VI
DOCUMENTS SELECTED FROM THE REPORTS OF THE EXTRAORDINARY COMMISSION OF INQUIRY APPOINTED BY HIS MAJESTY THE EMPEROR OF RUSSIA
I. Violation of a Sister of Mercy.
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.”
II. Violation of a Girl.
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.
III. Murder of Wounded Soldiers.
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.
IV. Murder of Wounded Soldiers.
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.
V. Murder of Wounded Soldiers.
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.
VI. Burning the Russian Wounded.
Evidence of the Private Nicholas Semenov Dorozhka
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.
VII. Ill-Treatment of Prisoners of War.
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.
VIII.
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.
IX.
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.”
Alexis Krivtsov, Senator,
President of the Extraordinary
Commission of Inquiry.
VII
THE GERMAN WHITE BOOK
The Introductory Memorandum.
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.
VIII
MASSACRE OF BRITISH PRISONERS BY GERMAN SOLDIERS AT HAISNES ON SEPTEMBER 25TH, 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.
(Signature of Deponent) J. E. A——,
Captain.
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.
(Signature of deponent) D. M——, Sergeant.
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.
IX
REPORTS RELATIVE TO THE USE OF INCENDIARY BULLETS BY GERMAN TROOPS[96]
To:
The Commanding Officer,
2nd Batt. The —— Regiment.
From:
2nd Lieut. L. E. S——,
B Co., 2nd —— Regiment.
18/6/1915.
Use of Incendiary Bullets by the Enemy
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.
I have the honour to be,
Sir,
Your obedient servant,
(Signed) L. E. S——,
2nd Lieut.
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.
(Signed) G. M——,
C.S.M.,
C Co., 2nd ——.
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.
(Signed) E. H. M. N——,
Sergeant.
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.
(Signed) J. W. D——,
Corporal.