When the tricolour was forbidden altogether, it was replaced

Note: Project Gutenberg also has an HTML version of this

file which includes the original illustrations.

See 12644-h.htm or 12644-h.zip:

(https://www.gutenberg.org/1/2/6/4/12644/12644-h/12644-h.htm)

or

(https://www.gutenberg.org/1/2/6/4/12644/12644-h.zip)

THROUGH THE IRON BARS

Two years of German occupation in Belgium

BY

EMILE CAMMAERTS

ILLUSTRATED WITH CARTOONS BY LOUIS RAEMAEKERS

MCMXVII

CONTENTS.

I. The Prison Gates

II. The Lowered Flag

III. The Poisoned Wells

IV. The Sacking of Belgium

V. The Modern Slave

1. The Creeping Tide

2. "By the Waters of Babylon"

VI. The Olive Branch

Through the Iron Bars

I.

THE PRISON GATES.

The English-speaking public is generally well informed concerning the

part played in the war by the Belgian troops. The resistance of our

small field army at Liège, before Antwerp, and on the Yser has been

praised and is still being praised wherever the tale runs. This is easy

enough to understand. The fact that those 100,000 men should have been

able to hold so long in check the forces of the first military Empire in

Europe, and that a great number of them, helped by new contingents of

recruits and led by their young King, should still be fighting on their

native soil, must appeal strongly to the imagination.

If it be told how the new Belgian army, reorganised and re-equipped

after the terrible ordeal on the Yser, is at the present moment much

stronger than at the beginning of the war, how it has been able lately

to extend its front in Flanders, and how some of its units have rendered

valuable help to the cause of the Allies in East Africa and even in

Galicia, the story sounds like a fairy tale. There is, in the history of

this unequal struggle, the true ring of legendary heroism; it seems an

echo of the tale of David and Goliath, or of Jack the Giant Killer; it

is full of the triumph of the spirit over the flesh, of independence and

free will over fatalism and brute force, of Right over Might.

I feel confident that some day a poet will be able to sing this great

epic in verses which shall answer to the swinging rhythm of battle and

roll with the booming of a thousand guns. But, in the meantime, I should

like to say a few words about a much humbler, a much simpler, a much

more familiar subject. It awakes no classical remembrances of Leonidas

or Marathon. My heroes risk their lives, but they are not soldiers,

merely prosaic "bourgeois" and workmen. They have no weapon, they cannot

fight. They have only to remain cheery in adversity and patient in the

face of taunts. They cannot render blow for blow, they have no sword to

flourish against an insolent conqueror. They can only oppose a stout

heart, a loyal spirit, and an ironic smile to the persecutions to which

they are subjected. They can do nothing--they must do nothing--only hope

and wait. But there are as much heroism and beauty in their black

frock-coats and their soiled workmen's smocks as in the gayest and most

glittering uniforms.

It is the plain matter-of-fact story of Belgian life under German rule.

Many more people will be tempted to praise the glory of our soldiers.

But, if the incidents of conquered Belgium's life are not recorded in

good time, they might escape notice. People might forget that, besides

the 150,000 to 200,000 heroes who are now waging war for Belgium on the

Western front, there are 7,500,000 heroes who are suffering for Belgium

behind the German lines, in the close prison of guarded frontiers, cut

off from the whole world, separated alike from those who are fighting

for their deliverance and from those who have sought refuge abroad.

These are the people whom America, England, Spain, and many generous

people in other allied and neutral countries have tried to save from

material starvation. If I could only show to my readers how they are

saving themselves from despair, from spiritual starvation, I should be

well repaid for my trouble, for, among all the wonders of this war,

which has displayed mankind as at once so much worse and so much better

than we thought, there is perhaps nothing more surprising than the way

in which the Belgian people have kept their spirits up.

One can, to a certain extent, understand the bright courage and the grim

humour of the fighting soldier; he has the excitement of battle to

sustain him through danger and suffering. But that an unarmed

population, which, having witnessed the martyrdom of many peaceful

towns, is threatened with utter destruction, which, ruined by war

contributions and requisitions, is on the brink of starvation, which,

persecuted by spies and subjected constantly to the most severe

individual and collective punishments on the slightest pretext, is

obliged to refrain from any manifestation of patriotic sentiments--that

such a population, completely cut off from its Government and from most

of its political leaders, and, moreover, poisoned every day by news

concocted by the enemy, should remain unshakable in its courage and

loyalty and should still be able to laugh at the efforts made by its

masters to bring it into submission, is truly one of the most amazing

spectacles which we have witnessed since the war broke out. General von

Bissing has declared that the Belgians are an enigma to him. No wonder.

They are an enigma to themselves. I am not going to explain the miracle.

I will only attempt to show how inexplicable, how miraculous, it is.

