Often when German troops wish to carry a position, they place
civilians, men, women and children before them, and take shelter behind
this shield of living flesh. As the stratagem consists essentially in
speculating upon the noblemindedness of the adversary, of saying to
him: "You will not fire upon these unhappy people, I know, and I hold
you at my mercy, disarmed, because I know you are less cowardly than
I", as it implies a homage to the enemy, and humiliation of oneself,
it is almost inconceivable that soldiers can resort to it, and that is
why it represents a new invention in the long list of human cruelties,
and the most fearful _Penitentiels_ (_Summæ peccatorum_) of the middle
ages have not recorded it. And it is also why, in presence of accounts,
French, English or Belgian accusing the Germans of such practices I
for a long time doubted, I admit if not the truth of the evidence, at
least its importance: such acts must, it seemed to me, prove only the
unavowed crimes of officers, individual acts which do not dishonour a
nation, for a nation on learning them would repudiate them. But now
can we doubt that the German nation accepts such ruffianly exploits as
worthy of her, that she recognizes and acquiesces in them, when the
following narrative, signed by a Bavarian officer, Lt. A. Eberlein
is laid before us in one of the best known newspapers in Germany, in
the issue of 7^{th} Oct. 1914 (n^o 513 _Vorabendblatt_ p. 2 of the
_Münchner Neueste Nachrichten_)? Lt Eberlein describes the occupation
of St Dié at the end of August. After entering the town at the head
of a column, he was obliged to barricade himself inside a house until
reinforcements came up (_Plate 9_):
[Illustration: _Plate 9._]
We had arrested three civilians, and suddenly a good idea struck me.
We placed them on chairs and made them understand that they must go
and sit on them in the middle of the street. On one side entreaties,
on the other blows from the butt-end of a gun. One gets terribly
hardened after a while. At last they were seated outside in the
street. I do not know how many prayers of anguish they said; but they
kept their hands tightly clasped all the time. I pitied them; but
the devise worked immediately. The shooting at us from the house at
the side stopped at once; we were able to occupy the house in front,
and became masters of the principal street. Every one after that who
showed himself in the street was shot. The artillery, too did good
work during this, and when towards seven in the evening, the brigade
advanced to free us, I was able to report that "St Dié is free of the
enemy".
As I learnt later on, the ... regiment of reserve which had entered
St Dié more from the north had had similar experiences to ours. The
four civilians that had been made to sit in the street had been
killed by French bullets. I saw them myself, stretched out in the
middle of the street, near the Hospital.
V
Article 28 of the Hague Convention of 1907, signed by Germany, runs
thus "It is forbidden to pillage a town or locality even when taken
by assault." Article 47 runs: "(In occupied territory), pillage is
forbidden".
This is how the armies of Germany interpret these articles.
Private Handschuhmacher (of the 11 battalion of Jägers, reserve) writes
in his diary:
"8^{th} August 1914. _Gouvy_, (Belgium). There as the Belgians had
fired on German soldiers we at once pillaged the Goods Station. Some
cases, eggs, shirts and all eatables were seized. The safe was gutted
and the money divided among the men. All securities were torn up."[18]
This took place on the fourth day of the war and enables us to
understand why in a technical article on the Military Treasury (_der
Zahlmeister im Felde_) the _Berliner Tageblatt_ of the 26^{th} Nov.
1914 (1 Supplement) notices as a mere incident an economic phenomenon
which is however curious: "As it is a fact that far more money orders
are sent from the theatre of operations to the interior of the country
than vice versa ..." «_Da nun aber erfahrungsgemäss viel mehr Geld vom
Kriegsschauplatz nach der Heimat gesandt wird_ ...».
But as, according to the common practice of the German armies, pillage
is but the prelude to incendiarism, non-commissioned-officer Hermann
Levith (of the 160^{th} Regt. VIII^{th} Army Corps) writes:
"The enemy had occupied the village of Bièvre and the skirts of the
wood. The 3^{rd} Company advanced in first line. We carried the
village and pillaged and burnt nearly all the houses."[19]
And P^{te} Schiller (133 Inf. XIX^{th} Corps) writes:
"It was at Haybes (Ardennes) on the 24^{th} of August that we had
our first battle. The 2^{nd} Battalion entered the village, searched
the houses sacked them and burnt all those from which shots had been
fired."[20]
Private Seb. Reishaupt (3 Bavarian Inf. 1^{st} Bavarian Corps) writes:
"Parux (Meurthe-et-Moselle) is the first village we burnt; then the
dance began: villages one after the other; by field and meadow on
bicycle to the ditches by the roadside, there we ate cherries."[21]
They vie with one another in stealing, they steal everything and
anything, and they keep a record of their loot: "_Schnaps, Wein,
Marmelade, Zigarren_" so writes this plain soldier; and the smart
officer of the 178^{th} Saxon, who at first was indignant at the
"Vandalismus" of his men, confesses in his turn, that the 1^{st} of
September at Rethel, he stole "in a house near the _Hôtel Moderne_,
a splendid mackintosh and a camera for Felix". Without distinction
of grade, nor of arms, nor of Corps, they steal, and even in the
ambulances the doctors steal. Here is an example from the diary of
Private Johannes Thode (4. Reserve-Ersatz Regiment):
"Brussels 5. 10. 14. A motor arrives at the hospital with booty, a
piano, two sewing machines, a lot of albums and all sorts of other
things."[22]
Two sewing machines, as «booty» (_Kriegsbeute_). Stolen from whom? No
doubt from two humble Belgian women. And for whom?