L’an 1914, le 1 octobre, devant nous, Alphonse Verschaeve, procureur du Roi à Ypres, a comparu, dans notre cabinet, sur invitation de notre part, le nommé V—— A—— F——, 28 ans, mineur domicilié à Tamines, actuellement réfugié à Reninghe, lequel nous a fait sous la foi du serment en langue flamande la déclaration suivante:
Le samedi, 22 août, dans le courant de l’après-midi, les Allemands, au nombre de 200, me semble-t-il, sont entrés dans la commune de Tamines. Immédiatement ils obligèrent tous les habitants (les femmes et les enfants aussi bien que les hommes) à sortir de leurs maisons et à se rendre à l’église. Pendant que nous sortions par la porte de devant, les Allemands pénétraient dans nos demeures par la porte de derrière et y mettaient le feu. Aussi en très peu de temps toute la commune ne formait plus qu’un vaste brasier. Lorsque toute la population se trouvait réunie dans l’église, les femmes et les enfants furent expediés vers le couvent des religieuses, tandis que les hommes (au nombre de 400), furent obligés de se diriger par rangs de quatre vers la plaine, et entre une double haie de soldats allemands. Pendant cette marche les soldats allemands ne cessèrent de tirer sur nous et de cette façon massacrèrent impitoyablement un nombre considérable de mes concitoyens.
Voyant que nombre de mes camarades tombaient, abattus par les coups de feu, je me suis laissé tomber à terre, quoique je n’étais pas blessé, et je suis resté là, immobile, couché sous les cadavres jusque vers le milieu de la nuit suivante; c’est ainsi que j’ai sauvé ma vie. Le lendemain matin, lorsque je me suis relevé, j’ai constaté que nous étions à peine trente habitants qui avions échappé au massacre, mais la plupart des autres échappés étaient blessés; cinq seulement d’entre nous en étaient sortis complètement indemnes. Plus tard dans la journée nous avons été forcés d’inhumer les cadavres de nos 350 concitoyens, puis amenés à une distance de 5 kilomètres; là on nous remit en liberté mais avec défense formelle de remettre encore le pied dans notre commune.
Après lecture il persiste dans sa déclaration et signe avec nous.
(Signed) V—— A—— F——.
Pour traduction conforme,
le Procureur du Roi,
(Signed) A. Verchaeve.
(a) Extract from the Diary of a German Soldier forwarded by the Extraordinary Commission of Enquiry instituted by the Russian Government.
“When the offensive becomes difficult we gather together the Russian prisoners and hunt them before us towards their compatriots, while we attack the latter at the same time. In this way our losses are sensibly diminished.
“We cannot but make prisoners. Each Russian soldier when made prisoner will now be sent in front of our lines in order to be shot by his fellows.”
(b) Extract from a Diary of a German Soldier of the 13th Regiment, 13th Division, VIIth Corps captured by the Fifth (French) Army and reproduced in the First (British) Army Summary No. 95.
December 19th, 1914.—“The sight of the trenches and the fury, not to say bestiality, of our men in beating to death the wounded English affected me so much that, for the rest of the day, I was fit for nothing.”
(c) Contents of a Letter found on a Prisoner of the 86th Regiment, but written by Johann Wenger (10th Company Body Regiment, 1st Brigade, 1st Division I.A.C. Bav.) dated 16th March, 1915, Peronne, and addressed to a German Girl.
(After promising to send a ring made out of a shell.) “It will be a nice souvenir for you from a German warrior who has been through everything from the start and has shot and bayoneted so many Frenchmen, and I have bayoneted many women. During the fight at Batonville [?Badonviller] I bayoneted seven (7) women and four (4) young girls in five (5) minutes. We fought from house to house and these women fired on us with revolvers; they also fired on the captain too, then he told me to shoot them all—but I bayoneted them and did not shoot them, this herd of sows, they are worse than the men.”
(d) Extracts from the Diary of Musketeer Rehbein, II., 55th Reserve Infantry Regiment (2nd Company), 26th Reserve Infantry Brigade, 2nd Guard Reserve Division, X. Reserve Corps.
(This diary was captured during the recent operations at Loos, and forwarded to Professor Morgan by the Head-quarters Staff.94)
August 16th (1914). On the march towards Louvain.—“Several citizens and the curé have been shot under martial law, some not yet buried—still lying where they were executed, for every one to see. Pervading stench of dead bodies. The curé is said to have incited the inhabitants to ambush and kill the Germans.”
1914. 16/8. Marsch nach Louveigne.—Mehrere Bürger u. der Pfarrer standrechtlich erschossen, zum Teil noch nicht beerdigt. Am Vollziehungsplatz noch für jedermann sichtbar. Leichengeruch Uberall. “ Pfarrer soll die Bewohner Angefeuert haben die Deutschen aus dem Hinterhalt zu töten.”
(e) Extracts from the Diary of a German Soldier, Richard Gerhold (Official Translation by French Head-quarters Staff).
Extraits du carnet de route trouvé le 22 avril sur le cadavre du réserviste Richard Gerhold, du 71º R.R. (IVº C.R.) tué en Septembre à Nouvron
... Le 19 août, nous avançons et peu à peu on apprend à connaître les horreurs de la guerre: du bétail crevé, des automobiles détruites, villages et hameaux consumés; c’est tout d’abord un spectacle à faire frissonner, mais ici on cesse être un homme, on devient flegmatique et on n’a plus que l’idée de sa sécurité personnelle. Plus nous avançons, plus le spectacle est désolé: partout des décombres, fumants et des hommes fusillés et carbonisés. Et cela continue ainsi....
... Nous franchissons la frontière le 17 août; je me souviens, et je vois sans cesse ce moment là: tout le village en flammes, portes et fenêtres brisées, tout gît épars dans la rue; seule une maisonnette subsiste et à la porte de cette maison une pauvre femme, les mains hautes, avec six enfants implore pour qu’on l’épargne elle et ses petits; il en va ainsi tous les jours.
Dans le village voisin la compagnie se fait remettre les armes naturellement avec la plus grande prudence. A peine nous sommes-nous mis en marche que des maisons on tire sur nos troupes; on fait demi-tour et en quelques instants tout est en flammes; il n’y a pas de place pour la pitié, il arrive fréquemment que cette sale engeance de curés prenne part à la fusillade; c’est pour moi une folle joie quand on peut se venger de cette canaille de curés;95 ici naturellement tout est foncièrement catholique. Quelle vie agréable la population pourrait avoir ici si elle ne se laissait pas conduire sur une mauvaise voie par cette hypocrite canaille de pretres; ... la population ne serait pas inquiétée le moins du monde de la part des Allemands; mais puisqu’il en est ainsi par ici, il n’y a pas de notre côté à garder le moindre ménagement....
... Le 18, nous atteignons Tongres: ici aussi c’est un tableau de destruction complète, c’est quelque chose d’unique en son genre pour notre profession (c’est un verrier qui parle)....