* * * * *

The German occupation of Belgium may be roughly divided into two

periods: Before the fall of Antwerp, when the hope of prompt deliverance

was still vivid in every heart, and when the German policy, in spite of

its frightfulness, had not yet assumed its most ruthless and systematic

character; and, after the fall of the great fortress, when the yoke of

the conqueror weighed more heavily on the vanquished shoulders, and when

the Belgian population, grim and resolute, began to struggle to preserve

its honour and loyalty and to resist the ever increasing pressure of the

enemy to bring it into complete submission and to use it as a tool

against its own army and its own King.

I am only concerned here with the second period. The story of the German

atrocities committed in some parts of the country at the beginning of

the occupation is too well known to require any further comment. Every

honest man, in Allied and neutral countries, has made up his mind on the

subject. No unprejudiced person can hesitate between the evidence

brought forward by the Belgian Commission of Enquiry and the vague

denials, paltry excuses and insolent calumnies opposed to it by the

German Government and the Pro-German Press. Besides, in a way, the

atrocities committed during the last days of August, 1914, ought not to

be considered as the culminating point of Belgium's martyrdom. They

have, of course, appealed to the imagination of the masses, they have

filled the world with horror and indignation, but they did not extend

all over the country, as the present oppression does; they only affected

a few thousand men and women, instead of involving hundreds of

thousands. They were clean wounds wrought by iron and fire, sudden,

brutal blows struck at the heart of the country, wounds and blows from

which it is possible to recover quickly, from which reaction is

possible, which do not affect the soul and honour of a people. The

military executioners of 1914 were compassionate when compared to the

civilian administrators who succeeded them. The pen may be more cruel

than the sword. Considered in the light of the recent deportations, the

first days of frightfulness seem almost merciful.

Observers have found no words strong enough to praise the attitude of

the Belgian people when victory seemed close at hand, when news was

still allowed to reach them. What should be said now after the

twenty-seven months for which they have been completely isolated from

the rest of the world? The ruthless methods of the German army of

invasion which deliberately massacred 5,000 unarmed civilians and sacked

six or seven towns and many more villages has been vehemently condemned.

What is to be the verdict now that they have succeeded, after two years

of efforts, in sacking the whole country, ruining her industry and

commerce, throwing out of employment her best workmen and leading into

slavery tens of thousands of her staunchest patriots? The horrors of

Louvain and Dinant were compared, with some reason, to the excesses of

the Thirty Years War, but modern history offers no other instance of

forced labour and wholesale deportations. If, fifty years ago, the

conscience of the world revolted against black slavery, what should its

feelings be today when it is confronted with this new and most appalling

form of white slavery? We should in vain ransack the chronicles of

history to find, even in ancient times, crimes similar to this one. For

the Jews were at war with Babylon, the Gauls were at war with Rome.

Belgium did not wage war against Germany. She merely refused to betray

her honour.

* * * * *

Let us watch, then, the closing of the prison gates. Up to the beginning

of October, the Belgians, and specially the people of Brussels, had been

kept in a state of suspense by the three sorties of the Belgian army,

which left the shelter of the Antwerp forts to advance towards Vilvorde

and Louvain, a few miles from the capital. At the beginning of

September, the sound of guns came so close that the people rejoiced

openly, thinking that deliverance was at their gates. To sober their

spirit--or to exasperate their patience?--the Governor General ordered

that a few Belgian prisoners, some of them wounded, with their

quickfiring gun drawn by a dog, should be marched through the crowded

streets. The men were covered with dust, their heads wrapped in

blood-stained bandages, and they kept their eyes on the ground as if

ashamed. Some women sobbed on seeing them, others cursed their guards,

others plundered a flower shop and showered flowers upon them. At last

two stalwart workmen shouldered away the escort, and, helped by the

crowd, which paralysed the movements of the Germans, succeeded in

kidnapping the prisoners, and getting them away to the neighbouring

streets. They could never be discovered, and it was the last display of

the kind which the Governor gave to Brussels.

During the siege, people had learnt to recognize the voice of every fort

of Antwerp. They said to each other: "That is Lizele, Wavre Ste.

Catherine, Waelhem." One after the other the Belgian guns were silenced,

first Wavre, then Waelhem ... and the vibrating boom of the German

heavies was heard louder than ever. The listening Bruxellois grew paler,

straining every nerve to catch the voice of Antwerp. It was as if their

own life as a nation was slowly dying away, as if they were mourning

their own agony. But still the valiant spirit of the first days

prevailed. "They will be beaten for all that. What was Antwerp compared

with the Marne? All forts must fall under 'their' artillery. After all,

the nest is empty; the King and the army are safe."

Since those days a kind of reckless indifference has seized the

Belgians. If we must lose everything to gain everything, let us lose

it. The sooner the better. It is the spirit of a poor man burning his

furniture in order to shelter his children from cold, or of a Saint

suffering every physical privation in order to gain the Kingdom of

Heaven. It is an uncanny spirit composed of wild energy and bitter-sweet

irony. "First Liège, then Brussels, then Namur, now Antwerp. The King

has gone, the Government has gone. If all Belgium has to go, let it go.

