report, "The atmosphere of the camp is excellent." There is a touch of
humour in the report on Merseburg (l.c. p. 29). "One man complained to
me that he had been punished for 'having a hole in his trousers' (as he
said), but on investigation I found that he had cut a new pair of
trousers, which had been given him by the German authorities, in order
to make a pair of boxing shorts. One man had a black eye, another a
sprained thumb, and a third a broken nose, as the result of boxing
matches."[10] The four English prisoners at Königsmoor said "that there
was no discrimination against them of any kind, and their relations with
the German guard were evidently pleasant. They all said that they had
plenty of warm clothing, including overcoats, and one even had an
overcoat which had been given him by the German authorities in addition
to one which he had received from home. They said the food was 'not
bad' ..." At the working camp at Hakenmoor, "the midday 'soup' was
excellent.... All looked in good health and seemed to be contented, and
their relations with the German guards appeared to be friendly....
Several complained that the clothing furnished soon became too tight for
comfort, and nearly every man in the camp had put on from ten to thirty
(even more) pounds of flesh. None spoke of any bad treatment ...
although one Englishman said that there were occasional differences with
the (Belgian) barrack captains. The Commandant is interested in his
work; he knows most of the men by name, and seems to try to do all in
his power to add to their comfort."
FOOD.
In these reports the food is almost invariably referred to as good, and
to save further quotations we may cite the evidence at Güstrow
i/Mecklenburg as giving a fair general view of the case (January, 1916):
"The men told me that while they depend on their home parcels for
variety, a man who received nothing (as is the case with the Russian
prisoners) could live on the food supplied, although in that case he
would always be glad when meal time came."
"ATMOSPHERE."
At Dyrötz, "the general atmosphere of the camp certainly seemed
excellent, both on the part of the men and on the part of the
authorities." (January, 1916.) At Blankenburg "the Commandant has now
adopted the practice of taking different officer prisoners of war with
him for occasional walks in the neighbouring country." "In a lazaret at
Spandau," writes Mr. Jackson, "I sat alone with Captain Coulston in the
good-sized, comfortably furnished room which he occupies by himself....
Recently he had had a conversation with Her Royal Highness the Princess
Friedrich Leopold of Prussia, who visited the lazaret, but ordinarily he
had little opportunity to talk, as he speaks only a few words of German,
French, or Russian. On my speaking of this, I was told that an effort
would be made to have English-speaking German officers call on him from
time to time."
GERMAN PROFESSORS.
Attention is again drawn to the excellent work of Prof. Stange at
Göttingen. "He has an office in the camp at which he is present for two
hours every day, during which time he can be consulted by any prisoner,
and has formed classes of study, which are well attended." At Giessen,
too, "Prof. Gmelin of the local university has taken a great interest in
the prisoners and visits them regularly with a view to providing for
their instruction."
A CONTRADICTION.
The following is important and I quote it in full. _Mr. Osborne to Mr.
Gerard._ (_February 23, 1916_) (l.c. p. 62.):
In accordance with your instructions and with reference to the
article in the London _Times_ of February 7, stating the report
of an exchanged British prisoner of war that two British
prisoners at the detention camp at Güstrow, in Mecklenburg, had
been bayonetted for smoking in a forbidden vicinity, and that
one had died and the other was still in hospital, I have the
honour to inform you that I visited the camp at Güstrow on
February 12, 1916. I did not notify the camp authorities of my
arrival. I was shown every courtesy and received every facility
for speaking to the British prisoners out of earshot of the
Germans. I talked with a large number of British
non-commissioned officers and with some of the men, and all were
unanimous on two points; first, that if such an occurrence as
the one mentioned had taken place, they would certainly have
heard of it; and, second, that they had heard of no such
occurrence. I visited the lazaret, through which I was taken by
a British N.C.O., who is an assistant in caring for the sick,
and spoke to every British patient under treatment there, not
one of whom could possibly have been suffering from a bayonet
wound. It seems to me quite out of the question that the
occurrence mentioned in the English newspaper accounts could
have actually taken place at Güstrow.
In point of fact, instead of complaints at Güstrow, I heard
rather praise of the camp from the British interned there, and
praise of the British prisoners from the camp authorities. The
men were all well fitted out with clothes of all sorts, and
seemed particularly cheerful. The authorities stated that it
had never been necessary, in recent times at least, to place a
British prisoner under arrest. On the whole, the camp struck me
as being as nearly ideal as it is possible for a place of
detention of this kind to be.