... Le 25 août, nous prenons un cantonnement d’alerte à Grinde (Sucrerie); ici aussi tout est brûlé et détruit. De Grinde nous continuous notre route sur Louvain; ici c’est partout un tableau d’horreur; des cadavres de nos gens de nos chevaux; des autos tout en flammes, l’eau empoisonnée; à peine avons-nous atteint l’extrémité de la ville que la fusillade reprend de plus belle; naturellement on fait demi-tour et on nettoie; puis la ville est mitraillée par nous complètement.
Chemin faisant passent devant nous des cortèges de prisonniers, homines femmes et enfants poussant des cris....
... Le 1º septembre, nous sommes embarqués dans Bruxelles-Paris; sur cette ligne le même tableau se renouvelle: villages consumés, fossées énormes, etc....
... Aujourd’hui, 7 septembre, c’est le jour le plus pénible que jusqu’à présent nous ayons vécu; l’endroit s’appelle Attichy; nous atteignons cet endroit en faisant de longs détours, car on a fait sauter beaucoup de ponts. A 5 h. du matin, on repart, et cela au pas accéléré parce que beaucoup de cochonneries y ont été commises....
... Le 9 septembre, après un bon cantonnement, mais qui dure trop peu, nous partons la nuit à 1 h. 1/2 après avoir mis des chemises fraîches et nous avançons vers l’ennemi vers 6 h. du matin et livrons un combat après lequel nous sommes complètement désorganisés. Notre régiment actuellement se compose d’un bataillon du 71º, d’une compagnie du 2º bataillon, de compagnies cyclistes des 14º, 46º et 27º et de nombreux autres éléments encore. Vers 11 h. du matin nous tombons sous une grêle de shrapnells, nous n’avons pas d’artillerie, ni d’autre couverture; l’après-midi nous sommes engagés dans une chaude lutte.... Ici c’est Ormoy. Nous nous joignons au 9º Corps et nous portons vers la position occupée hier par l’ennemi.... Nous faisons au feu d’artillerie très vif, mais nous ne pouvons rien faire jusqu’à ce que notre artillerie ait nettoyé la place. Nous bivouaquons en forêt après que l’ennemi s’est retiré et nous nous avançons pour chercher de l’eau; la nuit vers 3 h. nous rentrons à la compagnie. A 4 h. nous repartons: ainsi en 3 jours 8 heures de sommeil et avec cela, nourris comme cela arrive parfois à la guerre et la marche continue de plus belle avec des efforts physiques les plus grands pour envelopper l’ennemi vers Compiegne. Nous nous heurtons au 94º qui a été repoussé avec de fortes pertes; plusieurs compagnies de ce régiment sont fondues et réduites à 40 hommes; nous cantonnons ici; mais quelque chose de bien! Dieu! quelles délices!... Nous faisons un brin de toilette, mangeons et buvons à cœur joie et songeons en rêve à vous là-bas!
Le 11 septembre, mouvement tournant vers Chaulny.... Nous arrivons en cantonnement d’alerte à Chaulny vieux repaire de brigands. Après quelques heures de sommeil, nouveau départ à 3 h. du matin. Le 12 septembre nous nous fortifions à 10 Klm de Chaulny dans des tranchées: il ne s’y passe pas longtemps que nous y sommes vivement bombardés par l’artillerie; à ce moment s’engage un violent combat d’artillerie. Vers 5 h. du soir, nous entrons dans l’action, mais nous ne pouvons avancer que jusqu’à une pente abrupte où nous restons couchés sous des torrents d’eau jusque dans la nuit....
... Malheureusement nous sommes encore trop faibles dans cette position; le rapport vient à l’instant que notre 2º Corps arrivera ou doit arriver dans l’après-midi: de ces sortes de promesses, on nous en fait toujours, mais? Celui qui va croire ou se laisser conter que les Français fuient devant quelques fusils ou canons allemands se trompe joliment et ne sait rien. Jusqu’à présent nous sommes obligés de dire que les Français sont un adversaire honorable que nous ne devons pas juger au-dessous de sa valeur. Ici, aussi, il se passe des choses qui ne devraient pas être; oui, des atrocités sont commises ici aussi, mais naturellement sur les Anglais et les Belges, tous sont abattus sans pardon à coups de fusil....
DOCUMENTS SELECTED FROM THE REPORTS OF THE EXTRAORDINARY COMMISSION OF INQUIRY APPOINTED BY HIS MAJESTY THE EMPEROR OF RUSSIA
A Sister of Mercy, wearing the sign of the Red Cross, was seized by German and Austrian troops on April 20th, 1915, at the station of Radzivilishki and shut up in a cart-shed.
“On the fourth day several officers visited her in the cart-shed and demanded information from her as to the positions of the Russian troops. They then beat her with swords and pricked her body with needles. On the same day she was taken to the third line of German entrenchments and lodged in a ‘dug-out’ occupied by German officers. Here she was violated, and during a week and a half several German officers frequently committed violent acts of copulation with her, and kept her in the ‘dug-out’ without clothes under a special guard. At last she succeeded in escaping from the trenches. With the help of a Lithuanian peasant she made her way to the Russian positions, where she arrived in an almost unconscious state. First medical aid was at once administered, as it was found she was suffering from inflammation of the peritoneum and cellular membrane surrounding the matrix. On examining her for marks of violence, bruises were visible in the region of the shoulder and on the thighs and legs.”
At the beginning of the war, when the Germans entered the town of Kalish, a girl named X—— was arrested and led out to the public place, or square, for execution. Here the Germans tied her to a tree and told her that she would be shot. Others of the inhabitants, also condemned to be shot, were drawn up on the same open space. Among these victims was an acquaintance of the girl X——, a student named N. Davuidov. The German soldiers proceeded to stab this Davuidov with their bayonets before the very eyes of the girl X——, and then they tore out hair from his head and finally shot him dead. This scene of murder gave the girl such a shock that she fainted. On coming to her senses she found herself in an apartment occupied by German officers. No sooner did she revive, than one of these officers committed a rape upon her and destroyed her virginity. During the following days she remained a captive in the same apartment, where she was forced to yield to the brutal lust of the officer who first violated her, and to the solicitations of two of his comrades, who threatened to cut her to pieces with their swords if she offered any resistance. These officers then told her “that the Germans had invented a new method of making war on the Russians, which would exterminate them by means of poisonous gas without the waste of any more bullets.”
The girl was subsequently rescued by the Russian troops.
A combined judicial and medical examination of the girl X—— on June 4th, established the fact that she had been deprived of her maidenhood and an inflammatory condition of the sexual organs was still plainly visible.
On April 25th, 1915, when an infantry regiment retreated from the station of Krosno in Galicia, the unarmed wounded soldiers, who were unable to follow, and many of whom were crawling away on their hands and knees, were overtaken and stabbed to death, or despatched by blows with the butt end of rifles by the Austro-Hungarian troops.
The foregoing facts have been confirmed by the evidence of junior subaltern B—— of the regiment, Serge Yakovlev Sudarikov, aged thirty, who was interrogated as a witness by the Examining Magistrate of the 1st ward of Kharkov.