It is the price we have to pay. The victory of our soul shall be all the

greater if our body is shattered and tortured."

Henceforth, the voice of Belgium reaches us only from time to time. Its

sound is muffled by the enemy's strangle-hold, which grows tighter and

tighter. Before the fall of Antwerp, the German administration of

General von der Goltz had merely a temporary character. We knew that

most of the high officials were stopping in Brussels on their way to

Paris. On the other hand, any skilful move of the Allies, any successful

sortie from Antwerp, might have jeopardized all the conqueror's plans

and necessitated an immediate retreat. The Yser-Ypres struggle barred

the way to Brussels as well as to Calais. The Germans knew now that they

were safe, at least for a good many months, and began systematically to

"organize the country." All communications with the uninterrupted part

of Belgium were interrupted. It became more and more difficult and

dangerous to cross the Dutch frontier without a special permit. The

economic and moral pressure increased steadily, and the conflict between

conquerors and patriots began, a conflict unrelieved by dramatic

interest or excitement from outside, which carried the country back to

the worst days of Austrian and Spanish domination.

II.

THE LOWERED FLAG.

The contrast which I have endeavoured to indicate, in the first chapter,

between the attitude of the German administration before the fall of

Antwerp and its behaviour afterwards is nowhere so well marked as in the

measures taken for the purpose of repressing all Belgian manifestations

of patriotism.

During the two first months of occupation, the Germans made at least a

show of respecting the loyal feelings of the population. In his first

proclamation, dated September 2nd, in which he announced his appointment

as General Governor of Belgium, Baron von der Goltz declared that "he

asked no one to renounce his patriotic feelings." And when, a few days

later, the Governor of Brussels, Baron von Luttwitz, issued a poster

"advising" the citizens to take their flags from their windows, he did

this in conciliatory words, giving the pretext that these manifestations

might provoke reprisals from the German troops passing through the town:

"The Military Governor does not intend in the least to hurt, by such a

measure, the feelings and self-respect of the inhabitants. His only aim

is to protect them against all harm." (September 16th.) Every Belgian

was still wearing the national colours, pictures of the King and Queen

were sold in the streets, and the Brabançonne was hummed, whistled, and

sung all over the country. The people had lost every right but one: they

could still show the enemy, in spite of the declarations of the German

Press, that they were not yet ready to accept his rule.

This apparent tolerance is easy to explain. After the massacres of

August, the German authorities were anxious not to exasperate public

opinion, and not to spoil by uselessly vexatious measures the effect

which had been produced. During the Marne and the three sorties of the

Belgian army, they had only a very small number of men at their disposal

to garrison the largest towns. The slightest progress of the Belgian

army might have endangered their line of communications. We know now

that the withdrawal of the seat of the government from Brussels to Liege

was at one moment seriously contemplated, and that the same troops were

made to pass again and again through the streets of the capital in order

to give the illusion that the garrison was stronger than it really was

(_Frankfurter Zeitung_, August 22nd, 1916). Besides, Germany had not yet

given up all hopes of coming to terms with King Albert, since a third

attempt was to be made at Antwerp to separate the Belgian Government

from the Allies. In these circumstances it seemed wiser to let the

Belgian folk indulge in their harmless manifestations of loyalty, so

long as they did not cause any disturbance and did not complicate the

task of the military.

Let us look now at the next phase. As soon as the Belgian army has

achieved its junction with the Allies on the Yser and all communications

are cut between the Government and the people, the Germans cease to

consider Belgium as an occupied territory, and seize upon every pretext

to treat her as a conquered country, which will, sooner or later, become

part of the Empire. They no longer take the trouble to explain or

justify their oppressive measures, or to reconcile them with their

former promises. They simply ignore them. First in Namur (November the

15th, 1914), then in Brussels (June the 30th, 1915), it becomes a crime

to wear the tricolour cockade. The Te Deum, which is celebrated every

year, on November 15th, in honour of King Albert's Saint's day, is

forbidden. From the month of March, 1915, it is practically a forbidden

thing to sing the Brabançonne, even in the schools. All patriotic

manifestations, on the occasion of the King's Birthday (April 8th) and

of the anniversary of Belgian Independence day (July 21st) are severely

prosecuted.

In some of the orders issued there is still a weak attempt at

"respecting," in a German way, "the people's patriotic feelings." The

Governor of Namur, for instance, discriminates with the acutest subtlety

between wearing the national colours in private and in public, and the

Brabançonne can for a time be sung, so long as it is not rendered "in a

provoking manner." In fact, the Belgians are free to manifest their

patriotism so long as they are neither seen nor heard. They are

generously allowed to line their cupboards with tricolour paper and to

hum their national tunes in the depth of their cellars. But, in most of

the orders made under Governor von Bissing's rule (his reign began on

December 3rd, 1914), this last pretence of consideration and respect

disappears entirely. "I warn the public," declares the Governor of

Brussels on July the 18th, 1914, "that any demonstration whatsoever is

forbidden on July 21st next."

