures will be taken against the commune in which the damage has
been caused or the present notice removed.
THE GENERAL COMMANDING THE ARMY CORPS.
(_Posted at Bieghem, copy made 22nd October, 1914._)
NOTICE.
All damage done to the Telegraph, Telephone, or Railway lines will
be punished by the Military Court. According to the circumstances,
the guilty person will be condemned to death.
If the guilty person is not seized the severest measures will be
taken against the commune in which the damage has been done,
THE GENERAL GOVERNMENT.
Printed by H. A. Heymann, Berlin, S.W.
(_Posted at Tervueren, copy made 15th April, 1915._)
Very frequently the penalties with which the community is threatened
are not specified in these placards. One may suppose that it would
consist of a fine; this is indeed the punishment most frequently
applied, doubtless because it is the most productive. Here are some
examples, for cutting the telegraph wires, various localities in
Flanders were forced to pay fines in December 1914.
The military chest does not lack for money; for in a garrison command a
fine may be inflicted more readily than elsewhere. Here is an example.
An officer was choosing some music in a shop; and found, amidst a heap
of pieces of music, a copy of the _Marseillaise_. Now it has never
been stated that one must not possess the _Marseillaise_. Result: the
shopkeeper was condemned to pay a fine of 500 marks or to twenty days'
imprisonment. "I prefer the imprisonment," said the unfortunate man.
"But, my good fellow, you can avoid going to prison! Pay the fine!" "I
know, but I have not got 500 marks. I could only scrape together 150
frs. at most." "All right, give them to me!"
* * * * *
_Fines for Telegraphic Interruptions._
The military chest is also replenished by the fines paid because the
telegraph and telephone do not work properly. Now it has often happened
during the last six weeks that communication has been obstructed in
Flanders. The smallest communes have been forced to pay fines.
Here is a brief list of such fines:
Gand 100,000 marks
Ledebourg 5,000 "
Destelbergen 30,000 "
Schellebelle 50,000 "
Sweveghem 4,900 "
Winckel Sainte-Croix 3,000 "
Wachtebeke 3,000 "
_(N.R.C._, 30th January, 1915, evening edition.)
_Fines for "Attacks by Francs-tireurs."_
We may observe, in passing, that in September 1914 the accusation--the
accusation, we say, not the offence--of having allowed a telegraph
wire to deteriorate was punished, in Brussels, by a stoppage of the
telephone service; but in December the Germans preferred to fill
their treasury. The same observation is true of Mons and Bilsen; the
accusation of "francs-tireurs," which in September 1914 would have
ended in a massacre of the inhabitants and the burning of the town,
was in October the motive for a tax of 100,000 frs. At that time it no
longer seemed essential to terrorize; the Germans no longer required
blood, but money.
ON BEHALF OF THE GERMAN MILITARY AUTHORITIES.
WARNING.
The City of Mons has been forced to pay a tax of 100,000 frs.
because a private person fired upon a German soldier.
(_Posted at Louvain._)
And indeed it is money that is demanded everywhere--5,000 frs. from the
commune of Grenbergen, near Termonde, because an inhabitant allowed
his pigeons to fly. 5,000,000 frs. was required of Brussels because
a police agent maltreated a German spy (p. 157). It was with a money
fine that Mons was threatened should an Englishman be discovered on its
soil (placard posted at Mons, 6th November, 1914), and the city of Mons
and the province of Hainaut if any inhabitant retained for his own use
any benzine or a motor-bicycle (placard posted at Mons, 6th October,
1914). At Seraing, in February 1915, it was again money that was
demanded, because a bomb had burst within the limits of the commune.
The more surely to obtain the sum, a few hostages were imprisoned, with
the promise that they would be sent to a fortress in Germany if the
communal treasury did not pay their ransom; but the hostages themselves
advised the commune to refuse. The Germans, fearing to be left in the
lurch, reduced their demands by half; finally, having obtained nothing,
they released the hostages. Singular justice, to regulate its penalties
not by the gravity of the offence, but according to the temper of the
victims! We are waiting for the German newspapers to publish a schedule
of penalties as affected by the docility of the victims and the season.
Here is an amusing instance of a penalty which was inflicted upon
Antwerp. When the Germans posted up a statement that they had captured
52,000 Russians and 400 guns in Eastern Prussia, a playful citizen
replaced the first letter of _Russians_ in the Flemish text by an M
and concealed the two first letters of _canonen_. The new version
announced that the Germans had captured 52,000 sparrows and 400 nuns.
The Germans were annoyed and imposed a fine of 25,000 frs. on the city.
At Tirlemont, where the same pleasantry was perpetrated, the Germans
contented themselves with making vague threats.
The adventure of Eppeghem also deserves to be told in a few words.
In November 1914 a German soldier walking in the country fired at a
hare or a pigeon. An officer turned up and questioned the soldier. As
all sport is reserved for officers, the soldier, to avoid punishment,
threw the blame on to the peasants. The matter was referred to
Brussels, and on the following day officers arrived with forty Uhlans.
A fine of 10,000 frs. was inflicted on the commune.
Some women living in a house which had by chance remained standing,
near the field in which the soldier had fired, asserted that no
inhabitant had fired a shot, but that they had seen the soldier fire.
No one listened to them. "We must have 10,000 frs., and at once." But
in this village, ruined from end to end, where scarcely a house was
habitable, from which all the men had been deported into Germany,
there was no means of collecting such a sum of money. "Since that is
so, hostages will be taken," said the officers. The Uhlans organized a
hunt, and seized the curé and three laymen, the only ones they could
find; and even of these one was an inhabitant of Vilverde, who had
obligingly been acting as a citizen policeman at Eppeghem. They were
taken to Brussels, but on passing through Vilverde the inhabitant of
that place was released, owing to the protests of his fellow-citizens.
After ten days' imprisonment Baron von der Goltz, finding that there
was nothing to be extracted from the communal treasury of Eppeghem,
and that the curé and his two parishioners were being kept and fed at
a loss, set them at liberty.
_Hostages_
The taking of hostages is also in flagrant opposition to the provisions
of Article 50, but in conformity with the German _Usages of War_. The
hostage guarantees with his own life that his fellow-citizens, with
whom he has no influence, shall faithfully execute the orders of the
German authorities.
The first care of enemy troops arriving in any locality is always to
demand the provision of hostages; these are usually the curé, the
burgomaster, the notary, the schoolmaster, and a few other notables.