On May 12th, 1915, near the village of Bobrovka, forty versts from Yaroslav in Galicia, after the withdrawal of the “platoon sotnias” of dismounted cossacks from their trenches, the latter were occupied by German guardsmen, who drove out the Russian wounded at the point of the bayonet.
Private Nikita Davidenko, who was one hundred paces from the trenches taken by the Germans, saw how they used their bayonets to thrust out four or five of his wounded comrades, whose groans were distinctly audible.
When the Russian troops advanced on May 15th, Davidenko saw the bodies of many cossacks, who had been bayoneted or sabred to death in the trenches abandoned on May 12th.
The above facts have been confirmed by the evidence of Davidenko, who was interrogated as a witness by the Examining Magistrate of the second ward of Kharkov.
On the retirement of the Russians, after the battle near Gumbinnen, in Eastern Prussia, August 7th, 1914, a junior subaltern, named Alexander Lappo, aged twenty-six, who had been wounded in the back by a piece of an exploded shrapnel, was left behind, lying on the field.
He soon perceived a group of about fifteen Germans, headed by an officer and a colour sergeant, following up their detachments, and shooting all the wounded Russians within reach as they marched along. There was no consideration for the fact that these Russians had been struck down at a considerable distance from the actual fighting, without having fired a shot. One of the Germans in this squad caught sight of Lappo and fired at him with his rifle. Lappo received the bullet in his left elbow. A second shot, fired by the same German soldier, hit a wounded Russian private Tartar, lying next to Lappo. The Tartar made one or two convulsive movements and expired. The pain from the wound in his elbow made Lappo moan rather loudly, and this attracted the attention of the German officer, who at once levelled his revolver and shot him in the neck. This second wound rendered Lappo unconscious and he only recovered his senses towards evening, when he was picked up by Russian Red Cross men. Lappo then noticed that his leather wrist band with a black watch, worth ten roubles, had been stolen, evidently by the Germans.
It is not certain to what troops of the enemy’s forces this German officer and the men under his command belonged, but the German soldiers killed in the battle near Stalupenen, on August 4th, 1914, in which Lappo took part, had the figures “41” on their shoulder straps.
The above described facts have been verified and established by a combined judicial and medical examination, and by the evidence of Lappo, given under oath before the Examining Magistrate of the Circuit Court of Vitebsk, district of Gorodok.
In the latter half of June the regiment in which this witness was one of the rank and file took part in a battle near Ivangorod. When the fighting was over, the regiment settled down to rest. Some of the men, however, went to help the sanitary attendants to bring in the wounded and place them in a wooden cart-house or shed, roofed with straw, at one end of the village. According to statements made by the Red Cross bearers, from sixty-six to sixty-eight men were lodged in this building. At eleven o’clock at night there was a sudden and violent rattle of rifle fire. The village had been surrounded by the Germans. The witness seized his rifle and started to leave with three comrades, but in the darkness they stumbled into a German trench, and were taken prisoners. Their weapons were taken from them, and all four Russians were led to the same cart-shed, to which the witness Dorozhka had assisted to carry the Russian wounded. A German officer on the spot gave an order to his German soldiers and then he gathered up an armful of the straw, littered over the floor of the shed, placed it against one of the corners of the building, and set fire to it with a match. The witness declares, that he almost fainted when he saw this officer setting fire to the shed. The straw blazed up at once, the flames began to envelop the wooden walls, and when it reached the roof, piercing shrieks came from the wounded inmates, calling for help. At this moment the officer who fired the shed approached the prisoners, who were standing near, and without uttering a word, he discharged his revolver point blank at one of the comrades of the witness, who instantly fell to the ground dead. Then this officer struck witness’s other comrade with something in the lower part of the body, and by the light of the conflagration witness noticed that the man’s intestines were protruding. Dorozhka rushed to one side and managed to break away from a group of German soldiers and escaped unhurt, although three shots were fired after him. The witness, after tramping all night, fell in with one of the Russian pickets.
The foregoing was deposed to by the witness Dorozhka on examination by the Examining Magistrate of the 1st Dnieprovsky District.
In June, 1915, three Russian officers, Captain Kosmachevsky, Lieutenant Griaznov, and Sub-lieutenant Yarotsky, escaped from German captivity and reached Russia in safety.
They were made prisoners in East Prussia in August, 1914. Together with other captured officers, they were driven on foot to the town of Neidenburg, and at one place on the way were made to serve as cover for a German battery, which was in danger of attack from Russian artillery fire.
For this purpose the prisoners were put into two-wheeled carts and ordered to wave white flags and flags with the Red Cross, and these carts were placed in front of the battery. At the same time the prisoners were warned, that if only a single projectile fell into this German battery, they would all be shot for it.
Four days these prisoners were on the march. At night they were compelled to sleep in the open in roadside ditches, although there were villages near by, and all that time they received no food, but only coffee, without sugar, milk or bread, served up in pails. Along the road the inhabitants and troops whom they met cursed and insulted them, tore off their shoulder straps, threatened them with their fists, spat at them and shouted “To Berlin!”
Before the prisoners were put into the train they were searched, and in this way many of them lost their gold watches and money. The Cossack officers especially were subjected to very strict search, in the course of which they were stripped naked. These Cossack officers were separated from the others and sent off with the private soldier prisoners.
In the first instance the officer prisoners were interned in the fortress of Neisse in Silesia, and were subsequently removed to Kreisfeld, beyond the Rhine.
The prisoners, according to their own account, were kept in horrible conditions. They were lodged in dirty barracks where the windows were shut fast and the glass of the panes covered with oil paint. It was forbidden to approach these windows under pain of being fired at by the sentries. This threat was once carried out, when an officer wished to make a drawing at one of the windows. Fortunately nobody was hurt. The imprisoned officers had to sleep in dirty beds full of bugs, lice, and other vermin. Their meagre fare was served up on dirty tables, littered with straw, whilst alongside were other tables, covered with clean tablecloths and decently furnished even to the extent of glasses for beer, and on these tables dinner was served for the sentries, German subalterns, who looked on at the prisoners and their wretched accommodation in the most insolent manner.
All the imprisoned officers were formed into companies, commanded by rough and rude sergeant-majors, who treated them like common soldiers.
In November, 1914, two of the officer prisoners attempted to escape by bribing the shopman at the stores of the officers’ canteen. This shopman, however, turned out to be a German officer in disguise, and the attempt failed, but it cost the officers concerned very dear. They were put in irons and kept in prison six months in a far worse state than in the barracks.
The above is attested by the evidence of Captain Kosmachevsky, Lieutenant Griaznov, and Sub-lieutenant Yarotsky, given to Major-General Semashko, a member of the Extraordinary Commission of Inquiry, and the deponents were admonished that they would be required to swear to the truth of their statements.
Peter Shimchak, a peasant from the province of Warsaw, who fled from German captivity, being examined on oath, deposed to the following:—In August I was made prisoner while serving as a sailor on board a vessel under the British flag, going from Denmark to England.