The discrepancy between the last sentence in Mr. Osborne's report and
the _Times_ article is a striking one. It should give one pause in
placing too much reliance upon untested accusations, or upon newspaper
articles based upon them. We forget sometimes that all the bias is
_against_ an enemy, and the only stories likely to be free from
exaggeration are those told in his favour.
A MILITARY PRISON.
In the military prison at Cologne (Miscel. 16 [1916] p. 67), "the
prisoners receive the same food and the same general treatment as the
German military prisoners, with whom they are permitted to talk.... The
prisoners are not permitted to receive food from outside sources....
Generally speaking the conditions do not differ materially from those in
an ordinary working camp.... Corporal B. was found guilty of lack of
respect to his British superior, Corporal J. was punished for striking
the French non-commissioned officer in charge of his barrack, and
Corporals O. and S. had trouble with the German Landsturmmann in charge
of a cooking party...." Most of the sentences were for striking work at
various work centres, the men sentenced stating that the conditions were
bad. There was a special complaint against the railway work at
Langen-Halbach b/Haiger, but not all the British joined in the strike.
"I saw the men's midday meal, consisting of a thick porridge which
appeared to be nutritious. One man claimed that it was thicker to-day
than usual, but several of his comrades contradicted this flatly. No
complaints were made to me of any rough treatment in the Gefängnis
[prison]."
BAVARIAN COURTESY.
The Venerable Archdeacon Wm. E. Nies, who had been given permission to
visit British prisoners of war in Bavaria, writes: "I think it is only
fair to comment favourably upon the friendly way in which my mission to
the men is received and furthered by the commanders without exception
thus far."
HOSPITAL TREATMENT.
Of Germersheim hospitals we read: "The food served in these hospitals is
exceptionally satisfactory. Dr. Algeron, the chief surgeon in charge, a
broad-minded man and indefatigable worker, attends personally to the
catering.... Under this regime there have been some noteworthy increases
in weight...."
At Bayreuth a private of the Black Watch had been "removed--for the
purpose of electrical treatment of his arm by which it is hoped to avoid
an operation--to the military lazaret in the city, which is an admirably
equipped modern hospital."
WUENSDORF, CREFELD.
We pass now to reports in Miscel. No. 26 (1916). Indian prisoners of war
at Wünsdorf (Zossen) find their treatment "very good." At Crefeld
officers' camp, "the walks on parole ... have been entirely
successful.... The only complaint as to these was that the German
accompanying the party was a non-commissioned instead of a regular
officer. This will, however, be rectified at once.... There is no
trouble of any kind with the inhabitants on these.... The relations with
the camp authorities are excellent." As regards the behaviour of the
inhabitants, I would refer also to Chaplain O'Rorke's statement (see p.
36), though, as one would expect, the inhabitants have in some other
cases behaved badly (_e.g._, p. 32).
MUENSTER II., MUENSTER III.
At Münster II, "The Commandment, General von Ey-Steinecke, as well as
the other officers, and the general treatment, are well spoken of by the
men." Some improvements suggested on March 16 were already started on
the 18th. At Münster III. the benches in the English Chapel "were
provided at the expense of the camp, although the British prisoners
offered to pay for them.... The camp authorities have endeavoured to
arrange courses of instruction with some success, and several British
are taking lessons in French.... Sergeant Middleditch, the ranking
non-commissioned officer, who has taken an active part in the work of
improvement, stated that the relations with the camp authorities were
excellent, and that the officers showed much consideration in acceding
to reasonable requests. The commandant, General Raitz von Frentz, is
well spoken of by all, and shows a liberal and progressive spirit in
dealing with such difficulties as arise."
PARCHIM, BRANDENBURG.
From Miscel. No. 7 (1917) a few extracts may be made. Of Parchim Dr.
A. E. Taylor and Mr. J. P. Webster write: "We believe that special
commendation should be given to the Commandant, Oberst Kothe, for the
spirit in which he governs the camp, and for the way in which he does
everything in his power for the welfare of the prisoners, and for the
promotion of a cordial relationship between the men and those in
charge." Of Brandenburg, Mr. Jackson writes candidly: "The part of the
building occupied by the British prisoners was not so clean as the
remainder, but for this the men themselves are responsible." It is
obvious that the spirit as to this and other matters will vary in every
country among different sets of men (c.f., _e.g._, below the very
different Güstrow report).
