The work of the supply ship captured recently in a port on the east
coast of Scotland hardly comes within the limits of this book, but it is
significant as showing the daring of German methods, which apparently
include the obtaining of supplies from an enemy's country by means which
endanger neutral shipping--so long as the neutral ships can be found to
take the risks. It was noted by the naval authorities that German
submarines had been displaying activity at such a distance from their
legitimate ports of supply as to render probable and almost certain the
existence of other sources of supply. A watch was consequently kept for
suspicious neutral shipping, and in the end a capture was made.
A vessel came into port and proceeded to load for departure, and the
customs officers could find nothing wrong with her. Her papers were in
order, her cargo contained nothing in the nature of contraband of war,
and there was no cause for detaining her, as far as could be seen. But
there were noted on the deck of the vessel, neatly coiled, cables and
cables, enough to furnish a whaler on a three-years' sailing voyage and
leave over sufficient to start a ropemaker in business. All over the
decks bulky coils of hawser lay, and though, at any other time, the
hawsers might have passed without notice, it was felt by the customs men
that the superabundance of rope justified further investigation than had
already been bestowed on the boat.
So one of the coils was unfastened, its wrappings removed, and the cable
itself was uncoiled. Then was it found that there was merely a shell of
rope, which served as covering for a steel drum containing oil fuel
suited for the use of submarine engines. And there the story ends.
The other case which I propose to quote shows equal audacity. At the
Guildhall Court there appeared, on October 5, George Newton Spencer, who
described himself as a clerk, and gave his address as Lubeckerstrasse,
33, Hamburg, Germany. He was charged with "unlawfully inciting Mr
Frank Henry Houlder (Houlder Brothers, Limited, Leadenhall Street and
Liverpool) to trade with the enemy."
Mr Humphreys stated in opening the case for the prosecution that the
charges against the accused were based on the Trading with the Enemy Act
of 1914. The accused was a British subject (as they all seem to be) who
had been long resident in Germany, and had been clerk to a shipping
company with a rather long name, but which might be translated as the
Transport Shipping Company of Hamburg. The accused appeared to have
been sent over to this country by his employers towards the end of
September for the purpose of negotiating what, from their point of view,
was a most important transaction. Although an Englishman, and of the
age of thirty-two years, no difficulty was made by the German military
authorities over the accused obtaining a pass to travel in Germany and
leave the country. There was little doubt that the object of his visit
was known to the authorities, who gave him that permission, although,
from the German Emperor's point of view, he was an alien enemy.
The prisoner arrive in London on September 22, and on the next day he
called on Mr Houlder. He introduced himself by producing a document in
English, signed by his employers, which contained the proposal which had
been made the subject of the charge. The proposal was as follows: There
were six ships owned by the company at Hamburg, on which Messrs. Houlder
had mortgages amounting to about 30,000 pounds. These ships, on the
outbreak of the war, and certainly in September--were either in neutral
ports, and therefore temporarily lost to their owners, or were prizes of
war, and as such temporarily--and probably finally--lost to their
owners. The proposal to Messrs. Houlder--to whom was payable 20,000
pounds on November 11, and 13,000 pounds on November 15, was to the
effect that they should pay over 15,000 pounds to the Hamburg firm, and
take over three of the steamers. The result would be that the mortgages
on all six of the vessels would be wiped off, and Messrs. Houlder would
become the owners of them, while the steamship company at Hamburg would
have 15,000 pounds in cash to enable them to carry on their business.
The fact that one of the steamers was a prize of war in Gibraltar, and
would probably be sold as such, made the proposal still more remarkable.
Since, under these circumstances, Messrs. Houlder could have no title,
the Hamburg firm were virtually, asking for cash for nothing.
Mr Houlder did not seriously consider the proposition, but, having made
up his mind what to do, told the defendant he would have to consult his
solicitors, and mentioned the existence of the proclamation which he
assumed would prevent them from carrying out the transaction. Defendant
replied to the effect that his employers had communicated with the
German Foreign Office--as they had no proclamation--and had received
permission to carry out the transaction. He handed Mr Houlder a bundle
of documents in German, which showed that the defendant's employers in
Hamburg, before ever they attempted to put this transaction in form,
obtained leave from their own authorities, to whom they stated their own
frank view-point with regard to the matter. It was set out that
monetary benefit to a certain amount would accrue to the Hamburg company
as a result of the transaction, and that the vessels were all old
freight steamers, of no possible use to the German Navy--neither were
they fit for transport purposes. The Berlin Secretary of State for Home
Affairs replied that no objection would be taken to the transaction.