As a Russian subject I was not set free, but was placed in solitary confinement for seven days in a prison at Hamburg, and then sent to a camp for prisoners of war near Berlin, at Zel, where there were already many English, French, and Belgian prisoners. In that camp there was a small yard where offending prisoners were generally punished. On one occasion four Cossacks were brought into the camp. I recognised them by the yellow stripes down the sides of their trousers. They were taken out into the yard and placed about ten feet from the wall of the barrack, and through the crevices I was able to watch the proceedings. They took the first Cossack and placed his left hand on a small wooden post or block, and with a sword bayonet one of the German soldiers chopped off successively half of the Cossack’s thumb, half of his middle finger and half of his little finger. I could plainly see how these finger pieces flew off at each stroke of the sword-bayonet and fell to the ground. The Germans picked them up and put them into the pocket of the Cossack’s overcoat and then took him into a barrack, where there was a reservoir of running water. The second Cossack was brought up and had holes drilled through his ears, the point of the sword-bayonet being turned in the cut several times in order, evidently, to make the hole as large as possible. This Cossack was then led away to the barrack where the first one had been taken. When the third Cossack was brought to the place of torture his nose was chopped off by a downward stroke of a sword bayonet, but as the severed piece of nose was still hanging by a bit of skin, the Cossack made signs that they should cut it off completely. The Germans then gave him a pocket knife, and with this the Cossack cut off the hanging piece of his nose. Finally, the fourth Cossack was brought forward. What they intended to do with him it was impossible to say, but this Cossack with a rapid movement drew out the bayonet of the nearest soldier and dealt a blow with it at one of the Germans. There were about fifteen German soldiers present, and they all set upon this Cossack and bayoneted him to death, after which they dragged the body outside the camp. What was the fate of the remaining three Cossacks I do not know, but I think, says the witness Shimchak, in concluding his account of the case, they must have been also killed, for I never saw them again.
Evidence of the senior surgeon of the 73rd Artillery Brigade, Gregory Dimitrovich Onisimov, who was captured by the enemy on August 30th, 1914, near “Malvishek” in East Prussia, but has since been released. The most striking and characteristic part of this ex-prisoner’s testimony is a description of the insulting treatment received by Russian prisoners from the soldiers of their German escort on the road to Insterburg. “The peaceful temper of our German convoy did not last long. We soon began to meet detachments of German troops, who swore and shook their fists and levelled their rifles and revolvers at us, shouting, ‘Why lead these men about when they can be settled here on the spot?’ This kind of remark was shouted at us in German, Polish, and broken Russian. The peaceful inhabitants also reviled us, and called upon the soldiers to despatch us there and then. They shouted ‘nach Berlin—to Berlin with them! ... to Welhau! ... Russischer schweinhund—Russian swine,’ and so forth. The soldiers of the escort were taken into houses on the road and made drunk, so that they also began to amuse themselves at our expense. The German soldier walking on my right took his rifle from his shoulder, as if tired, and held it in such a way that the muzzle touched my right temple, and then he played carelessly with the lock of it, as though unaware of what he was doing. When I moved out of the way, he said: ‘Ah! you’re afraid of losing your head, there’s no danger.’ As soon as the guard on one side had had his little joke, his comrade on the other side began. Another soldier on a cart came along purposely handling his rifle so as to stick the muzzle into my chest, and when I warded it off he roared with laughter and seemed highly delighted. When going down a steep part of the road the driver of a cart behind intentionally drove into us and struck me on the legs with the shafts. I shouted to him to stop and not break my legs. He simply replied: ‘Bad to have no legs.’ This kind of thing went on throughout the march. Sometimes we were driven forward like horses, and the wounded men in the carts were so shaken about that they groaned with pain. The guards did not allow us to turn round to speak with them, and no attention was paid to our entreaties to drive them slowly.”
Immediately after the outbreak of the present war there arose in Belgium a violent struggle by the people against the German troops which forms a flagrant violation of international law and has had the most serious consequences to the Belgian country and people.
This struggle of a population which was under the dominion of the wildest passions continued to rage throughout the whole of the advance of the German army through Belgium. As the Belgian army fell back before the German troops after obstinately contested engagements, the Belgian civil population attempted by every means to impede the German advance in those parts of the country which were not yet occupied; but they did not scruple to injure and weaken the German forces by cowardly and treacherous attacks, also in places which had long been occupied by the German troops. The extent of this armed popular resistance can be seen from the attached general plan (Appendix 1) on which were marked the lines of the German advance, and the Belgian places in which the popular struggle chiefly raged. We have an overwhelming amount of material resting on official sources, especially on evidence given under oath and official reports, that on these routes and in these places the Belgian civil population of every rank, age, and sex took part in the struggle against the German troops with the greatest bitterness and fury. In the Appendices is given a selection from this material which, however, embraces only the more important events and can at any time be increased by further documents.
According to the attached material the Belgian civil population fought against the German troops in numerous places in the provinces of Liège (Appendices 2-10), Luxembourg (Appendices 11-30), Namur (Appendices 12, 17, 31-42), Henegau (Appendices 3, 7, 10, 40, 43-46, 49), Brabant (Appendices 47-49), East and West Flanders (Appendices 49, 50). The conflicts in Aerschot, Andenne, Dinant, Louvain assumed a particularly frightful character, and special reports have been provided on them by the Bureau which has been appointed in the Ministry of War for investigation of offences against the laws of war (Appendices A, B, C, D). Men of the most different positions, workmen, manufacturers, doctors, teachers, even clergy, and even women and children were seized with weapons in their hands (Appendices 18, 20, 25, 27, 43, 47; A 5; C 18, 26, 29, 31, 41, 42-44, 56, 62; D 1, 19, 34, 37, 38, 41, 45, 48). In districts from which the Belgian regular troops had long retired, the German troops were fired on from houses and gardens, from roofs and cellars, from fields and woods. Methods were used in the struggle which certainly would not have been employed by regular troops, and large numbers of sporting weapons and sporting ammunition and some old-fashioned revolvers and pistols were discovered (Appendices 6, 11, 13, 26, 36, 37, 44, 48, 49; A 2, C 52, 81; D 1, 2, 6, 20, 37). Corresponding with this were numerous cases of wounds by shot and also by burns from hot tar and boiling water (Appendices 3, 10; B 2; C 5, 11, 28, 57; D 25, 29). According to all this evidence there can be no doubt that in Belgium the People’s War (Volkskrieg) was carried on not only by individual civilians, but by great masses of the population.
The conduct of the war by the Belgian civil population was completely irreconcilable with the generally recognised rules of international law as they have found expression in Articles 1 and 2 of The Hague Convention: The Laws and Customs of War on Land, which had been accepted by Belgium. These regulations distinguished between organised and unorganised People’s War. In an organised People’s War (Article 1), in order that they may be recognised as belligerents, the militia and volunteer corps must satisfy each of the following conditions: They must have responsible leaders at their head; they must bear a definite badge which is recognisable at a distance; they must bear their weapons openly; and they must obey the laws and usages of war. The unorganised People’s War (Article 2) can dispense with the first two conditions, that is, responsible leaders and military badges. It is, however, bound instead by two other conditions; it can only be carried on in that part of the territory which has not yet been occupied by the enemy, and there must have been no time for the organisation of the People’s War.