We may recall Liége, where the bishop, Mgr. Rutten, was taken hostage;
Spa, Louvain, Charleroi, Gand, and Mons. In Brussels they demanded the
delivery of 100 hostages, but afterwards withdrew the demand.
As to the fate which awaits the hostages if the German army is
attacked, it is plainly stipulated in the proclamations: they will be
shot, "without previous judicial formalities." Thus, it would have been
enough for a Belgian patrol to renew its usual activities near Forest,
and two hostages would have immediately been shot "without previous
judicial formalities."
GENERAL GOVERNMENT IN BELGIUM.
TO THE PEOPLE OF FOREST.
Despite my repeated warnings attacks have again been made during
the last few days by the civil population of the neighbourhood
against German troops, and also upon the railway between Brussels
and Mons.
By the order of the Military Governor-General of Brussels each
locality must consequently provide hostages.
Thus at Forest the following are arrested:
(1) M. Vanderkindere, Communal Councillor.
(2) M. le curé François.
I proclaim that these hostages will immediately be shot without
previous judicial formalities if any attack occurs on the part of
the population upon our troops or the railway lines occupied by us,
and that moreover the most severe reprisals will be carried out
against the commune of Forest.
I request the population to keep calm and to refrain from all
violence; in this case it will not suffer the slightest harm.
THE COMMANDANT OF THE LANDSTURM,
HALBERSTADT BATTALION,
VON LESSEL.
FOREST, _26th September, 1914_.
If hostages try to escape they will be hanged and their village burned.
WARNING.
As fresh attempts at assassination have been made upon persons
forming part of the German army I have had persons from many
localities arrested as hostages. These will guarantee with their
lives that no inhabitant will again dare to commit a malevolent
action against German soldiers or attempt to damage the railway,
telegraph or telephone line, or other objects useful to the
operations of our army.
Persons not belonging to the army surprised in committing such
actions will be shot or hanged. The hostages of the surrounding
localities will suffer the same fate. I shall then have the
neighbourhood burned to the last house, even if important towns
are in question. If the hostages attempt to escape the locality to
which they belong will be burned, and if captured the hostages will
be hanged.
All inhabitants who give proof of their goodwill toward our troops
are assured of the safety of their lives and property.
THE COMMANDANT ENTRUSTED WITH THE
PROTECTION OF THE RAILWAYS,
FREIHERR VON MALZAHN.
(_Posted at Spa, Aywaille, Châtelineau.... 17th August, 1914._)
We do not know if hostages were shot or hanged in Belgium. But in the
north of France, according to a military correspondent of the _K.Z._,
at least one hostage was killed; this assassination was the more
criminal in that it punished not a hostile act of the inhabitants, but
a perfectly normal and regular operation of war: a bombardment.
A WAR PICTURE.
... A château stands beside the highway, at the back of a courtyard
protected by a French spear-headed railing. It is intact, and
shelters the staff of an infantry regiment. Facing it is the ruined
façade of an incredibly pretentious building on whose pediment
sprawls in letters of gold the one word, "Bank." Beside it is a
wholesale corn-chandler's and a wholesale wine-merchant's. All
this belonged to a single man. It was necessary to shoot him as
hostage, because the French were persisting, despite all warnings,
in throwing shells into the neighbourhood. In the wine-cellars
stores of unexpected importance were found; according to the
estimates there are more than half a million litres of red and
white wine of very good quality. A great part of the wine was
pumped out of the tanks and received, like an old acquaintance, by
the comrades far and near.
The rich man of this quarter of the town had a companion who was
more lucky, who in due time sought safety in flight.
(_K.Z._, 21st February, 1915.)
A very curious case of the punishment of innocent people in the case
of "guilty" ones is the following: On the 7th October, 1914, the
Germans posted statements that the militia-men of the occupied regions
could not rejoin the Belgian army, and that in case of disobedience
the young men would expose themselves to the risk of being sent into
Germany as prisoners of war. So far, nothing illegal. But the placard
then declared that in case of the departure of any militia-man his
family would be held responsible. Now, how are the parents guilty,
if their son intends at all costs to fulfil his obligations to his
native country? On the 30th December, 1914, there was an aggravation of
this measure: the burgomasters also were to be punished. On the 28th
January, 1915, a new notice appeared: all Belgians between the ages
of sixteen and forty years were to be regarded as capable of military
service. So when a man of forty goes to join the Belgian army the
members of his family will be punished! Truly the notice might have
stated whether children would be punished for not preventing their
father's departure!
Have there been cases of repression? The _N.R.C._ states that at
Hasselt the Germans actually arrested the fathers and mothers of the
young men who escaped.
The _Tijd_ learns from Ruremonde:
At Hasselt and in the neighbourhood the Germans have hunted down
the fathers of those young men who, liable to be called to the
colours, have been able, in spite of strict prohibition and active
supervision, to enter Holland, there to pass through England and
France with the intention of eventually joining the army.
But as soon as they heard that the fathers were being arrested,
these latter also crossed the frontier, and the Germans found that
a great many birds had flown.
They did not stop then: the mothers were arrested in their place.
At the same time the Germans made it known that all these people
would be transferred to the well-known camp at Münster, and
warned the women to provide themselves with as much body-linen as
possible. The whole of the little town was in consternation. Later
arrived a telegram from General von Bissing, announcing that the
departure for Münster was postponed for a week, and the prisoners
were taken to Tongres.
(_N.R.C._, 3rd February, 1915.)
A last example of punishment inflicted upon the innocent, when the
"guilty" person had already suffered punishment. A Belgian, having made
signals to the enemy (that is, to the Belgian army), was killed while
being arrested. Immediately the curé and the vicar were sent to Germany
as being responsible for the members of their parish.
IMPORTANT NOTICE.
Alidor Vandamme, inhabitant of Cortemarck, committed espionage by
making signals to the enemy. Resisting arrest, he was killed by a
rifle-bullet.
The German authority has taken the following measures of coercion
in consequence of the crime committed by Vandamme:
1. The curé Blancke and the vicar Barra, responsible for the
members of their parish, will be deported as prisoners of war to
Germany.
2. The commune of Cortemarck must pay a fine of five thousand marks
(5,000 M.).
(_Posted at Thielt_, _Termonde_, _etc._)
This iniquity was not enough for the German authorities: they
advertised it all through Flanders (we copied it at Thielt and
Termonde), and forced _Le Bien Public_ to give it publicity. Through
lack of conscience or insolence?
_Contributions and Requisitions._
ARTICLE 51.