Mr Houlder communicated with the Admiralty instead of with his
solicitors, and in the meantime the defendant went to a firm of marine
insurance agents and made a similar proposal--this time to the extent of
about 13,400 pounds cash benefit to the Hamburg firm. In neither case
was any application made to the authorities in England for a licence to
break the law regarding trading with the enemy. The total effect of the
proposals, had they been carried through, would have been to place the
Hamburg company in possession of about 28,000 pounds, with no
compensating advantage whatever to the British firms--and the defendant
was committed for trial. He received sentence of imprisonment for his
treachery on October 14, 1914, after due and proper trial.
The only point worthy of comment in connection with this case is the
doubtful morality, in a business sense, of German firms. We may set
aside the fact that a contravention of an enemy's law was attempted, for
no country would consider or regard the laws of a country with which it
was at war, unless they involved principles of definite conduct and were
the laws of civilisation rather than the laws framed for the protection
of the said enemy in time of war. The point at issue is that a shipping
company of Hamburg, by its offer of valueless titles in exchange for
hard British cash, was attempting such a form of sharp practice as would
land any British trader in the criminal courts for fraud. One is forced
to the conclusion that among many Germans, and even among German firms
whose standing ought to guarantee the cleanliness of their hands in
business, there is no such thing as honesty, at least where dealing with
a foreign firm is concerned. These people asked two London firms to
break British law, and to be swindled. By German ethics, evidently,
this is fair play and just dealing. It is an effect of the spy system
on the moral fibre of the nation, rather than an instance of the working
of the spy system itself--though the British subject who passed out from
Germany at an acute point of the war between the two countries, without
being questioned by German authorities, looks perilously like a spy at
work, and the nature of his other missions in England, had he been left
at liberty, calls for some speculation.
Much may be learned with regard to the present working of German spies
by intelligent perusal of the war reports, especially those coming from
France, for the Russian theatre of war is so tremendous and so far off
that the small details seldom come through--the details small in
themselves, but of far-reaching import. As an instance may be again
mentioned the way in which German troops, occupying a town, chalk on
certain doors "Spare this house"--there is a world of enlightenment in
the three words. Similarly, in advance and retreat the Germans have
their agents with them or near them, and often the report makes tacit
admission of the fact, in such a way that it is clear to one who reads
with the espionage system in mind. The work of these agents is as
endless as it is dishonourable and deadly--a poison that works just as
efficiently as the legitimate weapons of war--and often more
efficiently, since one can guard against an open weapon, but against the
treachery that uses naturalisation and all things to further the ends of
the monster trampling across the earth, there is no guard that soldiers
can use as they use their weapons against troops opposed to them.
The bibliography of espionage--German espionage--is a brief one, so far
as books of value are concerned. First and foremost stand Stieber's
Memoirs, which tell all that Stieber chose to tell--and that is a good
deal. The work has been translated into French, but not into English.
There is the "Indiscretions" of Wollheim, a book which gives some idea
of the system, but is mainly concerned with incident. The Memoirs of
Busch, Bismarck's friend, afford further light on the system, but only
in a fragmentary way. "Military Espionage in Peace and War," by W.N.
Klembovski, a Russian Staff Officer, is more a manual of what ought to
be done by purely military spies than a book descriptive of the German
system. "Espionage Militaire," by Lieutenant Froment of the French
Army, is open to the same class of criticism, as is to a certain extent
"Espionage," by N. de Chilly, though the last named is a more
informative book. "The German Spy System in France," an English
translation of Paul Lanoir's book on the subject, is a brief but
well-compiled review of what Germany has accomplished in the way of
espionage since 1870 in France, and although rather pessimistic in tone
as regards French counter-measures, ranks as a work of value.
As a rule "confessions" of spies may be disregarded, though they make
good melodramatic reading. The nature of the subject is such that those
who would tell the whole cannot, and those who can will not. Bearing in
mind the effect of thorough espionage on the German nation as a whole,
it is to be hoped that in the near future the whole system will be swept
away, together with the form of government that gave it birth and room
to grow.