Part 12 (2/2)
It is to these ”unripe conditions” that Lensch, Liebknecht, David, Hildenbrand and the remaining leaders of German Social Democracy should give their undivided attention. Last year the Berlin Government published a record of crimes committed in Germany. It is the most awful record of any nation in the world, and the above gentlemen would do well to study Volume 267 of the _Vierteljahrshefte_. There were hundreds of thousands of brutal crimes committed in Germany by German proletarians during the year 1912.
For half a century Marx, La.s.salle, Bebel, Liebknecht and their successors have been busily engaged in intellectualizing Germany's proletarians; now it is advisable for the Socialist party to begin the work of humanizing them. Their efforts to internationalize the world have resulted in a hopeless _debacle_; let them now begin the task of humanizing Germany. They have all evidently forgotten the German proverb: _Kehr vor deiner eignen Tur!_ (Sweep first before your own door.)
CHAPTER VII
”NECESSITY KNOWS NO LAW”
On August 2nd, 1914, Belgium announced her neutrality in the European war; France had already declared her intention to respect Belgian neutrality at all costs. On the other hand we have Bethmann-Hollweg's word that he knew French armies were standing ready to strike at Germany through Belgium. This statement he has never supported by any proof, nor even mentioned his authority for the same.[93] In view of the facts that no military preparations had been made on the Franco-Belgian frontier, and that the German armies first came into contact with French forces long after the fall of Liege, we are compelled to declare the German Chancellor's statement to be a pure invention.
[Footnote 93: So-called ”evidence” has been given by Richard Gra.s.shoff in his book ”Belgien's Schuld” (”Belgium's Guilt”), pp. 14-20. Gra.s.shoff quotes the sworn statements of a German corporal who resided in Boitsfort, near Brussels. The corporal states that he saw two French and one English officer in Brussels on July 26th, and eight French soldiers on July 29th.
The statements of three French soldiers, prisoners of war in Germany, are also cited; these men maintain that they entered Belgium on the 31st of July and the 2nd of August.
With regard to this ”evidence,” we must note that Gra.s.shoff is a German official, the corporal a German spy, and that the Frenchmen have made these statements in a prisoners' camp, a place where they were exposed to the temptation of German gold and the influence of Teutonic bullying.
Lastly, the Berlin General Staff has recorded that the German armies first came in touch with French troops on August 19th, near Namur.]
Moreover Germany's excuse for invading Belgium is given in the t.i.tle of this chapter. Had Germany possessed any proof that French officers in disguise were organizing preparations in Belgium, or that French airmen had crossed the latter's territories in order to drop bombs by Wesel, etc., then Bethmann-Hollweg would have had no reason to admit in the Reichstag that his country was committing a breach of international law.
Under such circ.u.mstances Belgian neutrality would no longer have existed; the Chancellor, instead of ”necessity,” could have pleaded justification and the world could scarcely have withheld its approval.
In the early hours of August 4th the Germans crossed the Belgian frontier, although the _Cologne Gazette_ had published a notice three days before announcing that Germany had no intention whatever of taking the step, and that no German troops were near the frontier.
General von Emmich immediately issued this proclamation in French: ”To my great regret German troops have been compelled to enter Belgian territory. They are acting under the compulsion of unavoidable necessity, for French officers in disguise have already violated Belgian neutrality by trying to reach Germany, via Belgium, in motor-cars.[94]
[Footnote 94: One wonders what military purpose these officers had in view. They would have been inevitably arrested at the German frontier.
The fable was made public by Wolff's Agency, and has been ridiculed even by the German Press, _vide_ pp. 96-7.]
”Belgians! it is my most ardent desire that it may yet be possible to avoid a struggle between two peoples which up till now, have been friends, formerly even allies. Remember the glorious days of La Belle Alliance, when German arms helped to found the independence and future of your Fatherland.
”Now we must have a free way. The destruction of tunnels, bridges and railways will be considered hostile actions. Belgians! you have to choose. The German army does not intend to fight against you, but seeks a free path against the enemy who wishes to attack us. That is all we desire.
”Herewith I give the Belgian people an official pledge that they will not have to suffer under the terrors of war; that we will pay ready money for all necessaries which we may have to requisition; that our soldiers will show themselves the best friends of a nation for which we have the highest esteem and ardent affection. It depends upon your prudence and your patriotism whether your land shall be spared the horrors of war.” (Appeared in the _Cologne Gazette_, August 6th.)
A Dresden paper of the same date contains an illuminating statement. ”We have just received official information that the German General Staff had been informed by an absolutely reliable source that the French intended to march through the valley of the Meuse into Belgium. The execution of this plan had already commenced, therefore France was by no means prepared to respect Belgian neutrality.”
”For years past the King of Belgium has conspired with England behind the backs of his ministers, to damage German interests. His telegram to the King of England was a trick planned long ago. These facts will soon be supplemented by a large number of doc.u.mentary proofs; from this the necessity has arisen to direct Germany's advance through Belgium irrespective of neutrality considerations.”[95]
[Footnote 95: _Leipziger Neueste Nachrichten_, August 9th.]
Here we have the first clumsy attempts to prove that Belgian neutrality did not exist. These after-thoughts have grown during the past year into no inconsiderable literature. Probably the two motives which have inspired Germany--official and unofficial--to print many volumes on Belgian neutrality have been the indignation aroused in neutral countries and the fact that a complete German victory was not obtained in three months of war.
German newspapers again betray the plot against Belgium, and a search through their files reveals in the clearest manner possible how Wolff's Bureau was again the source of a widespread campaign to prove that Germany was right, and simultaneously to lash public opinion into hatred for the Belgian ”barbarians and beasts.”
In the first few days of August the Press was filled with reports concerning the murder and ill treatment of Germans in Belgium, before any act of war had taken place. No doubt a justified fear for the mighty, brutal neighbour existed in the popular imagination, and fear may be the father of ill-considered deeds. Nevertheless, there is no proof that mob law prevailed in Belgium, as it did in Germany. Moreover, the latter country outlawed herself when she proclaimed the law of necessity. In the light of this consideration the German outcry that the Belgians were breaking both the laws of humanity and international jurisprudence lacks sincerity and remains unconvincing.
A country which announces her intention to ignore existing laws and ”hack a way through at all costs,” should surely be the last to declaim on the alleged offences against the laws of war by a small, weak, unprepared neighbour. If these considerations are insufficient, there remains the fact that Germany herself began war against unarmed Belgian civilians.
<script>