COTTBUS.
Men in hospital at Cottbus "said that the food was good and their
treatment excellent." Men in the main camp complained that bread sent to
them from Switzerland and England arrived in a mouldy condition, but "as
the mouldiness seemed to start in the middle of the loaf, they thought
this was due to the quality of the bread itself or the manner in which
it was packed."
ABSENCE ON LEAVE.
At Celle, where "inactive officers" and some others are detained, Mr.
Jackson found one British subject absent on leave, while "several others
have been permitted to make visits to their families in Germany. A
request from another, who had obtained no benefit from his stay at Bad
Blenhorst, for permission to go somewhere for a 'cure' is under
consideration."
LIMBAU, GUESTROW.
At the working camp at Limbau (occupied Russian territory) "the men
described the commandant as a 'gentleman,' and said they had no
difficulty in communicating with him in regard to their wishes. None had
any complaint to make of their treatment, and only a very few spoke of
the work as hard." The camp contained 500 British prisoners.
At Güstrow, "the treatment of the men and the conditions found in their
camp appeared to be very favourable. The commandant stated that the
British were the most satisfactory prisoners under his care...." Two
million, five hundred thousand letters passed through the camp post
office in the previous year, and about sixty thousand packages were
distributed.
HOSPITAL TREATMENT.
Hospital treatment is again and again described favourably in the
individual reports (_e.g._, pp. 4, 6, 14, 22, 50, 57), but the opinion
may here be cited of a Swiss doctor who has been occupied in German
hospitals during most of the war:
The writer of these lines never saw anything anywhere that could
be considered as intentional change for the worse in the lot of
prisoners and sick; on the contrary, he was able to ascertain
that the prisoners and the sick are treated in a manner that
could not be more humane. If later on the food was insufficient,
the English must be aware of the reasons which brought about
far-reaching starvation among great circles of the population of
Germany.... From deepest conviction the writer of these lines
affirms that the German people and the German doctors are
[generally] without guilt in the face of the accusations made
against them. Individual exceptions, if proved, could not alter
this judgment.
THE REPATRIATIONS.
There are bad stories of men arriving half-starving at the British and
French lines at the time of the general repatriations. It would require
care and impartiality to sift these. The more experience one gains, the
less one trusts the average newspaper report in war-time. It seems very
probable that, as Erzberger contended, many prisoners made off of their
own accord after the German Revolution, and the straits to which these
men were reduced could scarcely be ascribed to the German authorities.
That there were brutal cases of men being _driven_ away is also quite
probable. As regards the general question of prisoners, Erzberger said:
"If England can now actually prove that English prisoners of war have
been illegally treated, I give my word no guilty person shall go
unpunished. But allow me the counter question, Is it known in enemy
countries how _German_ prisoners of war were frequently treated? I do
not believe that is sufficiently well known. Only listen to our soldiers
who come from France...." (Berlin, Nov., 24, 1918, _Wolff_.) It should
be obvious that both sides must be heard before justice can decide, but
the obvious is the unrecognised in war time. And probably even by the
best and most impartial judgment only very rough generalisations can be
arrived at. One need seems to me paramount, that each side shall become
once more aware of the _good_ in the other. Here, then, are one or two
favourable facts from repatriated men: "We understand that the Germans
could not let us march to the frontier, as we were prepared to do, lest
we should start to plunder the inhabitants. For the same reason we were
accompanied on the train by a German N.C.O. with a rifle. At night we
slept in school buildings at Zevenaar (?) where we were given food and
coal, and were well treated. We gave some of our food there to Sisters
for the poor.... We had not to pay any fare at Wesel. The Germans on the
train wished to be very friendly. We understand that the German
authorities helped to make the arrangements about our taking the train
at Wesel. No special compartments were put on for us. We travelled with
the ordinary passengers." (_Daily News_, November 25, 1918.)
Again:
The first contingent of British prisoners from Germany to arrive
in London under the terms of the armistice reached Cannon Street
Station from Dover yesterday. The party, numbering nearly 300,
were provided with hot refreshments on arrival. The men looked
remarkably fit, and one of the party explained that they had
mostly been working on the railways behind the lines, and their
treatment had been fairly good.