_No contribution shall be collected except under a written order,
and on the responsibility of a General in command._
_The collection of the said contribution shall only be effected
in accordance, as far as is possible, with the legal basis and
assessment of taxes in force at the time._
_For every contribution a receipt shall be given to the
contributories._
ARTICLE 52.
_Requisitions in kind and services shall not be demanded from local
authorities or inhabitants except for the needs of the army of
occupation. They shall be in proportion to the resources of the
country, and of such a nature as not to involve the inhabitants in
the obligation of taking part in military operations against their
own country. Such requisitions and services shall only be demanded
on the authority of the commander in the locality occupied._
_Contributions in kind shall as far as possible be paid for in
ready money: if not, a receipt shall be given and the payment of
the amount due shall be made as soon as possible._
The last paragraph of Article 23, already cited, in reality presupposes
that passage in Article 52 which forbids the occupant to force the
inhabitants to do work which would assist operations directed against
their country (p. 112).
Among the forms of contribution included in Article 49 we must
give first place to that which fixes the value of the mark. The
_Düsseldorfer Zeitung_ of the 4th September announces that the military
commander of the occupied portion of Belgium and France fixed the value
of 100 marks at 130 frs. And indeed placards posted at Charleroi,
Saint-Trond, Namur, and Liége required the Belgians to accept German
marks at this exaggerated tariff, which has caused certain of our
merchants to lose considerable sums.
PROCLAMATION.
The circulation of German money having given rise to perplexities,
_the value of the German mark has been fixed at 130 centimes_.
The attention of the public is called to the fact that all German
paper money must be accepted in financial transactions at the same
rate as German coin.
THE GOVERNOR.
_The 25th August, 1914._
(_Posted at Liége._)
The fraudulent intention in this measure was only too evident. A month
later Baron von der Goltz made it known that until further notice the
mark was to be valued at the lowest at 1 fr. 25 (placard of the 3rd
October, 1914). In reality the mark was worth only 1 fr. 08 to 1 fr.
15, so that the Belgians naturally endeavoured to refuse German notes;
whereupon fresh placards were exhibited, compelling their acceptance
(placards of the 4th and 15th November, 1914). We must mention an
unhappy phrase in a placard posted at Mons; it states that the mark
must be accepted _at the actual value of the coin_, and further on
fixes this value at 1 fr. 25, which is obviously incorrect.
_Contributions demanded from the Cities._
Let us now consider the pecuniary contributions demanded from the
cities. The most important were: Liége, 20 million frs.; Namur, 32
millions; Antwerp, 40 millions; Brussels, 45 millions. The discussions
excited by this last contribution are extremely instructive; they
have been reported by the _N.R.C._ We learn how the Germans violated,
successively, all the different agreements which they concluded with
the city; finally they imposed a fine of 5 millions, which enabled
them, in spite of everything, to complete the sum of 50 millions which
they had promised themselves they would extort from the capital.
CONTRIBUTION IMPOSED UPON BRUSSELS.
FROM ONE OF OUR WAR CORRESPONDENTS
... In the course of this journey I once more heard people speaking
of the reasons which resulted in the city of Brussels being fined
the sum of fifty millions of francs, as every one knows. What I
relate here I had from one of the most eminent members of the
magistracy:--
At the time of their entry here, the Germans demanded fifty
millions from the city, and--don't cry out at this--450 millions
from the province of Brabant. The communal council of Brussels
tried to demonstrate that the city could not pay this tax, and that
the tax imposed on the province was utterly exorbitant, seeing
that Brabant, which draws on the budget for an annual sum of five
to six millions, employed this money before it was paid, and could
not, therefore, pay a fine, since the province had first to provide
for its expenditure.... Having discussed the matter at great
length, the Germans finally released Brabant from this war-tax,
and at the same time gave the communal council a week to find the
fifty millions, during which period they would suspend all other
requisitions.
Burgomaster Max then had posted the well-known placard announcing
that for the coming week no requisitions whatever would be made by
the German authorities.
But on the following day the burgomaster was called upon to justify
his action, and although he produced the written convention before
the new Governor of the city, the latter gave him to understand
that his predecessor might possibly have granted such a delay,
but that he, being of superior rank, did not recognize the clause
at issue. Fresh negotiations were commenced, and it was at last
arranged that twenty millions should be paid in five instalments of
four millions each. Four of these instalments were punctually paid,
and the fifth was about to be paid, when Max was summoned by the
Governor, who asked him what his arrangements were concerning the
remaining thirty millions.
Max did not conceal his extreme surprise, stating that he fully
understood that the remainder of the tax had been remitted, and
that the twenty millions constituted the whole amount.
The German Governor was by no means of this opinion, and demanded
the remaining thirty millions. Thereupon Max immediately sent an
order to the bank to suspend payment of the last four millions,
which were ready for payment, until he was certain that the Germans
would accept them as the final instalment. There was then on either
side an equal degree of obstinacy. The Governor maintained that Max
was breaking his engagements; Max, on the other hand, maintained
that the Germans had failed to keep their word. The result was
that the burgomaster was arrested, and he is at the present moment
imprisoned in a fortress at Glatz in Silesia.
The communal council was then warned that it would be deprived
of its functions, and that the Germans would take over the
administration of the city if the war-tax was not paid.
There were again interminable negotiations, and it was arranged
that in all forty-five millions should be paid.
The sum was paid. Still the Germans wanted to get hold of the five
remaining millions, so a police agent who had shown lack of respect
for an officer was condemned to five years' imprisonment, while
Brussels was fined five million francs.
One might ask whether, if the Germans continue to act in this
fashion, the city of Brussels will be forced to pay a fine each
time one of its functionaries is guilty of offence: for it is
impossible that the city can control all its employés.
In this case the German officer who was insulted was in civilian
clothes. Now to a complaint of the communal council the Governor
had replied, some time previously, that there were no secret agents
at work in civilian clothing; so that the police agent could not
have known that he was dealing with an officer, since the latter
was not in uniform.
It may be imagined that lively protests were made, but once more
the Germans threatened to assume the direction of the commune
if the sum was not paid by the 10th November at latest; so,
although the council presented a memorandum on the affair, it was
nevertheless forced to pay in order to pursue its mission in peace.
(_N.R.C._, 9th November, 1914.)