More than that, the German Administration frequently goes out of its way

to hurt the people's feelings. The fact of helping a patriot to join the

Army is not merely punished as a crime against the Germans, it is

delicately called "a crime of treason," and when people are condemned

because they are suspected of belonging to the Belgian intelligence

service, the public posters announcing their condemnation speak of them

as supplying information "to the enemy."

The sham tolerance of the first days has given way to a restless

repression, and even, during the last year, to deliberate persecution.

Schools may be inspected at any time by the authorities and every

"anti-German manifestation" (that is to say, any pro-Belgian teaching)

is severely punished. Shops are raided so that every patriotic picture

post-card (especially the portraits of the Royal Family) may be seized,

and even the intimacy of the private home is not respected. To begin

with, the Belgians have been allowed to show their loyalty--with

discretion; next, every patriotic manifestation is excluded from public

life; and last, the Germans, through their spies, penetrate the homes of

every citizen, and endeavour to extirpate by a reign of terror these

same feelings which they so emphatically promised to respect.

* * * * *

People who are leading a quiet life and who enjoy the blessings of an

autonomous Government will perhaps not appreciate the importance which

the Belgians attach, at the present moment, to these patriotic

manifestations. They may imagine that, so long as national life is

assured and citizens are otherwise left alone by their conquerors,

public affirmation of loyalty to King and country is of secondary

importance.

God knows that the economic situation of occupied Belgium is bad enough,

and the endless and tragic lists of condemnations and deportations are

there to prove that her people are living under the most barbarous

regime of modern times. But, even if this was not the case, anybody with

the slightest knowledge of their national character would understand the

extraordinary value which the Belgians attached to their last privilege

and the deep indignation roused by this German betrayal.

Von Bissing shrugs his shoulders and calls them "big children." So they

are. And his son, with a scornful smile, declares in the _Suddeutsche

Monatschrift_ (April 15th, 1915) that it is in "the people's blood to

demonstrate and to wear cockades." So it is. The love of processions and

public pageants of all kinds is deeply rooted in Belgian traditions.

But what does it prove? Simply that the people have preserved enough

freshness and joy of life to care for these things, enough courage and

independence to feel most need of them when they are most afflicted.

This is how they think of it: "Our bands used to pass through the

streets, shaking our window-panes with the crashing of their trombones,

our flags used to wave in the breeze--in the happy days of peace. Should

we now remain, silent and withdrawn, in the selfish privacy of our

houses, now that the country needs us most, now that we want, more than

ever, to feel that we are one people and that we will remain independent

and united whatever happens in the future?" Baron Friedrich Wilhelm von

Bissing sneers at the Belgians because on any and every pretext they

display the American colours. If they do, it is because they are not

allowed to display their own, and because they feel somehow that the

best way to show that they have still a flag is to adopt the colours of

the great country which has so generously come to their help. It may

well be, as the Baron informs us, that most of the "small and big

children" who wear the Stars and Stripes do not know a word of English.

What does it mean again? Simply that heart may call to heart and that it

is not necessary to talk in his own language to understand a brother's

mind. It is true that only children--children small and big--know how to

do it.

If the Germans had had the least touch of generous feeling for the

unfortunate country upon which they thrust war in spite of the most

solemn treaties, they would not have obliged the Belgian citizens to

lower the flags which they had put up during the defence of Liège, they

would not have torn their tricolour cockades from their buttonholes,

they would not have silenced their national songs, they would not have

added these deep humiliations to the bitter cup of defeat. One wonders

even why they did it if it was not for the mere pleasure which the bully

is supposed to feel when he makes his strength felt by his victim. They

might have gone on gaily plundering the country, shooting patriots,

deporting young men, doing whatever seemed useful in their eyes. But the

petty tyranny of these measures passes understanding. Governor von

Bissing is certainly too clever to believe that the satisfaction of

making a few cowards uneasy by such regulations can at all outweigh the

danger inherent in the resentment and the deep hatred which the bullying

has aroused against Germany. You may take the children's bread, you may

take their freedom, but you might at least leave them a few toys to play

with, and you would be wise to do so.

* * * * *

Such narrow-minded tyranny always defeats its own objects. Burgomaster

Max's proud answer to General von Luttwitz's "advice" to remove the

flags became the password of the patriots. Every Bruxellois henceforth

"waited for the hour of reparation." A great number of women went to

prison rather than remove the emblems of Belgium which they wore.

Stories passed from lip to lip. Their accuracy I would not guarantee,

but they belong to the epic of the war and are true to the spirit of the

people. A young lady, who was jeered at by a German officer because she

was wearing King Albert's portrait, is said to have answered his

"Lackland" with, "I would rather have a King who has lost his country

than an Emperor who has lost his honour." Another lady, sitting in a

tram-car opposite a German officer, was ordered by him to remove her

tricolour rosette. She refused to do so, and, as he threatened her,

defied him to do it himself. The Boche seized the rosette and pulled ..

and pulled .. and pulled. The lady had concealed twenty yards of ribbon

in her corsage.