The two special conditions required for the organised People’s War were certainly not present in the case of the Belgian francs-tireurs. For, according to the reports of the German military commands, which agree with one another, the civil persons who were found taking part in the struggle had no responsible leaders at their head, and also wore no kind of military badge (Appendices 6, 49; C 4-7, 14, 15, 22, 24, 25, 31; D). The Belgian francs-tireurs can therefore not be regarded as organised militia or volunteers according to the laws of war. It makes no difference in this, that apparently Belgian military and members of the Belgian “Garde Civique” also took part in their enterprises; for as these individuals also did not wear any military badge but mingled among the fighting citizens in civilian dress (Appendices 6; A 3; C 25; D 1, 30, 45, 46), the rights of belligerents can just as little be conceded to them.
The whole of the Belgian People’s War must therefore be judged from the point of view of an unorganised armed resistance of the civil population. As such resistance is only allowed in unoccupied territory, it was for this reason alone, without any doubt, contrary to international law in all those places which were already in occupation of German troops, and particularly at Aerschot, Andenne, and Louvain. But the unorganised People’s War was also impermissible in those places which had not yet been occupied by German troops, and particularly in Dinant and the neighbourhood, as the Belgian Government had sufficient time for an organisation of the People’s War as required by international law. For years the Belgian Government has had under consideration that at the outbreak of a Franco-German war it would be involved in the operations; the preparation of mobilisation began, as can be proved, at least a week before the invasion of the German army. The Government was therefore completely in a position to provide the civil population with military badges and appoint responsible leaders, so far as they wished to use their services in any fighting which might take place. If the Belgian Government in a communication which has been communicated to the German Government through a neutral Power, maintain that they took suitable measures, this only proves that they could have satisfied the conditions which had been laid down; in any case, however, such steps were not taken in those districts through which the German troops passed.
The requirements of international law for an unorganised People’s War were then not complied with in Belgium; moreover, this war was carried on in a manner which alone would have been sufficient to have put those who took part in it outside the laws of war. For the Belgian francs-tireurs regularly carried their weapons not openly, and throughout failed to observe the laws and usages of war.
It has been shown by unanswerable evidence that in a whole series of cases the German troops were on their arrival received by the Belgian civil population in an apparently friendly manner, and then, when darkness came on or some other opportunity presented itself, were attacked with arms; such cases occurred especially in Blegny, Esneux, Grand Rosère, Bièvre, Gouvy, Villers devant Orval, Sainte Marie, Les Bulles, Yschippe, Acoz, Aerschot, Andenne, and Louvain (Appendices 3, 8, 11-13, 18, 22, 28, 31, 43; A, B, D). All these attacks obviously offended against the precept of international law that arms should be borne openly.
What, however, is the chief accusation against the Belgian population is the unheard-of violation of the usages of war. In different places, for instance, at Liége, Herve, Brussels, at Aerschot, Dinant, and Louvain, German soldiers were treacherously murdered (Appendices 18, 55, 61, 65, 66; A 1; C 56, 59, 61, 67, 73-78), which is contrary to the prohibition “to kill or treacherously wound individuals belonging to the hostile nation or army.” (Article 23, Section 1 (b) of The Hague Convention: The Laws and Customs of War on Land.) Further, the Belgian population did not respect the sign of the Red Cross, and thereby violated Article 9 of the Convention of Geneva of July 6th, 1906. In particular, they did not scruple to fire on German troops under the cover of this sign, and also to attack hospitals in which there were wounded, as well as members of the Ambulance Corps, while they were occupied in carrying out their duties (Appendices 3, 4, 12, 19, 23, 28, 29, 41, 49; C 9, 16-18, 32, 56, 66-70; D 9, 21, 25-29, 38, 47). Finally, it is proved beyond all doubt that German wounded were robbed and killed by the Belgian population, and indeed were subjected to horrible mutilation, and that even women and young girls took part in these shameful actions. In this way the eyes of German wounded were torn out, their ears, nose, fingers, and sexual organs were cut off, or their body cut open (Appendices 54-66; C 73, 78; D 35, 37). In other cases German soldiers were poisoned, hung on trees, deluged with burning liquid, or burnt in other ways, so that they suffered a specially painful death (Appendices 50, 55, 63; C 56, 59, 61, 67, 74-78). This bestial behaviour of the population is not only in open contravention of the express obligation for “respecting and taking care of” the sick and wounded of the hostile army (Article 1, Section 1, of the Convention of Geneva), but also of the first principles of the laws of war and humanity.
Under these circumstances, the Belgian civil population who took part in the struggle could of course make no claim to the treatment to which belligerents have a right. On the contrary, it was absolutely necessary, in the interests of the self-preservation of the German Army, to have recourse to the sharpest measures against these francs-tireurs. Individuals who opposed the German troops by fighting had, therefore, to be cut down; prisoners could not be treated as prisoners of war according to the laws of war, but according to the usage of war as murderers. All the same, the forms of judicial procedure were maintained so far as the necessities of war did not stand in the way; the prisoners were, so far as the circumstances permitted, not shot till after a hearing in accordance with regulations, or after sentence by a military court. (Appendices 48, D 19, 20, 37, 40, 41, 43, 44, 48.) Old men, women and children were spared to the widest extent, even when there were urgent grounds of suspicion (Appendices 49; C 5, 6, 25, 26, 28, 31, 35, 41, 47, 79); indeed, the German soldiers often looked after such persons so far as was in any way possible in the most self-sacrificing manner by taking helpless people who were in danger under their protection, sharing their bread with them and taking charge of the weak and sick, although their patience had been subjected to an extraordinary difficult test by the treacherous attacks (Appendices C 45, 47, 51-53, 55, 58, 80-86).
There can be no doubt that the Belgian Government was essentially to blame for the illegal attitude of their population towards the German Army. For apart from the fact that a Government has, under all circumstances, to bear the responsibility for deeds of this kind which give a general expression of the popular will, the serious charge must at least be made against them that they did not stop this guerilla war, although they could have done so (Appendices 33, 51-53; D 42, 43, 48). It would certainly have been easy for them to provide their officials, such as the Burgomasters, the soldiers, members of the “Guarde Civique,” with the necessary instructions to check the violent excitement of the people which had been artificially aroused. Full responsibility, therefore, for the terrible blood-guiltiness which rests upon Belgian attachés to the Belgian Government.
The Belgian Government has made an attempt to free itself from this responsibility by attributing the blame for the events to the rage of destruction of the German troops, who are said to have taken to deeds of violence without any reason. They have appointed a Commission for investigating the outrages attributed to the German troops, and have made the findings of this Commission the subject of Diplomatic complaint. This attempt to pervert the facts into their opposite has completely failed. The German Army is accustomed to make war only against hostile armies, and not against peaceful inhabitants. The incontrovertible fact that from the beginning a defensive struggle in the interests of self-protection was forced upon the German troops in Belgium by the population of the country cannot be done away with by the inquiry of any commission.