_Exactions of a Non-commissioned Officer._
Fines without rhyme and reason, and exorbitant war contributions have
become so normal and so customary that the Germans have finally learned
to exploit the situation. The _N.R.C._ for the 21st May, 1915, reported
that the Council of War in Coblenz had condemned to eighteen months'
imprisonment the non-commissioned officer Garternich, who had demanded
from several occupied Belgian communes a war contribution of 3 frs.
per head, and had thus acquired, for his own personal profit, a sum of
27,393 frs. Does not this simple fact reveal the habitual squeezing to
which our poor country is subjected? Eighteen months' imprisonment for
having emptied the communal treasuries already officially despoiled by
the authorities--that truly is not much; especially when we compare
this sentence with those pronounced upon the communes when a telegraph
wire breaks down: the threat of burning a whole neighbourhood or a
formidable fine.
_Requisitions of Raw Materials and Machinery._
_Requisitions may only be demanded_, says Article 52, _for the needs
of the army of occupation_. Now our enemies have removed from Belgium
enormous quantities of raw material, and machinery which evidently
cannot be of use to the army of occupation (see _Belg. Allem._, pp.
113, 116, 117). What can the army do with raw cotton, wools, spun
cotton, nickel, jute, etc.? It can be of use only to the industries of
Germany, paralysed by the suppression of the mercantile marine. Among
these requisitions are included machine-tools for the manufacture of
shells (notably those removed from the national arsenal at Herstal and
the royal cannon foundry at Liége), and metals, such as copper, which
are indispensable to the manufacture of munitions; so that the articles
which have been taken from us, contrary to Article 52 of the Hague
Convention, subscribed to by Germany, are thus directly employed in
fighting against us.
The Germans cannot pretend that these requisitions of machinery
were made by over-zealous officers ignorant of the laws, for Baron
von Bissing himself, in his quality of Governor-General, signed
the proclamation of the 17th February ordering the despatch of our
machine-tools to Germany. Moreover, in Berlin even people are perfectly
aware of these requisitions, and of their destination (_N.R.C._, 22nd
February, 1915, morning edition).
We must insist on the fact that all these raw materials of industry,
all this machinery, etc., is not bought, but requisitioned. There is
here no case of a commercial transaction, nor even an expropriation;
for we have no redress against the decision arrived at in Berlin as to
the prices which will be paid after the war. It is a theft, to express
the matter in a word.
_Requisitions in kind and in services ... shall be in proportion to the
resources of the country_, says Article 52; which evidently means that
requisitions must not exhaust the country to the point of jeopardizing
the lives of the inhabitants. If this stipulation had been respected
we should not have to deplore the famine which is ravaging our country,
and to which we shall return later on.
We shall confine ourselves--in order to give some idea of the excessive
and inhuman manner in which requisitions have been made--to referring
the reader to certain articles written by eye-witnesses, particularly
those who have seen what has happened near the frontier, and at Gand.
It will at once be recognized that the requisitions made exceed that
which the inhabitants can reasonably provide (see _N.R.C._, 10th
January, 1915, morning; 23rd January, 1915, morning; 16th January,
1915, evening; 30th January, 1915, evening; 12th January, 1915,
morning; 22nd December, 1914, evening).
The Germans have always taken good care to demand wine. They demanded
enormous quantities in the little villages of the Campine of Limburg
(_N.R.C._, 15th January, 1915). Elsewhere they took for their own use
all the cellars of the wine-merchants and the inhabitants, without
allowing the latter to make use of them (see _Belg. Allem._, p. 118).
A last point as to requisitions. They shall _as far as possible be paid
for in ready money; if not, a receipt shall be given_.
Very often no receipt has been given to the owners of property taken.
Elsewhere the receipts are fantastical and valueless.
It is the truth that those who do receive vouchers are requested
to satisfy themselves of their accuracy, but this prescription is
obviously a dead letter. Imagine, on the one hand, a peasant, Fleming
or Walloon, terrorized into a condition of helplessness, and incapable
of reading a voucher scrawled in German; and on the other, soldiers
whose customary arguments are shooting and burning.
ARTICLE 53.
_An army of occupation shall only take possession of cash, funds,
and realizable securities which are strictly the property of the
State, depôts of arms, means of transport, stores and supplies,
and, generally, all movable property belonging to the State which
may be used for military operations...._
From the very first days of the occupation the Germans, in defiance
of law and justice, seized upon the communal treasuries and the funds
deposited in the branch establishments of the National Bank, the
post offices, etc. They were obliged to recognize the justice of the
protests made by the Belgian Government; but their love of pillage is
incorrigible; on entering Gand, on Monday, the 12th October, their
first care was to lay hands on the 1,800,000 (£72,000) contained in the
communal treasury.
According to Article 55 the Germans had no right to remove the
furniture of the Ministries of Brussels (p. 134), since this property
was not of a kind to be useful in military operations.
ARTICLE 55.
_The occupying State shall be regarded only as administrator and
usufructuary of public buildings, landed property, forests, and
agricultural undertakings belonging to the hostile State, and
situated in the occupied country. It must safeguard the capital of
such properties and administer them in accordance with the rules of
usufruct._
The German respect for legality did not restrain them from violating
this Article. From the very first days of the war they employed the
churches which they consented to leave standing as stables; on reaching
Liége they took possession of the Palais de Justice and made a
barracks of it. Why did they expel Justice? Herren Koester and Noske
tell us (p. 30), it was simply because the position is central and easy
to defend (see a photograph facing p. 32). They did not take account
of the fact that such employment of the building is doubly contrary
to the Hague Convention, since they did not respect the nature of the
monument, and exposed it to bombardment by Allied aviators on the
look-out for the German garrison.
It was the same with the Palais de Justice of Brussels, which also
serves as a German barracks. To adapt it to its novel use, the soldiers
have destroyed a great part of the magnificent furnishings which
adorned the halls; the immediate surroundings have been fortified,
and the cupola serves by night as a station for signalling to
dirigibles. In short, all preparations have been made with a view to
the bombardment of Poelaert's masterpiece by the Allies.
It is obviously with the idea of preventing their adversaries from
attacking them that they take up their quarters in our monuments; these
are to serve them as artistic bucklers, just as our compatriots are
employed as living bucklers.
The violations of Article 55 are past counting. We will confine
ourselves to mentioning a few in Brussels; they will give us some idea
of the diversity of the transformations which our property has suffered
at German hands. The offices of the Ministries are transformed into
bedrooms for officers. The Palais des Académies has become a military
hospital; God knows in what condition we shall find its libraries.
