We arrested three civilians, and a bright idea struck me. We furnished them with chairs and made them seat themselves in the middle of the street. There were supplications on one part, and some blows with the stocks of our guns on the other. One, little by little, gets terribly hardened. Finally, there they were sitting in the street. How many anguished prayers they may have muttered, I cannot say, but during the whole time their hands were joined in nervous contraction. I am sorry for them, but the stratagem was of immediate effect. The enfilading directed from the houses diminished at once; we were able then to take possession of the house opposite, and thus became masters of the principal street. From that moment every one that showed his face in the street was shot. And the artillery meanwhile kept up vigorous work, so that at about 7 o'clock in the evening, when the brigade advanced to rescue us, I could report "Saint-Die has been emptied of all enemies."

As I learned later, the —— Regiment of Reserves, which came into Saint-Die further north, had experiences entirely similar to our own. The four civilians whom they had placed on chairs in the middle of the street were killed by French bullets. I saw them myself stretched out in the street near the hospital.

V.

Article 28 of The Hague Convention of 1907, subscribed to by Germany, uses this language: "The sacking of any town or locality, even when taken by assault, is prohibited." And Article 47 runs: "[in occupied territory] pillage is forbidden."

We shall see how the German armies interpret these articles.

Private Handschuhmacher (Eleventh Battalion of Chasseurs Reserves) writes in his notebook:

Aug. 8, 1914, Gouvy, (Belgium.)—There, the Belgians having fired on some German soldiers, we started at once pillaging the merchandise warehouse. Several cases—eggs, shirts, and everything that could be eaten was carried off. The safe was forced and the gold distributed among the men. As to the securities, they were torn up.

This happened as early as the fourth day of the war, and it helps us to understand a technical article on the operations of the military treasury (Der Zahlmeister im Felde) in the Berliner Tageblatt of the 26th of November, 1914, in which an economic phenomenon of rather unusual import is recited as a simple incident: "Experience has demonstrated that very much more money is forwarded by postal orders from the theatre of operations to the interior of the country than vice versa."

As, in accordance with the continual practice of the German armies, pillaging is only a prelude to incendiarism, the sub-officer Hermann Levith (160th Regiment of Infantry, Eighth Corps) writes:

The enemy occupied the village of Bievre and the edge of the wood behind it. The Third Company advanced in first line. We carried the village, and then pillaged and burned almost all the houses.

And Private Schiller (133d Infantry, Nineteenth Corps) writes:

Our first fight was at Haybes (Belgium) on the 24th of August. The Second Battalion entered the village, ransacked the houses, pillaged them, and burned those from which shots had been fired.

And Private Sebastian Reishaupt (Third Bavarian Infantry, First Bavarian Corps) writes:

The first village we burned was Parux, (Meurthe-et-Moselle.) After this the dance began, throughout the villages, one after the other; over the fields and pastures we went on our bicycles up to the ditches at the edge of the road, and there sat down to eat our cherries.

They emulate each other in their thefts; they steal anything that comes to hand and keep records of the thefts—"Schnaps, Wein, Marmelade, Zigarren," writes this private soldier; and the elegant officer of the 178th Saxon Regiment, who was at first indignant at the "vandalismus" of his men, further on admits that he himself, on the 1st of September, at Rethel, stole "from a house near the Hotel Moderne a superb waterproof and a photographic apparatus for Felix." All steal, without distinction or grade, or of arms, or of cause, and even in the ambulances the doctors steal. Take this example from the notebook of the soldier Johannes Thode (Fourth Reserve Regiment of Ersatz):

At Brussels, Oct. 5, 1914.—An automobile arrived at the hospital laden with war booty—one piano, two sewing machines, many albums, and all sorts of other things.

"Two sewing machines" as "war booty." From whom were these stolen? Beyond a doubt from two humble Belgian women. And for whom were they stolen?

VI.

I must admit that, out of the forty notebooks, or thereabout, that I have handled, there are six or seven that do not relate any exactions, either from hypocritical reticence or because there are some regiments which do not make war in this vile fashion. And there are as many as three notebooks whose writers, in relating these ignoble things, express astonishment, indignation, and sorrow. I will not give the names of these, because they deserve our regard, and I wish to spare them the risk of being some day blamed or punished by their own.



The first, the Private X., who belongs to the Sixty-fifth Infantry, Regiment of Landwehr, says of certain of his companions in arms, (Fig. 10:)

They do not behave as soldiers, but rather as highwaymen, bandits, and brigands, and are a dishonor to our regiment and to our army.