The narratives of fugitives which have been put together by the Belgian Commission, and which are characterised as the result of careful and impartial investigation, bear the stamp of untrustworthiness, if not of malicious invention. In consequence of the conditions of things, the Commission was not in a position to test the reports which were conveyed to it as to their correctness or to grasp the connection of events. Their accusations against the German Army are, therefore, nothing but low calumniations, which are simply deprived of all their weight by the documentary evidence which is before us.
The struggle of the German troops with the Belgian civil population at Aerschot did not, as is suggested on the Belgian side, arise through the German officers violating the honour of the Burgomaster’s family, but because the population ventured on a well-considered attack on the Commanding Officer, and murdered him treacherously (Appendix A). At Dinant it was not harmless, peaceful citizens who fell as a sacrifice to the German arms, but murderers who treacherously attacked German soldiers, and thereby involved the troops in a struggle which destroyed the city (Appendix C). In Louvain the struggle of the civil population did not arise through fleeing German troops being by mistake involved in a hand-to-hand contest with their comrades who were entering the town, but because the population, blinded as they were and unable to understand what was going on, thought they could destroy the returning German troops without danger (Appendix D). Moreover, in Louvain, as in other towns, the conflagration was only started by the German troops when bitter necessity required it. The plan of the destruction of Louvain (Appendix D 50) shows clearly how the troops confined themselves to destroying only those parts of the city in which the inhabitants opposed them in a treacherous and murderous manner. It was indeed German troops who, so far as was possible, tried to save the artistic treasures, not only of Louvain, but also of other towns. On the German side, a Special Commission has shown to what a high degree works of art in Belgium were protected by the German troops.
The Imperial German Government believes that by the publication of the material contained in this work, they have shown that the action of the German troops against the Belgian civil population was provoked by the illegal guerilla war, and was required by the necessity of war. For their part, they expressly and solemnly protest against a population which has, with the most despicable means, waged a dishonourable war against the German soldiers, and still more against the Government which, in complete perversion of their duties, has given rein to the senseless passions of the population, and even now does not scruple to free itself from its own heavy guilt by mendacious libels against the German Army.
Berlin, May 10th, 1915.
I, Captain J. E. A——, 8th Batt. —— Highlanders, make oath and say as follows:—
(1) I command C Co. of the 8th Batt. —— Highlanders. My company took part in the attack on September 25th, 1915. Between 5 and 6 p.m. on that day we were attacked and compelled to retire from an advanced position about Haisnes. We moved into Pekin Trench, and later to Fosse Alley. The battalion commenced to reorganise there.
(2) Just before 8 p.m. 2nd Lieut. G. T. G——, of my battalion, reported to me that Sergeant D. M——, who had been attached to my company for the day, had just returned in an exhausted condition, and that he reported that the Germans had collected our wounded and prisoners and bombed them.
Instructed Lieut. G—— to bring Sergeant M—— to me at once. This was done. 2nd Lieut. G. T. G—— has since died of wounds.
(3) Sergeant M—— reported to me that he and a party of men had been collected in a traverse by the Germans and bombed from both sides, that he and a Highlander had jumped out of the traverse, and that he had escaped into a shell hole, whilst the Highlander had been shot.
The Sergeant, D. M——, was very exhausted and covered with mud and water up to the neck. He was not in an excited condition.
He carried on with his duties reorganising the company.
(4) The story as told to me by Sergeant M—— at that time has been adhered to by him ever since without any material alteration.
This Sergeant is a most reliable man in every way.
Sworn at Poperinghe in Belgium on active service this first day of October, 1915.
Before me,
A. M. H. S——, Captain,
D.A.A.G., 1st Army,
Commissioner for Oaths.
I, No. 6546, Sergeant D. M——, of D Co., 8th ---- Highlanders, make oath and say as follows:
(1) On September 25th, 1915, I was attached to C Co., 8th —— Highanders. I took part in the attack on Haisnes on that day.
About 5 p.m. the part of this company commanded by Lieut. A—— with which I was in trenches just west of Haisnes, and was going to retire.
Lieut. A—— ordered me to collect stragglers from Pekin Trench.
(2) I went 400-500 yards along Pekin Trench and found about twenty wounded men of various regiments, all Scottish, whose names I did not know.
I left these men sitting down and went about 100 yards further on and found about twenty men of the —— Highlanders, about ten of whom were wounded.
(3) It was now 5.15 p.m., and I could see that the Germans had cut me and all these men off from our own troops. I took the men of the —— Highlanders back to where the others were. I now had about forty men with me. For the sake of the wounded men we decided to surrender.
(4) We all took off our rifles and equipment and put them on top of the parapet.
I stood on top of the parapet and held up my hands.
A large party of Germans then advanced both in the open and by the trenches towards us.
When they drew near I said, “We surrender.” One German, speaking English, said, “All right. Come along this way, every one.” We all followed him up Pekin Trench towards the north, helping the wounded along, and leaving our rifles and equipment behind. It now began to pour in torrents of rain.
(5) The German who spoke English was dressed in dark khaki and wearing a cape down to his thighs. He had khaki trousers with a thin red stripe and long black boots. He wore a helmet with a dark khaki cover on it. He had no badges showing. His cape blew open and I saw a figure 6 in red on his shoulder and, I think but am not sure, a figure 2 in part of it, making 26.
All these Germans were big men and were dressed alike, quite clean and fresh as though they had only just come into the trenches. I did not notice anyone in command of them.
Their manner was not threatening.
(6) About thirty of these Germans led us into a circular traverse in Pekin Trench, and the English-speaking German said, “Pack in there and stay.” All the Germans then went out of sight. The wounded men sat on the fire-step and the unwounded remained standing. It was now about 5.30 p.m.
(7) After we had been there about two minutes a bomb was thrown into the traverse where we were, one bomb from one side and one from the other.
I shouted to the men to clear out if possible. Only one man and myself jumped over the parapet. I seized an English rifle lying on the parapet and fired down the trench. I then jumped into a shell hole about 15 yards from the traverse. It was almost full of water, in which I stood up to my neck. The other man was shot.
I heard the Germans bombing this circular traverse continuously for about fifteen minutes. At first the men I left were crying out, but after about ten minutes this ceased.
(8) I was over an hour in the shell hole, and left it after dark.
2nd Lieut. G. T. G——, of D Co., 8th —— Highlanders, was the first person to whom I told my experiences. This was at about 7.45 p.m.
(9) The second person to whom I told them was Capt. J. E. A——, also of the 8th ——, whom I saw at about 8 p.m. the same evening.
Sworn at Poperinghe in Belgium on active service this first day of October, 1915.
Before me,
G. M. H. S——, Captain,
D.A.A.G., 1st Army,
Commissioner for Oaths.