In the Parc Royal of Brussels, in the centre of the city, they have
installed an automobile depôt, a riding-track, and a rifle range; on
the 28th October a shot fired from this range wounded a lady through
the windows of the Schlobach _magasin_ in the Rue Royale.
ARTICLE 56.
_The property of local authorities, as well as that of institutions
dedicated to public worship, charity, education, and to science
and art, even when State property, shall be treated as private
property._
_Any seizure or destruction of, or wilful damage to, institutions
of this character, historic monuments and works of science and art,
is forbidden, and should be made the subject of legal proceedings._
The first paragraph of this Article has been scrupulously observed;
the property of the communes, etc., has indeed been treated as private
property has been treated: the latter has everywhere been sacked and
looted, and the Germans have done the same to collective property.
As to the intentional character of these acts of vandalism, it is
indubitable. How otherwise explain the fact that in numerous villages
the church has been the prey of the flames, in many cases even when
the surrounding houses have remained intact? A few examples will
suffice. The village of Haecht was occupied on the 19th and 20th
August. On the 24th the Belgians in Antwerp made a sortie which was
repulsed. The Germans, infuriated, shot 17 civilians and pillaged all
the houses, particularly remembering the wine in the cellars. Then the
inhabitants were expelled. A fresh sortie of the Belgians took place
from the 9th to the 13th September; at noon on the last day our troops
fell back; in the afternoon the Germans set fire to the church and 41
houses. The strong-box of the church was broken open after the fire.
The destruction of the monument did not strike them as sufficient,
and they dynamited the whole on the 16th (or 17th) September. In
the neighbouring village of Werchter, after the battle of the 25th
and 26th August, they shot 6 civilians and burned 267 houses out of
the 513 which formed the village. After the second fight, on the
15th September, they burned the church. In both villages most of the
houses round the churches were spared; it will therefore be difficult
for the Germans to pretend, as at Louvain, that the burning of these
churches was an accident (_Brandunglück_) due to burning fragments
carried by the wind (p. 220). We have already (p. 73) noted another
more significant case, that of the chapel of the Béguinage of Termonde,
which was alone burned, in the centre of the Béguinage, not a dwelling
of which was touched.
_Conclusions--The Famine in Belgium._
Germany had need, in the conflict with France, of all the men who
passed through Belgium; also she could leave in Belgium only weak
garrisons of the Landsturm. To safeguard them against possible attack
on the part of the Belgian population, it was necessary to terrorize
the latter to such a point that it no longer dared to stir. Such was
the object of the carnage and incendiarism which marked the beginning
of the campaign, as was frankly admitted by Herr Walter Blöm, adjutant
to the Governor-General in Belgium (p. 84). No doubt the massacres of
Louvain, Andenne, Tamines, and Dinant, committed to order between the
19th and the 26th August, appeared insufficient, for a new series was
organized between the 4th and 13th September.
At the news of this butchery a resounding cry of horror and indignation
went up from all the nations of the earth. That the Belgian Army,
on the field of battle, should have paid large tribute to the war
unloosed upon us by Germany--that was to be expected, but no one
would have dared to suppose that Germany, after participating in the
second Hague Conference, would display towards our civil population
such an implacable cruelty, such exterminating fury, as history has
never recorded since the Thirty Years' War. But facts are facts; one
must needs submit to the evidence; the German Army has destroyed our
treasures of art and science, has shot down in cold blood, often by
machine-gun fire, hosts of men, women, even old people and children;
it has ordered the burning of thousands of houses; it has turned whole
districts into deserts.
Still, some semblance of motive was necessary; with a mathematical
regularity the pretext of "francs-tireurs" was alleged. "_Man hat
geschossen_"--that was enough; immediately the neighbourhood was given
over to massacre, pillage, and fire. Never was any inquiry made, no
matter how summary. Yet when it was desired to show a foreigner of
note--for example, Dr. Sven Hedin--how they proceeded in the matter of
punishing "francs-tireurs," a regular Council of War was constituted
... which brought in a verdict of _non-lieu_ (p. 78). We defy the
Germans to cite a single case in which a tribunal of this kind has sat
_before_ reprisals. In the few rare cases when witnesses, etc., have
been questioned the examination has taken place _after_ the firing of
houses and the shooting of inhabitants. This is why we declare without
the slightest reservation that _not one single attack by civilians_ has
been established by any kind of proof.
_The Flight of the Belgians._
The inhabitants of our towns and our countryside soon realized to
what they were exposing themselves if they awaited the arrival of
the Germans in their own homes. So, as the Germans advanced, a void
appeared before them. After the taking of Antwerp, the majority of
the peasants of the "Campine" of Antwerp fled in all haste toward
Holland. If to them we add the people of Antwerp, who had been driven
out by the bombardment, and above all the innumerable villages of
Brabant, Limburg, and the provinces of Liége and Antwerp, whose homes
had been pillaged and reduced to ashes, we shall not be astonished to
find that in October there were more than a million Belgian refugees
in Holland.[30] To our northern neighbours we owe our profoundest
gratitude for the fraternal manner in which they welcomed our
unfortunate compatriots.
_The Causes of the Famine._
The horror provoked by the butchery at Dinant, Aerschot, etc.,
relegated to the background the purely material crimes. But these--the
pillage, methodically conducted, of our towns, villages, farms,
and châteaux--the outrageous requisitions of provisions and of the
raw material of industries--the formidable taxes which drain us
of coin--the fines which rain upon the communal administrations
and on private persons--and many other infractions of the Hague
Convention--have exercised on our economical life an extremely
depressing effect, but have produced no echo abroad: doubtless because
only those can understand the whole extent of our misery who daily rub
shoulders with the thousands of starving and unemployed people who drag
themselves from one end of the town to the other in quest of work that
is not to be found, or who mingle with the interminable files of women
who go in search of rations of bread and soup for their families.
Let us briefly consider the principal causes of famine which prevails
in Belgium.
1. Exaggerated requisitions, out of all proportion to the resources of
the country. They are of two kinds:--
Firstly, those which have emptied the country of grain, cattle, forage,
and other foodstuffs.
Then the requisitions of the raw materials intended for the factories,
which have completely paralysed industry, especially in the Flanders.
One example will suffice. All the workshops of Termonde were burned
save one--the Escaut-Dendre establishment, which makes boots and shoes.
But the Germans sent into Germany both the leather and the shoes which
were in the warehouse. The factory is thus condemned to stand idle for
lack of raw material, and also for lack of funds. Those industries of
which the machinery has been removed are also, of course, doomed to
paralysis. The German authorities threaten to despoil our factories of
all the copper forming part of the machinery, which would reduce them
one and all to impotence. It is an ironical fact that this measure was
announced by a propagandist leaflet addressed to the Belgians.