When the tricolour was forbidden altogether, it was replaced by the

ivyleaf, ivy being the emblem of faithfulness; later, the ivyleaf was

followed by a green ribbon, green being the colour of hope. The

Brabançonne being excluded from the street and from the school took

refuge in the Churches, where it is played and often sung by the

congregation at the end of the service. There are many ways of getting

round the law. The Belgians were forbidden to celebrate in any ordinary

way the anniversary of their independence. Thanks to a sort of tacit

arrangement they succeeded in marking the occasion in spite of all

regulations. On July 21st, 1915, the Bruxellois kept the shutters of

their houses and shops closed and went out in the streets dressed in

their best clothes, most of them in mourning. The next year, as the

closing of shops was this time foreseen by the administration, they

remained open. But a great number of tradespeople managed ingeniously to

display the national colours in their windows--by the juxtaposition, for

instance, of yellow lemons, red tomatoes and black grapes. Others

emptied their windows altogether.

These jokes may seem childish, at first sight, but when we think that

those who dared perform them paid for it with several months'

imprisonment or several thousand marks, and paid cheerily, we understand

that there is more in them than a schoolboy's pranks. It seems as if the

Belgian spirit would break if it ceased to be able to react. One of the

shop-managers who was most heavily fined on the occasion of our last

"Independence Day" declared that he had not lost his money: "It is

rather expensive, but it is worth it."

* * * * *

If patriotism has become a religion in Belgium, this religion has found

a priest whose authority is recognised by the last unbeliever. If every

church has become the "_Temple de la Patrie_," if the Brabançonne

resounds under the Gothic arches of every nave, Cardinal Mercier has

become the good shepherd who has taken charge of the flock during the

King's absence. The great Brotherhood, for which so many Christian souls

are yearning, in which there are no more classes, parties, and sects,

seems well nigh achieved beyond the electrified barbed wire of the

Belgian frontier. Are not all Belgians threatened with the same danger,

are they not close-knit by the same hope, the same love, the same

hatred?

When the bells rang from the towers of Brussels Cathedral on July 21st

last, when, in his red robes, Cardinal Mercier blessed the people

assembled to celebrate the day of Belgium's Independence, it seemed that

the soul of the martyred nation hovered in the Church. After the

national anthem, people lifted their eyes towards the great crucifix in

the choir, and could no longer distinguish, through their tears, the

image of the Crucified from that of their bleeding country.

III.

THE POISONED WELLS.

We must never forget, when we speak of the moral resistance of the

Belgian people, that they have been completely isolated from their

friends abroad for more than two years and that meanwhile they have been

exposed to all the systematic and skilful manoeuvres of German

propaganda. Not only are they without news from abroad, but all the news

they receive is calculated to spread discouragement and distrust.

How true lovers could resist a long separation and the most wicked

calumnies without losing faith in one another has been the theme of many

a story. From the story-writer's point of view, the true narrative of

the German occupation of Belgium is much more romantic than any romance,

much more wonderful than any poem. The mass is not supposed to show the

same constancy as the individual, and one does not expect from a whole

people the ideal loyalty of Desdemona and Imogen. Besides, we do not

want the reader to imagine that, before the war, the Belgians were

ideally in love with one another. Like the English, the Americans and

the French, we had our differences. It is one of the unavoidable

drawbacks of Democracy that politics should exaggerate the importance of

dissensions. Therefore it is all the more remarkable that the sudden

friendship which sprang up between classes, parties and races in

Belgium, on the eve of August 4th, should so long have defied the

untiring efforts of the enemy and should remain as unshakeable to-day as

it was at the beginning.

We do not wonder that the German intellectuals who have undertaken to

break down Belgian unity are at a loss to explain their failure.

Scientifically it defies every explanation. Here was a people

apparently deeply divided against itself, Socialists opposed Liberals,

Liberals opposed Catholics, Flemings opposed Walloons; theoretical

differences degenerated frequently into personal quarrels; political

antagonism was embittered by questions of religion and language. Surely

this was ideal ground in which to sow the seed of discord, when the

Government had been obliged to seek refuge in a foreign country and a

great number of prominent citizens had emigrated abroad. The German

propagandist, who had been able to work wonders in some neutral

countries, must have thought the task almost unworthy of his efforts.

Every one of his theoretical calculations was correct. He only forgot

one small detail which a closer study of history might have taught him.

He forgot that, in face of the common danger, all these differences

would lose their hold on the people's soul, that the former bitterness

of their quarrels was nothing compared with the sacred love of their

country which they shared.