To:
The Commanding Officer,
2nd Batt. The —— Regiment.
From:
2nd Lieut. L. E. S——,
B Co., 2nd —— Regiment.
Sir,—I have the honour to report as follows:
During the action on 15th to 16th instant my platoon occupied the right of the old German trench running from —— to —— between 7.30 p.m. and 10.30 p.m., 15th instant. Seventy-five yards to my front I saw six or seven men lying down in the grass. One of them attracted my attention immediately as he appeared to be smoking or to have lit a small fire. I observed him carefully and saw that his clothes were smouldering. Later on they were entirely charred black: he did not move and was apparently dead. The enemy were sniping at these men, unquestionably using incendiary bullets, as I saw three or four of these strike the ground and set the grass around on fire. The flames could be seen distinctly.
About 9 p.m. one of these bullets struck the bottom of the parapet of the trench, and burned with a brilliant white flare for about fifteen seconds, at the same time giving off heavy phosphorus fumes and burning the sand-bags which it had struck.
The following statements were made by N.C.O.’s of the 2nd Batt. —— Regiment and 2nd Batt. —— Regiment (7th Division), relative to the alleged use by the enemy on June 15th, 1915, of incendiary bullets:
C.S.M. G. M——, C Co., 2nd Batt. —— Regiment, states:
On the night of the 15th and 16th I saw German rifle bullets cause a flash as they struck the ground. The flash seemed to rise about 2 feet from the ground. My attention was called to this by an Officer of the 3rd Co. (?) Grenadier Guards. The Guards were on my left and I was near ——. It was some time between 11 p.m. and 12 midnight.
Sergeant N——, B Co., 2nd —— Regiment, states:
Just before dusk on the evening of the 15th I was in the disused German trench ——, and saw a man fall in front of the trench hit by a bullet. As he lay on the ground he seemed to be on fire in the right shoulder and breast, and was clawing the ground in agony. (The grass, which was green, was set on fire round him.) He was not more than 100 yards from me—hardly that. I could not do anything for him as the Germans had been following me and were almost on top of me, and I was nearly alone at the time.
Very shortly afterwards I saw another man (a Lance-Corpl. in the —— I think), run out apparently to fetch in the first man. He slewed off, and must have seen the Germans, who were then crawling through the grass. He fell, seemingly hit in the stomach, and whilst rolling about on his back, his right knee and his puttees down to his boot caught fire. I think he must have been hit in the knee. He too seemed to be in agony, and the grass caught fire round him also. I could not swear that his second wound was not caused by a bomb, though I did not see any bomb burst there.
Corporal D——, B Co., 2nd Batt. —— Regiment, states:
Shortly after the bombardment on the evening of the 15th instant, I was just on the left of the crater (near ——)—about 30 yards from the crater—and saw a man on fire in the grass in front of and below me. Another man ran out of a disused trench towards the first man, when he appeared to be hit in the chest. He fell forward on his chest, and as he did so flames spurted out of his chest. As he lay on the ground he was burning all over, and the cartridges in his bandolier went off. He burned for about an hour and the grass was set on fire. Both men were rather less than 100 yards from me. I called the attention of my Officer Mr. L. J—— (subsequently wounded) to the second man. I am quite sure the second man was hit by a bullet, not a bomb.
DEPOSITIONS RELATIVE TO THE EMPLOYMENT BY THE GERMAN TROOPS OF RUSSIAN PRISONERS ON THE WESTERN FRONT97
(a) Statement of a German Prisoner (Translation) Captured in Northern France.
I, the undersigned Stephan Grzegoroski, a recruit in the 6th Co. (5th Section) 2nd Batt. No. 143 Infantry Regiment, XV. German Army Corps, hereby declare on oath that in the course of the month of October, I have frequently seen Russian prisoners of war in Russian uniform employed upon the construction of the third line trenches of my regiment.
There were some 150 to 200 Russians altogether so employed. During the course of their work they occasionally came under fire. Two were killed and four wounded. Seven Russians tried to escape—two succeeded: one was shot dead, and four were retaken.
The men were guarded by soldiers of my regiment.
I spoke personally with some of the Russian prisoners, and they complained that they had much work to do, but only very little to eat.
(b) Statement of Two Russian Soldiers (Translation) taken down in November, 1915, at British Headquarters in France.
Michael Klokoff, Russian soldier, private in the Novo Skolsky Regiment; taken prisoner by the Germans on the Bzura on December 26th, 1914 / January 8th, 1915; and Andrei Slizkin, Russian soldier, private in the 41st Siberian Regiment, taken prisoner by the Germans near Prasnysz on January 29th/February 11th, 1915, declare that: we were interned as prisoners of war at Strzalkowo until October 7th/20th, 1915. We then came with 2,000 other Russian prisoners to Belgium. Some of the prisoners were taken to build railways; others, among them ourselves, were employed to dig trenches. During our work we came under shell fire and sustained casualties.
We escaped on October 31st, and reached the British lines on November 2nd. We were promised pay, but did not receive any.
(c) Statement of Two Russian Soldiers (Translation) taken down in December 1915, at British Headquarters in Northern France.
Anastasius Nietzvetznie, 231 Dragoon (Infantry) Regiment, and Nicholas Nevaskov, 210 Infantry Regiment, declare: When we were prisoners with the Germans we worked at digging trenches. Each day we were under English artillery fire. We received 30 pfennigs per day, and we worked against our will. When we refused to work, we got twenty-five strokes with an iron rod, and were tied up with our hands behind our backs in a cold room with windows open and nothing to eat.
(Signed) Anastasius Nietzvetznie,98
231 Dragoon Regiment.
(Signed) Nicholas Mikhailovitch Nevaskov,98
210 Infantry Regiment.
A REVIEW OF
GERMAN ATROCITIES
BY
THE RT. HON. VISCOUNT BRYCE
Published in The Westminster Gazette, London,
March 20, 1916
Professor Morgan, whose bright little book, called “Sketches From the Front,” has given to us some of the most fresh and vivid pictures of the actualities of warfare in France, presents in the present volume the evidence he has been busy in collecting regarding the behaviour of the German troops in the western theatre of war. Some of this has already been made known to the public by what he published in the Nineteenth Century and After in June, 1915, and also by the depositions which he obtained under the instructions of the Home Office and submitted to the British Committee on Alleged German Outrages. (Many of these were published in the Appendix to their Report last May.) Since that time he has spent four or five months in collecting further important data and still more months in collating the results of the facts he has collected, having been granted by the British Headquarters Staff in France those facilities for moving to and fro along the front and getting into touch with eye-witnesses which were essential for arriving directly at the facts. The evidence thus obtained is supplemented by several diaries of German soldiers never before published in England, and by some extracts from documents issued by the Russian Government describing cruelties committed by the Germans in the fighting on the Eastern front. As respects the data he has himself collected, Professor Morgan explains, in his introduction, the methods he has followed in taking evidence and testing its value, showing himself sensible, as a lawyer ought to be, of the need for care and caution in such a matter. The large experience which his months of work at the front have given him adds weight to his assurance that what he submits is worthy of all credence as well as to the conclusions at which he has arrived. But before adverting to these conclusions a preliminary question deserves to be considered.