2. Having made a clean sweep of the greater portion of all that was
indispensable to us, the Germans have been careful to take our money
from us. Under every imaginable pretext, and often without any pretext
at all, they have imposed crushing taxes upon us. The regular payment
of these taxes showing that the public coffers were not yet quite
empty, the Germans hastened to impose fines upon us, which vary from 5
frs. to 5 millions. The private banks, too, are threatened every moment
with the removal of a portion of their funds.
3. It is needless to insist on a third cause, which reduces our
working-class families to idleness and poverty: the destruction of an
enormous number of factories--some bombarded, but most of them burned
of set purpose.
4. We have already seen that many factories which remained intact are
condemned to inactivity by the lack of raw material, or because they
have been deprived of their machinery. The others are equally paralysed.
The stoppage of traffic on the railway lines, the impediments of all
kinds placed in the way of inland navigation, the absence of maritime
navigation, are causes more than sufficient to prevent the importation
of raw materials and the exportation of manufactured products. Of all
these obstacles the most important is assuredly the suppression of
goods traffic on the railways. "Why," say the Germans, "do not Belgian
employés return to their work, since our military trains would in any
case be run by our own men?" Hypocrites! The slowness and irregularity
of the trains is highly inconvenient to the German army, and it would
much like to see them resume their normal speed; but for this it
requires the assistance of the Belgian staff. Is it not obvious that
if our railway-men resumed their labours they would at the same time
facilitate the transport of German troops and munitions?
Let us again cite the prohibition of "circulation" between 8 or 9
o'clock and 6 o'clock, which is an obstacle to night work, which is
quite indispensable to the large industries; and the suppression of the
special trains by which the workers travelled.
5. Commerce has suffered no less than industry. There is no telegraph,
no telephone, no posting of closed letters; that is, no means of
sending or receiving orders. No railway, no horses, no motor-cars to
deliver goods or to supply customers. And, to cap all, the slightest
journey necessitates all sorts of exaggerated expenses: there is the
acquisition of a passport, the train journey at the rate of 10 cm.
per kilometre, hotel expenses, etc. The expenditure might be a minor
matter, but what of the waste of time? Before 1st July, 1915, any one
going from Liége to Brussels for business purposes had first of all to
waste one or two days in procuring his passport; the journey occupied
at least half a day; and after interviewing his client he would find
that there was no train back to Liége on the same day. In short, he
would have to allow four days for a journey which in normal times took
half a day.
* * * * *
Other causes of famine are:
The scarcity and high cost of provisions.
The financial difficulties in which the public powers are involved.
The paralysis of industry and commerce, resulting in unemployment--that
is, in suppression of wages.
In short, a diminution of resources, accompanied by an increase of
expenditure; so that the public coffers are almost powerless to come to
the aid of private distress.
That is how we stand in Belgium.
It is not our intention to depict the poignant distress which has
overwhelmed our country. We shall merely explain briefly how we try to
cope with it; this will suffice to give some idea of it.
_Creation of Temporary Shelters._
Let us first of all consider the country districts. Even when a few
houses only of a village have escaped incendiarism the inhabitants have
returned thither and have resumed their customary labours. Must they
not plough and sow, under penalty of preparing for themselves another
year of wretchedness? Where houses exist no longer they live in a
cellar, or an outhouse to which some kind of roof has been improvised;
families passed the winter of 1914-15 in a potato-silo,[31] under
the shelter of a few mats of straw. In the ruined villages the first
anxiety of the public powers and the relief committees was therefore to
provide provisional shelter.
In the towns and industrial districts the most urgent necessities are
of another kind. What is lacking most particularly is employment. The
administrations have therefore set themselves to provide the unemployed
with paid occupations which do not demand apprenticeship--the clearing
of ruins, the levelling of soil, the digging of reservoirs, etc.
The communal coffers being empty, communal vouchers are issued.
_L'Événement Illustré_, in its fourth issue, gives reproductions of
some of these vouchers, of which, it states, there are more than
500. In the communes near Louvain, where the poverty is particularly
poignant, it has been necessary to create vouchers for 2 centimes (at
Wilsele) and 5 centimes (at Herent).
From the outset stringent measures were taken to make up for the
insufficiency of provisions and to prevent speculators from obtaining
possession of existing stocks. The most important of these regulations
are the following:--
(_a_) Fixing of maximum prices.
(_b_) Prohibition of the exportation of provisions from the commune.
(_c_) It is forbidden to give animals provisions intended for human
beings.
(_d_) Collective exploitation. Many communes have set up in
business as bakers, butchers, restaurant-keepers, coal merchants,
dealers in colonial produce, etc. They prepare bread and soup
daily, and these are provided gratuitously to the poorest, or
sold at a low price to those who still have a few savings. In the
Brussels district there had been distributed by the 31st January,
1915, to adults, 30,060,608 rations, comprising soup and bread,
and to the children 932,838 rations, consisting chiefly of milk,
phosphatine, and powdered milk.
Certain communes also sell meat; others have installed communal stores
for the sale of all kinds of provisions, especially preserved foods,
dried vegetables, salt, potatoes, etc.; almost everywhere coal is sold
retail; petroleum was sold as long as it could be obtained. Moreover,
the collectivities are distributing enormous quantities of clothes; in
the Brussels district alone by the end of January 660,865 frs. worth of
clothing and footwear had been given to the necessitous. Abuses have
as far as possible been guarded against, (1) by the "household card,"
the _Carte de ménage_, which indicates the number of persons composing
each family; and (2) by the limitation of the quantity of each kind of
goods which the household can obtain during the week.
The basis of alimentation is bread. Therefore particularly Draconian
rules have been elaborated for the bakeries.
_The National Relief Committee._
Many problems presented themselves simultaneously, and with an
extreme urgency. In all communes local committees have been set up,
entrusted with the equitable distribution of provisions among all the
inhabitants. We say "all the inhabitants," for the reader must not
form any illusions as to our condition: there is not a single Belgian
family which, if left to itself, could obtain its daily bread; the
general rationing to which the whole population is subjected makes rich
and poor equally dependent on the National Committee of Relief and
Alimentation.