* * * * *

The first action of the German administration after the triumphal entry

into Brussels was to try to isolate the occupied part of the country, in

order to monopolize the news. Rather than submit to a German censor, all

the Belgian papers--with the exception of two small provincial

journals--had ceased to appear. During a fortnight, Brussels remained

without authorized news. From that time, the authorities allowed the

sale of some German and Dutch dailies and of a few newspapers published

in Belgium under German control. The Government itself issued the

_Deutsche Soldatenpost_ and _Le Réveil_ (in French) and a great number

of posters, "_Communications officielles du Commandant de l'Armee

allemande_," which were supposed to contain the latest war-news.

To this imposing array, the patriots could only oppose a few pamphlets

issued by the editor Bryan Hill, soon prohibited, and copies of Belgian,

French and English papers, which were smuggled at great risk, and

consequently were very expensive. Still, before the fall of Antwerp, it

was practically impossible for the Germans to stop private letters and

newspapers passing from the unoccupied to the occupied part of the

country. Besides, they had more important business on hand. Here again,

it was only after the second month of occupation that the pressure

increased. During October and November, several people were condemned to

heavy fines and to periods of imprisonment for circulating written and

even verbal news. The Dutch frontier was closed, wherever no natural

obstacle intervened, by a continuous line of barbed wire and electrified

wire. Passports were only granted to the few people engaged in the work

of relief and to those who could prove that it was essential to the

interests of their business that they should leave the country for a

time. The postal service being reorganized under German control, any

other method of communication was severely prosecuted. At the end of

1914, several messengers lost their lives in attempting to cross the

Dutch frontier. Under such conditions it is easy to understand that, in

spite of the efforts made by the anonymous editors of two or three

prohibited papers, such as _La Libre Belgique_, the bulk of the

population was practically cut off from the rest of the world and was

compelled to read, if they read at all, the pro-German papers and the

German posters. The only wells left from which the people could drink

were poisoned.

* * * * *

The German Press Bureau in Brussels, openly recognised by the

administration and formerly the headquarters of Baron von Bissing's son,

set to work in three principal directions. It aimed at separating the

Belgians from the Allies, then at separating the people from King

Albert and his Government, and finally at reviving the old language

quarrel between Walloons and Flemings.

The campaign against the Allies, though still carried on whenever the

opportunity arises, was specially violent at the beginning, when the

Germans had not yet given up all hope of detaching King Albert from the

Alliance (August-September, 1914). It was perhaps the most dangerous

line of attack because it did not imply any breach of patriotism. On the

contrary it suggested that Belgium had been duped by the Allies, and

especially by England, who had never meant to come to her help and who

had used her as a catspaw, leaving her to bear all the brunt of the

German assault in an unequal and heroic struggle. It was accompanied by

a constant flow of war news exaggerating the German successes and

suggesting that, even if they ever had the intention of delivering

Belgium, the Allies would no longer be in a position to do so.

According to the first war-news poster issued in Brussels, a few days

after the enemy had entered the town, the French official papers had

declared that "The French armies, being thrown on the defensive, would

not be able to help Belgium in an offensive movement." I need not recall

how, his name having been used at Liège to bolster up this false report,

M. Max, the burgomaster of Brussels, found an opportunity of

contradicting it publicly and, at the same time, of discrediting all

censored news.

The effect was amazing. Henceforth the official posters were not only

regularly regarded as a tissue of lies, but definitely ridiculed. The

people either ignored them or paid them an exaggerated attention. In

some popular quarters, urchins climbed on ladders to read them aloud to

a jeering crowd. The influence of M. Max's attitude was such that,

eighteen months later, several people coming from the capital declared

that, as far as war news was concerned, Brussels was far more

optimistic than London or Paris, every check received by the Allied

armies being systematically ignored and every success exaggerated.

When one reads through the series of German "_Communications_" pasted on

the walls of the capital during the first year of the occupation, one

wonders how they did not succeed in discouraging the population. For, in

spite of some extraordinary blunders--such as the announcement that a

German squadron had captured fifteen English fishing boats (September

8th, 1914), that the Serbs had taken Semlin because they had nothing

more to eat in Serbia (September 13th, 1914), or that the British army

was so badly equipped that the soldiers lacked boot-laces and writing

paper (October 6th, 1914)--the author of these proclamations succeeded

so skilfully in mixing truth and untruth and in drawing the attention of

the public away from any reverse suffered by the Central Empires, that

the effect of the campaign might have been most demoralizing.

After this first reverse, the Germans only attacked the Allies in order

to throw on their shoulders the responsibility for the woes which they

themselves were inflicting on their victims. When some English

aeroplanes visited Brussels, on September 26th, 1915, a few people were

killed and many more wounded. The German press declared immediately that

this was due to the want of skill of the airmen, who dropped the bombs

indiscriminately over the town. We possess now material proof that the

people were killed, not by bombs dropped from the air, but by fragments

of shells fired from guns. This can only be explained in one way. The

German gunners must have timed their shells so that they should not

burst in the air, but only when falling on the ground. This method of

propaganda may cost a few lives, but it is certainly clever. It might

well be calculated to stir indignation in the hearts of the people

against the Allies and at the same time to serve as a warning to enemy

headquarters to the effect: "Whenever you send your aeroplanes over

Belgian towns, we are going to make the population pay for it."