It has been asked—and it is natural that it should he asked—“What is the use of multiplying tales of horror?” “Why do anything that can aggravate the bitterness of feeling, already lamentably acute, between the belligerent nations? All war is horrible; why add fresh items to the list of offences which are making us think worse of human nature than we supposed two years ago we ever could think?”
These questions need an answer. Such a painful record as the present book contains, such a record as can be found in the reports already officially published by the Belgian, French, and British Governments, might, perhaps, have been better left unpublished if it did not serve some definite tangible aim, looking to some permanent good for mankind.
Now such a definite, tangible, practical aim does exist, and seems to justify, and, indeed, to require, the publication of the facts contained in this book and also in the reports which have been published by the Belgian, French, and British Governments. It is an aim which can be stated quite shortly; and the need for pursuing it is shown by what has happened during the last twenty months.
In most parts of the ancient world, and among the semi-civilised peoples of Asia till very recent times, wars were waged against combatants and non-combatants alike. Even in the European Middle Ages indiscriminate slaughter of combatants and non-combatants alike sometimes occurred, especially where, as in the case of the Albigenses, religious passion intensified hatred. As late as the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries there were campaigns in which frightful license was allowed to soldiery, private property was pillaged or ruthlessly destroyed, and women were habitually outraged.
A reaction of sentiment caused by the horror of the Thirty Years’ War, coupled with a general softening of manners, brought about a change. During the last two centuries, though every war was marked by shocking incidents, there was a growing feeling that non-combatants should be protected, and a serious purpose to restrain the excesses of troops invading a hostile country. The wars of the eighteenth century were less cruel and destructive than those of the seventeenth, and the wars of the nineteenth showed some improvement on those of the eighteenth. The war of 1870-71, if those of us in Britain who remember it can trust our recollection, seemed better in both the above-named respects than had been the Revolutionary and Napoleonic wars between 1793 and 1814. Till the outbreak of the present conflict men who sought for signs of the progress of mankind were cheered by the hope that war would hereafter be waged only between regular disciplined forces on each side; that these forces would abstain from needless cruelty, that women would be protected from lust, and that the lives of non-combatants would not be endangered. There was even a prospect that private property would not be destroyed except in so far as a definite military aim made its destruction unavoidable, as when a hostile force had to be shelled out of its shelter in a village. The Hague Convention had passed rules which ameliorated the practices of war as regards the combatant forces and had solemnly proclaimed the duty of respecting the lives and property of non-combatant civilians.
The present war has, however, brought a rude awakening. The proofs are now overwhelming that in Belgium and Northern France—as to other regions the evidence is not fully before us—non-combatants have been slaughtered without mercy by the orders of the German military authorities, while the mitigations of war usages as regards combatants have been openly and constantly disregarded. Private property has been constantly destroyed where no specific military reason existed, but only for the sake of terrorising the civil population, or perhaps out of sheer malice. A license has been practised by, and in many cases obviously permitted to, the soldiers which has led to acts of wanton cruelty. Outrages upon women have been far more numerous than in any war between civilised nations during the last hundred years. One crime deserves special condemnation, because it is done deliberately and is justified by its perpetrators. This is the practice of seizing innocent non-combatants, usually the leading inhabitants of a town or village, calling them hostages and executing them in cold blood if the population of the town or village whom “the hostages” cannot control, fail to obey the commands of the invaders. Civilians who fire upon invading troops without observing the requirements which the Hague Convention prescribes may, no doubt, be shot according to the customs of war; but there must be some proof that these particular civilians have done so. To put to death a quarter or more of the adult male inhabitants of a village because some shots have been fired, or are supposed by an excited soldiery to have been fired, out of its houses, is mere murder. All the paragraphs in the Manual of War issued by the German Staff cannot make it anything else.
Though we may hope, and indeed must hope, that the horror caused by this war may lead to measures which will diminish the risks of war in the future, he must be indeed a sanguine man who can think that war, the oldest of the curses that have afflicted mankind, is likely to be eradicated within this century. It is therefore an urgent duty to do all that can be done for a regulation of the methods of war and a mitigation of the sufferings that it causes.
Now the cruelties that have been perpetrated on land, no less than the ruthless murder of innocent passengers on unarmed vessels at sea, are an aggravation of those sufferings. They are a reversion to the ancient methods of savagery, a challenge to civilised mankind, to neutral nations as well as to the now belligerent States. Neutral nations ought to be fully informed of the facts of these methods, for they are themselves concerned. The same methods may be used against them if they are attacked by Germany or by some other nation which sees that Germany has used them with impunity. If the public opinion of the world does not condemn these methods, war will become an even greater curse than it has been heretofore. Unless an effort is made as soon as ever the present conflict ends to regulate the conduct of hostilities between combatant forces, and, which is of even greater importance, to provide more effective safeguards for non-combatants, there may be a terrible relapse towards barbarism everywhere.
The Allied belligerent nations who are now fighting in the cause of humanity are called upon to take up this matter and deal with it effectively. So are neutral nations. It is a pity that they did not protest long ago. But a word may be said regarding the German people also. Professor Morgan thinks that they share in all the guilt of their Government, but the reasons he gives for this belief do not warrant so melancholy a conclusion. The behaviour of the mobs that were wont to insult and ill-treat the prisoners of war led through the streets of German towns, and the ferocious language of creatures like Von Reventlow and some other writers in the German Press, shocking as they are, cannot be taken as evidence of the sentiments of a whole people. Neither can we suppose that the declarations of professors, victims of a doctrine and a practice which compels them to approve every act of the State are more to be accepted as expressing what may be felt by the less vocal Germans. We must remember how severe is the German censorship, how accustomed the Germans are to believe what their Government tells them, how habitually mendacious the military authorities have been in the accounts they supply of the conduct of the Allied Powers and their troops. The German mind has had little but falsehood to feed upon ever since the outbreak of the war, and it now believes, absurd as the belief is, that it is the innocent victim of an unprovoked aggression. When any voice is raised in Germany to proclaim even a part of the truth and to plead for humanity and good feeling, that voice is instantly silenced. Silence will doubtless be enforced as long as the war lasts. But we may well venture to hope that when, after the war, the facts hitherto concealed from the people have become known and can be reflected on with calmness, there will be a condemnation of the practices I have described, and that in Germany and Austria, as well as in all neutral countries, there will be a wish to join in the efforts which both the Allies and the leading neutral Powers are sure to make to regulate and mitigate the conduct of war. In order to call forth these efforts by showing how great is the need for strengthening the existing rules of war, and providing more effective means of securing their observance, it is essential that the facts should be made known and studied, and that the world should see how the present rules, imperfect as they are, have been trampled under foot by the German authorities. This is what makes it right and necessary to publish the data contained in the Reports already referred to, and those data also which have been gathered by Professor Morgan with such earnest labour.