To organize the feeding of the public would have been a task above our
strength if Belgium, in her present distress, had been abandoned to
her own resources. But the misfortunes which have come upon us because
we could not consent to comply with the orders of a tyrannical and
perjured neighbour--the poverty which cripples us more completely day
by day, as requisitions, pillage, taxes, and fines deprive us of our
last resources--the massacres and the incendiarism which have turned
into deserts the most fertile and most densely peopled provinces
of Europe--the molestations and annoyances which have reduced to
unemployment a working population whose activity is proverbial--in
short, the unmerited misfortune which _Kultur_ has inflicted upon
us--all this has awakened, in all the civilized nations, a current of
sympathy and solidarity with poor Belgium.
By Germany our country was condemned to perish of starvation. The
miracle which alone could save us has been effected by the charity
of Spain, Scandinavia, Holland, Italy, Switzerland, New Zealand,
Australia, Canada, the Argentine Republic, Brazil, and, above all,
the United States. Since the month of November 1914 vessels laden
with provisions have been regularly leaving the American ports for
Rotterdam, whence the food is despatched, principally by means of
barges, into Belgium, and distributed, in the smallest villages even,
by the care of the National Committee of Relief and Alimentation. This
Committee is an extension throughout the whole country of a commission
which was formed early in September 1914 to succour the Brussels
district; it is under the patronage of their Excellencies the Marquis
of Villalobar, the Spanish Minister, and Mr. Brand Whitlock, the
United States Minister. In January and February 1915 the Committee was
induced to concern itself also with the country round Maubeuge, and the
Givet--Furnay--Sedan district.
The mission of the National Committee is equitably to distribute relief
and provisions. But it does not itself collect these resources; as
they derive more particularly from the United States it is an American
Committee, the "Commission for Relief in Belgium," which undertakes
to collect and administer funds. It is the American Committee which
despatches to Rotterdam, from American ports, the steamers carrying
food and clothing. In each province the American Commission has a
delegate who supervises the distribution of provisions and relief; he
assures himself that nothing is diverted to the use of the German army.
The Commission for Relief in Belgium sits in London, its chairman being
Mr. Herbert Hoover.
* * * * *
A serious difficulty cropped up immediately. Foreign beneficence was
eager to aid the Belgians, but not, obviously, the butchers who occupy
our country. It was therefore necessary at all costs to prevent the
German army from seizing the provisions and subsidies despatched by
America.
On the 16th October, 1914, the German authorities undertook to
exempt from all requisitions the provisions imported by the National
Committee. But this promise was promptly violated. The Germans, it is
true, did not requisition the wheat, but they did requisition the bread
made from that wheat. Moreover, they pretended that their engagement of
the 16th October, 1914, general as it was, did not affect Flanders, a
_territoire d'étape_ not subject to the Governor-General. This is the
effect of their letter of the 21st November, 1914. Up to the present
it has been impossible to get them to keep the engagements to which
they subscribed on the 16th October; for although they have extended to
cattle-foods the promise that nothing should be requisitioned by the
troops placed under the orders of the Governor-General--the _territoire
d'étape_ being thus excluded--they have, on the other hand, forced
the communes of Flanders to open grain markets, in which they make
purchases, thus continuing to impoverish the food-stores of the country.
While they exclude Flanders from the region exempted from requisitions,
they take care not to breathe a word of this exemption in their own
newspapers. The _K.Z._, on the 4th January, and _Der Volksfreund_
on the 5th declared that requisitions of foodstuffs were suspended
throughout Belgium.
Despite the difficulties raised by the Germans, the National Committee
of Relief and Alimentation has rendered our country inestimable
services, which only those who have visited our towns and rural
districts and have seen the work of the local Committees can form any
conception.
We borrow from the report of the Executive Committee for the month of
January 1915 (published in Brussels 15th February, 1915) a few figures
(_see_ table, p. 176) as to the distribution of relief during the month
of January.
But the National Committee extends its beneficent action over many
departments which are not mentioned in this table.
Here, according to the same report, is the list of these departments:--
I. Department of Alimentation (Foodstuffs).
II. Agricultural Section of the National Committee.
III. Relief Department:
1. Subsidies to Provincial Committees.
2. Construction of Refuges (100,000 frs. for Luxemburg)
3. Organizations patronized:
A. Central Refugee Committee.
B. Assistance and support of families of officers and
under-officers deprived of their means of sustenance
by the war (first subvention 50,000 frs.).
C. Assistance and support of Belgian physicians and
druggists ruined by the war (first subsidy of
10,000 frs.).
D. Assistance and support of artists (first subsidy
10,000 frs.).
E. Assistance and support of infantile charities.
F. Assistance and support of destitute persons.
G. Assistance and support of the homeless (Accommodation
section).
H. Assistance and support of destitute churches (two
subsidies of 5,000 frs. each).
I. Assistance and protection of the unemployed.
J. Assistance and protection of lace-makers (subsidy
of 129,749 frs.).
K. Union of Belgian Towns and Communes.
L. Belgian Intelligence Agency for Prisoners of War
and Persons Interned (monthly subvention of
3,000 frs.).
4. Co-operative Society for Loans and Advances.
5. Advances to Provinces and Communes.
6. Clothing.
DISTRIBUTION OF FOODSTUFFS, CLOTHING, AND SUBSIDIES IN MONEY, IN THE
PROVINCES
NATURE OF MERCHANDISE.