The same kind of argument is used at the present moment with regard to

the wholesale deportations which are going on in Belgium. To justify his

slave-raids, Governor von Bissing denounces England's blockade. It is

the economic policy of England--not German requisitions--which has

ruined Belgium and caused unemployment: "If there are any objections to

be made about this state of affairs you must address them to England,

who, through her policy of isolation, has rendered the coercive measures

necessary." [1] But the argument is used more for the sake of discussion

than in the real hope of convincing the public. General von Bissing can

have very few illusions left as to the state of mind of the Belgian

population. He knows that every Belgian worker, would answer, with the

members of the Commission Syndicale: "All the Allies have agreed to let

some raw material necessary to our industry enter Belgium, under the

condition, naturally, that no requisitions should be made by the

occupying power, and that a neutral commission should control the

destination of the manufactured articles." [2] Or, more emphatically

still, with Cardinal Mercier: "England generously allows some foodstuffs

to enter Belgium under the control of neutral countries ... She would

certainly allow raw materials to enter the country under the same

control, if Germany would only pledge herself to leave them to us and

not to seize the manufactured products of our industry."

Such arguments are extraordinarily characteristic of the German mind, as

it has been developed by the war: "Let Belgium know that she is

suffering for England's sake. Let England know that, as long as she

enforces her blockade, her friends in Belgium will have to pay for it."

It is the same kind of double-edged declaration as that used on the

occasion of the Allied air-raid on Brussels. Literally speaking, it cuts

both ways. The excuse becomes a threat and the untruth savours of

blackmail. Healthy minds work by single or treble propositions. If we

did not remember that our aim is to analyse the beautiful and heroic

side of the occupation of Belgium, rather than to dwell on its most

sinister aspects, we should recognize, in this last manoeuvre, the

lowest example of human brutality and hypocrisy, the double mark of the

German hoof.

[Footnote 1: Answer of Governor von Bissing to Cardinal Mercier's

letter, Oct. 26th, 1916.]

[Footnote 2: Letter of the "_Commission Syndicale_" to Baron von

Bissing, Nov. 14th, 1916.]

* * * * *

In spite of the most authentic documents, of the most glaring material

proofs, it might be difficult to realise that the human spirit may fall

so low. It seems as if we were diminishing ourselves when we accuse our

enemies. We have lived so long in the faith that "such things are

impossible" that, now that they happen almost at our door, we should be

inclined to doubt our eyes rather than to doubt the innate goodness of

man. Never did I feel this more strongly than when I saw, for the first

time, a caricature of King Albert reproduced from a German newspaper.

Surely if one man, one leader, has come out of this severe trial

unstained, with his virtue untarnished, it is indeed Albert the First,

King of the Belgians. His simple and loyal attitude in face of the

German ultimatum, the indomitable courage which he showed during the

Belgian campaign, his dignity, his reserve, his almost exaggerated

modesty, ought to have won for him, besides the deep admiration of the

Allies and of the neutral world, the respect and esteem even of his

worst enemy. There is a man of few words and noble actions, fulfilling

his pledges to the last article, faithful to his word even in the

presence of death, a leader sharing the work of his soldiers, a King

living the life of a poor man. When in Paris, in London, triumphal

receptions were awaiting them, he and his noble and devoted Queen

remained at their post, on the last stretch of Belgian territory, in the

rough surroundings of army quarters.

The whole world has noted this. People who have no sympathy to spare for

the Allies' cause have been obliged to bow before this young hero, more

noble in his defeat than all the conquerors of Europe in their victory.

But the Germans have not felt it. Not only did they try to ridicule King

Albert in their comic papers. Even the son of Governor von Bissing did

not hesitate to fling in his face the generous epithet, "Lackland." [3]

As soon as the last attempt to conciliate the King had failed the German

press in Belgium began a most violent and abusive campaign against him.

The _Düsseldorfer General-Anzeiger_ published a venomous article, in

which he was represented as personally responsible for "the plot of the

Allies against Germany and for the crimes of the franc-tireurs." He was

stigmatised as "the slave of England," and it was asserted that "If he

did not grasp the hand stretched out to him by the Kaiser on August 2nd

and the 9th it is only because he did not dare to do so" (October 10th,

1914). He was said to have "betrayed his army at Antwerp. Had he not

sworn not to leave the town alive?" And _Le Réveil_, another paper

circulated in Belgium by German propagandists, announced solemnly that,

once on the Yser, the King wanted to sign a separate peace with Germany,

but England had forbidden him to do so. The _Hamburger Nachrichten_, the

_Vossische Zeitung_ and the _Frankfurter Zeitung_ repeated without

scruple this tissue of gross calumnies. The _Deutsche Soldatenpost_,

edited specially for the German soldiers in Belgium, went even a step

further and violently reproached the Queen of the Belgians for not

having protested against the cruelties inflicted on German civilians in

Brussels and Antwerp, at the outbreak of the hostilities!

