The Boches have taken up three positions in succession. In the first
place, in their speeches, in their writings and by commemorative
pictures and medals, _they have gloried in their misdeeds_, thus
declaring that Kultur is above morality (as stated by their writer,
Thomas Mann), and that the right of German might is above everything.
Then, in the second place, when they discovered that in the world
outside them there was something known as a "moral conscience," not
understood by them, but still to be reckoned with, _they cynically
denied the charges_. Finally, when they were driven from this second
trench, when simple negation became impossible, _they had perforce to
explain their crimes_.
Their commonest explanation is this, "Civilians fired on us."[24] The
French Commission of Enquiry came to the following conclusion on this
point: "This allegation is false, and those who put it forward have been
powerless to give it the appearance of truth, even though it has been
their custom to fire shots in the neighbourhood of dwellings, in order
to be able to affirm that they have been attacked by innocent
inhabitants, on whose ruin or massacre they had resolved."
Enquiries conducted by high magistrates have established the fact that
German officials are very frequently guilty of premeditated lies. It is
probable, all the same, that many German soldiers, on entering Belgium
or France, were obsessed by the idea of civilians firing on them. The
cry of a soldier trembling with fear, drunk, or thirsting for
pillage--"Man hat geschossen (they have fired)"--is enough for a
locality to be delivered up at once to the wildest fury. "When an
inhabitant has fired on a regiment," said a soldier at Louvain, "the
place belongs to the regiment." What a temptation for a Boche soldier to
fire a shot that will at once unloose pillage and massacre!
Some mistakes have _possibly_ been made which could have been avoided by
the least enquiry. Read this admission recorded in his diary by a Saxon
officer: "The lovely village of Gué-d'Hossus has been given over to the
flames, though innocent in my opinion. I hear that a cyclist fell off
his machine and that his fall caused his rifle to go off of itself. As a
consequence there was firing in his direction. Then, the male
inhabitants were simply hurled straight away into the flames. Such
horrors will not be repeated, we must hope ... There ought to be some
compulsion to verify suspicions of guilt in order to put a check on this
indiscriminate shooting of people."
The only shots fired at them inside, or in the neighbourhood of,
villages have been those of French or Belgian soldiers covering their
retreat. Sometimes this has been discovered, but too late, and they have
continued their crimes--in order to justify them.
Here is the statement of a neutral: "In one village they found corpses
of German soldiers with the fingers cut off, and instantly the officer
in command had the houses set on fire and the inhabitants shot.... In
the same district a German officer was billeted with a famous Flemish
poet; the officer behaved courteously, was treated with consideration,
and allowed himself to talk freely: his complaint was the misdeeds of
his soldiers. Near Haelen, he told his host, he had to have a soldier
shot on finding in his knapsack some fingers covered with rings: the
man, on being questioned, admitted that he had cut them off the bodies
of the German dead."[25]
In exceptional cases an enquiry is held; and in every such instance the
truth is discovered and massacre prevented.
At the end of August, Liebknecht,[26] a member of the Reichstag, set out
in his car for Louvain. He came to a village where there was
considerable excitement going on. The Germans had just found three of
their men lying dead on the road, and accused the peasants of being
responsible for the deed. Liebknecht examined them, and was not long in
obtaining proof that the Germans had been killed by Belgian riflemen. At
Huy there were shots in the night; two soldiers wounded; the populace
accused; the mayor arrested and condemned to death; but he knew that
there were no Allied troops in the neighbourhood, and also that his own
people had not fired a shot. "Shoot me, if you like," he said calmly,
"but not before extracting the bullets from the wounded." The officer,
less of a brute than some, gave his consent to this. The bullets in the
wounds were German bullets. But the Germans do not even require a
pretext to take action. Their first crime, to our knowledge, was on
August 4th. Some officers dashed up to Herve in a car, challenged two
civilians while crossing the bridge and, without giving them time to
answer, shot them down with revolvers.
In their private diaries they accuse one another, each throwing on his
neighbour the responsibility for crimes committed. A cavalryman writes:
"It is unfortunately true that the worst elements of our Army feel
themselves authorised to commit any sort of infamy. This charge applies
particularly to the A.S.C." A bombing officer: "_Rethel_, September 2nd.
Discipline becoming lax. Brandy. Looting. The blame lies with the
_infantry_." An infantry officer: "Discipline in our company
excellent--a contrast with the rest. The _Pioneers_ are not worth much.
As for the _Artillery_, they are a band of brigands." A final extract
seems to be the only one that gives the truth: "Brin ... _troops of all
arms_ are engaged in looting."
It has been possible sometimes to prove premeditation. On the 17th
August, a German officer was billeted with a Belgian magistrate. Their
talk turned on Dinant. "Dinant," said the officer, "is a condemned
town!" M. X ..., of Dinant, happening to be in another town, made the
acquaintance of a German officer, who said to him on August 20th, "You
come from Dinant? Don't go back. It's a bad place, and will be
destroyed." Troops on their march towards Andenne announced in villages
through which they passed that they were going to burn the town and
massacre the inhabitants. At Louvain, a German officer, treated
generously by a middle-class family, and appreciating their courtesy,
rushed to their house on the 25th at 11 o'clock in the morning,[27] and
earnestly pressed his hosts to leave without delay, refusing to give
them any explanation. The family, puzzled and perturbed by his appeal,
went off and so escaped.
* * * * *
In the eyes of the moralist the worst of all their crimes will perhaps
be this, that the wretches tried to dishonour Belgium, after first
assassinating her. They have dared to say, write, and proclaim publicly,
and affirm to Neutrals, that Belgian women and girls had mutilated
German wounded soldiers, blinding them with scissors or with boiling
water. The reports of the Belgian Commission of Enquiry have been
replied to in a counter report[28] published as a German White Book.
This enquiry and these documents will live in history. In centuries to
come they will hang as a heavy weight on the Kaiser's memory and the
conscience of Germany. Listen to the pathetic conclusion of the Belgian
reply: "Before God and before man, the Belgian Government has no
hesitation in giving this as its opinion of the conduct of the German
Government towards the Belgian nation: 'He is twice guilty who violates
the rights of others and then attempts, with singular audacity, to
justify himself by imputing to his victim faults that were never
committed.'"[29]
It still remains to be explained how, by what means, by what deadly
influences, this German nation, consisting of men who, as individuals,
are not all brigands, has reached and been led to this state of
savagery? In the preparations for this _collective madness_ of a
people, what part has been played by its leaders of thought and its
politicians, by race and by education? This is a disturbing phenomenon
which students of mental disease[30] will study later, but on the
examination of which we cannot here embark. It is not for us to seek the
pathological cause for this moral decay--this decadence. We have only to
note its _effects_.