_Quantities in Tons._
----------+------+------+----+-----+-----+----+---+-----+----+-------+---------
Despatched|Wheat | Flour|Rice|Peas | Salt|Po- |Ba-|Maize|Sun-|Cloth- |Subsi-
or | | | |and | |ta- |con| |dry | ing | dies to
Remitted | | | |Beans| |toes| | | | (value|Provin
to-- | | | | | | | | | | in | cial
| | | | | | | | | |Francs)|Commit-
| | | | | | | | | | | tees (in
| | | | | | | | | | | France)
----------+------+------+----+-----+-----+----+---+-----+----+-------+---------
Province | | | | | | | | | | |
of | | | | | | | | | | |
Antwerp | 3,525| 1,247| --| 126| --| 2| --| 713| --|100,880| 300,000
Brussels | | | | | | | | | | |
and | | | | | | | | | | |
District | 3,371| 1,329| 13| 247| 6| --| --| 90| 82|379,058| 300,000
Brabant | 2,962| 1,486| --| 31| 116| 4| 24| 548| 57|101,916| --
Western | | | | | | | | | | |
Flanders | 542| 519| 59| 48| 20| --| --| --| 23| 41,059| 170,000
Eastern | | | | | | | | | | |
Flanders | 4,419| 1,982| 37| 46| 4| --| 3|1,120| 14| --| 300,000
Hainaut | 5,602| 3,739| 258| 350| --| 74| --| 181| 293| 81,493| 550,000
Liége | 3,356| 1,242| --| 5| --| --| --| 200| 80| 4,860| 280,000
Limburg | 1,539| 1,466| 11| --| --| 22| --| 200| 35| 41,477| 160,000
Luxemburg | 209| 853| 1| 58| --| --| --| --| --| 16,656| 160,000
Namur | 1,011| 346| --| 60| --| --| --| 150| 89| 95,307| 203,000
General | | | | | | | | | | |
Stock, | | | | | | | | | | |
Brussels | 446| 119| --| 8|2,268| 38| --| --| 239| --| --
Various | | | | | | | | | | |
Charities| --| --| --| --| --| --| --| --| --| 9,687| --
----------+------+------+----+-----+-----+----+---+-----+----+-------+---------
Totals |27,476|14,338| 359| 979|2,414| 140| 27|3,202| 912|822,379|2,423,000
----------+------+------+----+-----+-----+----+---+-----+----+-------+---------
Since the month of January 1915 the National Committee has not ceased
to extend its activities. But it is impossible to give more precise
data. The German authorities no longer permit the Committee to publish
its reports. In their dry, official manner they show us only too
clearly what we are to think of the present "prosperity" of Belgium and
the "normal state of the situation."
* * * * *
It will be seen that the activities of the National Committee are
fruitful and extensive. But more and more money is required, as savings
are exhausted and as the public coffers are emptied by the Germans.
In January 1915 the Sovereign Pontiff surrendered the Belgian
contribution to Peter's Pence.
As 40 million frs. per month (£1,600,000) is being paid to the Germans,
poverty is rapidly increasing. The number of Belgians deprived of
all resources and obliged to live entirely on charity had risen by
February to 1,500,000. It was estimated that by June it would be
2,500,000, or more than one-third of the total population. In February
the nourishment of this famishing host already demanded 10 million frs.
(£400,000) per month; soon it will demand 12 to 13 millions. In this
conjuncture Mr. Hoover, the President of the American Commission, went
begging to the British Government, which promised £100,000 per month
provided Germany would cease to make requisitions in Flanders and levy
the tax of 40 millions. Germany refused. How will it end?
_Belgium's Gratitude to America._
Belgium knows that she owes her relief to the United States. Without
American charity our country would perish in the distress into which
the German exactions have plunged her. No one in Belgium will ever
forget this, and it is in the name of the whole nation that King Albert
has publicly thanked America.
It was in sign of homage, and also of gratitude, that on the 22nd
February, 1915, on the anniversary of American Independence, the
Belgians wore in their buttonholes a medallion of the Stars and
Stripes, while thousands of the citizens of Brussels left their cards
at the hotel of His Excellency Mr. Brand H. Whitlock. Baron von Bissing
spoke of this as childishness; at Liége German officers even snatched
the American colours from women and young girls. Massacre and arson are
more familiar to _Kultur_ than gratitude.
FOOTNOTES:
[14] And also justified by the laws of warfare as affecting invasion.
Moreover: "The rules which affect a _levée en masse_ (a general rising
of the people to repel invaders, without organization) should be
generously interpreted. The first duty of a citizen is to defend his
country, and provided he does so loyally he should not be treated as a
marauder or criminal." The Germans could not at the outset know that
there was no _levée en masse_.--(TRANS.)
[15] The Germans have tried to persuade Rome that these priests were
not assassinated but killed in battle.
[16] To give an idea of these accusations, it was said that in the
cellars of a Louvain convent the corpses of fifty German soldiers were
discovered, murdered by the monks.
[17] If organized and disciplined, the civic guards and francs-tireurs
would have formed part of the Belgian forces, provided they wore a
recognizable sign and bore arms openly.--(TRANS.)
[18] We shall see later (p. 221) that at Louvain Dr. Hedin was
shamefully deceived by the military authorities who were guiding him
through the city. It is this which makes us fear that there may also
have been deceit in the case of the villagers tried as "francs-tireurs."
[19] _Kriegsbrauch im Landkriege._ Professor J. H. Morgan has published
a translation, with an introduction (John Murray). For a comparison
between German, French, and English usages see _Frightfulness in Theory
and Practice_, by Charles Andler, ed. Bernard Miall (T. Fisher Unwin).
[20] They are all, with a truly German lack of originality, with
the genuine intellectual slavishness of the "blonde beast," simply
repeating the words of Clausewitz, as all German military philosophers
have done for the best part of a century.--(TRANS.)
[21] A perusal of Clausewitz, von Hartmann, and the _Kriegsbrauch_
would have dispelled all doubt. None of these theories is new: how
often does a German develop a _new_ theory? This peculiarly bloodless,
mechanically ferocious barbarism is nearly a century old. The French
had seen it in action before.--(TRANS.)
[22] The Germans even accuse the Belgian Government of paying its
"francs-tireurs" "by the piece"; that is, so much per German killed.
[23] If it had _openly_ encouraged the civil population it would
merely have ordered the _levée en masse_, which it had a perfect right
to do: as Germany did in 1813. But it is interesting to note that in
1813 the German francs-tireurs were required _not_ to wear distinctive
uniforms or badges, and were allowed to use any weapons and any means
of injuring the enemy. Germany invented the franc-tireur, and now
expects Belgium to do what she would do in a like case. _The bogy so
feared by the German soldier is, indeed, his own shadow._ Actually, of
course, the Belgian Government called upon civilians to keep quiet and
to surrender arms.--(TRANS.)
[24] Thus _Der Grosse Krieg_, pp. 51 and 52, published a Wolff telegram
on the 3rd August, 1914, saying that many spies had already been shot
in Germany, but that the public should none the less be careful to
report suspects, particularly those who spoke a foreign language.
[25] _Étape_ (_etappen_, Germ.), stores, rations, or a
halting-place.--(TRANS.)
[26] If we mention Reims it is because the Germans have on eight
occasions posted placards in Belgium bearing declarations relating to
this crime against civilization.
[27] We have not been able to verify the authenticity of the quotation
from the _Times_.
[28] In Germany the phrase has a meaning _sui generis_.
[29] Names will be published later.
[30] See photographs in _Panorama_, 9B (26th August, 1914), 17A (16th
October, 1914), 18A (16th October, 1914).
[31] A pit for storing potatoes in good condition.