[Footnote 3: _Suddeutsche Monatshefte_, April 1915.]

* * * * *

Not being able to stir the people against the Allies or against their

own Government, the German Press Bureau attempted to revive the language

quarrel and to provoke internal dissensions. It is interesting to notice

that the new campaign, whose crowning episode was the opening of the

German University at Ghent, in October last, began two months after the

surrender of Brussels and did not develop until the spring of 1915, when

an important minority of Germans began to realise that it would be

impossible to retain Belgium, and when a greater number still only hoped

to keep Antwerp and Flanders, thanks to the "social and linguistic

affinities of Flemings and Germans."

That is how Germany, who had never troubled much before about the

Flemish movement and Flemish literature, suddenly discovered a great

affection for her Flemish brothers who had so long been exposed to "the

insults of the Walloons"; how she suddenly espoused their grievances and

put into effect, in spite of their strong protests, some reforms

inscribed on the programme; how she tried by every means at her disposal

to conciliate Flemish sympathies and to stir up antagonism and

jealousies by treating Flemings and Walloons differently, whether

prisoners in Germany or in occupied Belgium.

The German train of thought is clear enough: "If we are unable to hold

Belgium, any pro-German demonstrations in the Northern provinces may

suggest the idea that it is the wish of the Flemings to be bound to the

Empire and give a pretext for the annexation of Antwerp and Flanders. If

even that is impossible and if we are obliged to give back his Kingdom

to King Albert, we shall have sown so many germs of discontent in the

country that it will be impossible for the Government to restore Belgium

in her full unity and power. She will never become against us the strong

bulwark of the Allies."

All this Walloon-Flemish agitation started by Germany belongs to a vast

plan of mismanagement. The day Germany knew that she would not be able

to keep her conquest she deliberately set herself to ruin Belgium

economically and morally. She succeeded economically, for nobody could

prevent her from requisitioning whatever she wanted. She failed morally

because the people understood her purpose and because the Flemish

leaders proudly refused the German gifts. The reform of Ghent University

was made in spite of them. It was made with the help of a few Germans,

German-Dutch and Belgians without any reputation or following. The

professors have been bought and the students (they only number eighty)

have been mostly recruited among the Flemish prisoners in Germany and

among a few young men threatened with deportation. They are obliged to

wear a special cap and are under the ban of the whole population. No

true "Gantois" passes them in the street without whispering, "_Vive

l'Armée_." This is the pitiful medley of cranks, traitors and unwilling

students which General von Bissing is pleased to call a "University."

In his inaugural speech, the Governor exclaimed, "The God of War, with

his drawn sword, has held the new institution at the font. May the God

of Peace be gracious to her for long years to come." The Germans' lack

of humour surpasses even their ruthlessness. With one hand General von

Bissing was baptizing the baby--rather a difficult operation--with the

other he brandished his fiery sword over the heads of all the true

Flemings who refused to adopt it. Many of them paid for this patriotic

attitude by losing their liberty. With one hand Germany inflicted this

unwelcome gift on the Flemings, with the other she banished M.M.

Pirenne, Frédéricq and Verhaegen from the sacred precincts of Flemish

culture!

Most solemnly, on different occasions, all the prominent Flemish leaders

have protested against the German Administration's action. They have

declared that it was illegal and unjust. Governor von Bissing reminds

them that, according to De Raet's words, "Two heroic spirits dominate

the world: The Mind and the Sword." They may possess the first but he

holds the second.

IV.

THE SACKING OF BELGIUM.

There is one idea which dominates the Belgian tragedy: "The body may be

conquered, the soul remains free." These words were uttered for the

first time, I believe, by the Belgian Premier, Baron de Broqueville, in

the solemn sitting of the House, when the German violation of Belgian

neutrality was announced to the representatives of the people. The idea

is supposed to have been expressed by King Albert, in another form,

before the evacuation of Antwerp. It was used to great effect in one of

the most popular cartoons published by _Punch_, in which the Kaiser says

to the King, with a sneer, "You have lost everything," and the King

replies, "Not my soul." It is so intimately associated with the Belgian

cause that the image of the stricken country is scarcely ever evoked

without an allusion being made to it.

We have seen, in the course of the earlier chapters, how Belgium

succeeded in preserving her loyalty and patriotism in spite of the most

ruthless oppression and the most cunning calumnies. We must now look at

the darker side of the picture and see how she has not succeeded in

preserving either her prosperity, or even her supply of daily bread.

Through the Iron Bars: Two Years of German Occupation in Belgium · 第 1 / 4 段