Another contingent of returned prisoners, numbering about 800,
arrived at Dover yesterday afternoon.
(_Daily News_, Nov. 21, 1918.)
The _Daily News_ has honourably distinguished itself by publishing
favourable articles by repatriated prisoners. An officer writes:
Three days ago I arrived in England after having spent eight
months in a German prison camp. We were among the first
repatriated prisoners of war to come through Switzerland, and
were secretly amused at the attitude of friends and relatives on
our arrival home. They seemed to be quite surprised because most
of us were looking healthy and fit, and were not walking
skeletons or physical wrecks.
But after reading the home newspapers, we understood their point
of view. I do not for one moment suggest that these tales of
inhuman treatment are untrue or exaggerated, because I know many
cases which confirm them;[11] but I do say that this horrible
treatment has not been general, nor does it apply to all
prisoners of war. For this reason I am writing of what I know of
the prisoners in Baden, in Southern Germany, and I hope that
this article may allay the anxiety of those who are daily
expecting some dear one home, and who fear that he will be
terribly changed through suffering.
Men behind the lines had suffered far more, this officer considered.
This is somewhat at variance with the extract last cited. The writer
continues:
But the lot of the prisoners in the permanent camps in Baden was
much brighter. My authority for saying so is an old Roman
Catholic priest, Father Nugent, a native of Lancashire, I
believe, who was in Southern Germany when the war broke out. He
had free access to all prison camps and hospitals in Baden, and
had no stories of harsh and brutal treatment to tell. Two
American doctors were allowed to visit the hospitals in Rastatt,
Lazaret 4, and the Russenlager Hospital. They said that the
patients were comfortable and well looked after, in spite of the
great shortage of medical supplies in Germany.
Some of the soldiers had a good time working on the Baden farms.
One orderly at our camp, who was away for a fortnight in the
fruit season, picking plums, told me that he had met one of his
old regiment working on a farm. This man had just driven in to
the railway station for the Red Cross parcels, and told him that
they were working with an old German and his wife. They shared
rations with each other, and once a week the whole household
visited the cinema.
Delay in repatriation occurred owing to disorganisation.
But there is no ill feeling towards the prisoners in Baden.
After the armistice we wandered at will round Freiburg and in
the Black Forest; and everyone was treated with civility. There
were no cases of open hostility at all.
(_Daily News_, Dec. 18, 1918.)
Mr. G. G. Desmond volunteered at the age of 46. He was taken prisoner
and gave (_Daily News_, Dec. 10, 1918) some account of his general
outlook after his imprisonment. Unlike some of the stay-at-homes he can
still believe in the German people, as the following concluding
paragraphs of his article show:
The soldiers and the country people round Dülmen, and afterwards
everybody we met in those parts, expressed no sense of rancour
at their defeat, and simply leapt over it all to the prime,
joyful fact that the _Krieg_ was _fertig_. Everybody greeted you
with that, and covered his face with smiles thereby. Some said
that the terms were very hard, but agreed with me when I told
them that they were made hard in order to defeat thoroughly the
old gang and ensure a lasting peace. I wish I felt as certain
now as then that the Allies had that clean intention. One farmer
chuckled when he told me that Germany must give up a hundred and
fifty U-boats, because, he said, she had no such number.
One of the political parties, I am afraid I cannot remember
which, published a manifesto stating that Germany had been
deceived and betrayed by the military party, whereby among other
things she inflicted great wrongs on Belgium and the Allies, and
that she must pay in full for those wrongs. I do not doubt that
is a widespread feeling in Germany. If, however, the terms of
peace are to be vindictive, we shall in turn be in the wrong,
and the new Germany may have better cause than the old to hate
us.
When we were fighting the Kaiser, we took pains to tell the
German people that we were fighting their battle against their
enemies. We were, in fact, liberating the traditional distressed
damsel from the clutches of the ogre. It was a pity that so many
of our blows fell upon the damsel and not on the ogre. It would
be not only a pity but a crime and a grievous blunder if, now
that the damsel is free, we proceeded to thrash her for the
faults of the ogre.
The Germans, apart from their late Government, are not
Orientals intent upon deceiving us at every turn. They say they
have turned over a new leaf, and I am thoroughly persuaded that
they speak the truth. In business of all kinds, under
circumstances that made it very easy for them to have cheated
me, I found them, during my stay at Dülmen, the straightest
people I ever had anything to do with. They think the same of
us. Feldwebels and others who have had to do with us both
assured me that they much preferred the British to any other
class of prisoner, because we are blunt and true, say what we
mean, and stick to what we say. Certainly the Germans are the
most English of the great peoples on the Continent.
CONCLUSION.
Our survey of the reliable evidence at present available seems to me to
prove that there has usually been a serious effort in Germany to treat
military prisoners well. This does not imply that their lot is otherwise
than hard, and the prolongation of the imprisonment adds terribly to the
hardship. It is impossible to banish from one's mind such horrors as
those of Wittenberg, but it is quite plain that these were very far from
typical. When militarism goes wrong, it goes very wrong. If we consider
the special German difficulties with regard to prisoners, and the
special dangers of the militarist state, we may, I think, conclude a
very fair standard of humanity amongst the German people from the fact
that in so large a proportion of cases treatment has been reasonable and
in many even excellent.
I have no wish to arouse any resentment, and in case this conclusion
should do so, I quote here a further neutral opinion, that of a
well-known Norwegian, M. T. E. Steen, who had been allowed to visit
prisoners' camps in Britain, France, and Germany. M. Steen gave a
lecture at the Queen's (Small) Hall on July 15, 1915, under the auspices
of the British Red Cross Society. Sir Louis Mallet presided. According
to the _Daily Telegraph_ report, "M. Steen spoke favourably to the
conditions prevailing at the various internment camps he visited in
Germany, and expressed the hope that his remarks would remove misgivings
and allay anxiety. The general impression which the camps made on him,
he said, was 'very satisfactory.'"
We must remember, too, that in Germany also all kinds of rumours and
statements have circulated with regard to the treatment of prisoners and
wounded by us and our Allies (cf. pp. 2, 32, 38, and 80). Such rumours
and exaggerations are apparently a part of war. On the other side they
have not made for a benevolent attitude, and the really large amount of
interest openly shown in prisoners of war by such men as Prince
Lichnowsky, Prof. Stange, Prof. Gmelin, the Göttingen Pastors, and
others, is a remarkable fact. We realise this the more, when we consider
that it is not easy on this side for men in prominent positions openly
to show interest in German prisoners of war.
CAMPS IN U.K.
It would be interesting to compare the U.S. reports on British camps
with their reports on German ones. Unfortunately any useful comparison
is impossible. A collection of reports on "various internment camps in
the United Kingdom" is published in White Paper No. 30 (1916), but the
earliest inspection here recorded took place on February 21, 1916. As
the chief difficulties everywhere occurred earlier, the earlier reports
are plainly necessary for a fair comparison. "Are we as compassionate to
our prisoners as our ancestors were to theirs?" wrote the _Daily
Chronicle_ on October 29, 1914, and added "From accounts that have
reached us of the conditions that prevail at some of our concentration
camps, we fear not." Moreover, in these later reports it is difficult to
know the exact meaning of such remarks as the following, unless we have
the earlier reports: "They seemed much happier and more contented than
at the time of my former visit...." (Officers' Camp, Holyport). "There
has been no change in the sleeping accommodations since the last report,
but as the number of the prisoners is much less than it was at that
time, there is much more room...." (Dorchester.)
"The general tone of the hospital seemed to be much happier than at the
time of my last visit." (Dartford, Lower Southern Hospital for wounded
prisoners of war.)
"There has been no change in the sleeping accommodation since the last
visit, except that, owing to the smaller number of men, there is now
more room than before.... The men seemed much happier and more contented
than at the time of our last visit." (Officers' camp, Donington Hall.)
The last quotation recalls the once famous charges as to the excessive
luxury of Donington Hall. In every country the same kind of protest
arises as to the luxurious treatment of prisoners, and this is declared
a scandal in view of the inhuman policy of the enemy. In every country
is to be found the type of patriot who feels that all is lost if it can
be proved that he has treated an enemy too well. The hubbub about
Donington Hall led to the appointment of a Commons delegation to visit
various camps, and to a report in the _Times_ (April 26, 1915). In this
report the Hall is described as "a large, bare house situated in a
hollow.... The style of furnishing was that of a sergeant's mess." There
was one piano, provided at the prisoners' expense. The billiard tables
and other accessories imagined by perfervid patriots vanish into thin
air.