Another, Lieut. Y., of the Seventy-seventh Infantry of Reserves, says:

No discipline, ... the Pioneers are well nigh worthless; as to the artillery, it is a band of robbers.

The third, Private Z., of the Twelfth Infantry of Reserves, First Corps, writes, (Fig. 11:)



Unfortunately, I am forced to make note of a fact which should not have occurred, but there are to be found, even in our own army, creatures who are no longer men, but hogs, to whom nothing is sacred. One of these broke into a sacristy; it was locked, and where the Blessed Sacrament was kept. A Protestant, out of respect, had refused to sleep there. This man used it as a deposit for his excrements. How is it possible there should be such creatures? Last night one of the men of the Landwehr, more than thirty-five years of age, married, tried to rape the daughter of the inhabitant where he had taken up his quarters—a mere girl—and when the father intervened he pressed his bayonet against his breast.

Beyond these three, who are still worthy of the name of soldiers, the other thirty are all alike, and the same soul (if we can talk of souls among such as these) animates them low and frantic. I say they are all about alike, but there are shades of difference. There are some who, like subtle jurists, make distinctions, blaming here and approving there—"Dort war ein Exempel am Platze." Others laugh and say "Krieg ist Krieg," or sometimes they add in French, to emphasize their derision, "Ja, Ja, c'est la guerre," and some among them, when their ugly business is done, turn to their book of canticles and sing psalms, such as the Saxon Lieut. Reislang, who relates how one day he left his drinking bout to assist at the "Gottesdienst", but having eaten too much and drunken too much, had to quit the holy place in haste; and the Private Moritz Grosse of the 177th Infantry, who, after depicting the sacking of Saint-Vieth, (Aug. 22,) the sacking of Dinant, (Aug. 23,) writes this phrase:

Throwing of incendiary grenades into the houses, and in the evening a military chorus—"Now let all give thanks to God." (Fig. 12.)

They're all of a like tenor. Now, if we consider that I could exchange the preceding texts with others quite similar, quite as cynical, and taken at random, for instance—from the notebook of the Reservist Lautenschlager of the First Battalion, Sixty-sixth Regiment of Infantry, or the notebook of the Private Eduard Holl of the Eighth Corps, or the notebook of the sub-officer Reinhold Koehn of the Second Battalion of Pomeranian Pioneers, or that of the sub-officer Otto Brandt of the Second Section of Reserve Ambulances, or of the Reservist Martin Mueller of the 100th Saxon Reserve, or of Lieut. Karl Zimmer of the Fifty-fifth Infantry, or that of the Private Erich Pressler of the 100th Grenadiers, First Saxon Corps, &c., and if we will note that, among the exactions reported above, there are very few that are the work of isolated brutes, (such as, unfortunately, may be found even in the most noble armies,) but that, on the contrary, the crimes represented here are collective actions in obedience to service orders, and such as rest upon and dishonor not only the individual but the entire troop, the officers, and the nation; and if we will further note that these thirty notebooks taken at random—Bavarian, Saxon, Pomeranian, Brandeburger, or from the provinces of Baden and the Rhine—must of necessity represent hundreds and thousands of others quite similar, as we may judge from the frightful monotony of their recitals; if we consider all this, we must, I think, be forced to admit that these atrocities are nothing less than the practical application of a methodically organized system.



VII.

H.M. the Emperor of Germany, by ratifying The Hague Convention of 1907, covenanted (Article 24) that "it is forbidden (c) to kill or wound an enemy who, having laid down his arms, or being without means of defense, has surrendered unconditionally. (d) To declare that no quarter shall be given."

Have the German armies respected these covenants? Throughout Belgian and French reports depositions such as the following abound. This is taken from a French Captain of the 288th Infantry:

On the 22d, in the evening, I learned that in the woods, about one hundred and fifty meters north of the square formed by the intersection of the great Calonne trench with the road from Vaux-les-Palameis to Saint-Remy, there were corpses of French soldiers shot by the Germans. I went to the spot and found the bodies of about thirty soldiers within a small space, most of them prone, but several still kneeling, and all having a precisely similar wound—a bullet through the ear. One only, seriously wounded in his lower parts, could still speak, and told me that the Germans before leaving had ordered them to lie down and that then had them shot through the head; that he, already wounded had secured indulgence by stating that he was the father of three small children. The skulls of these unfortunates were scattered; the guns, broken at the stock, were scattered here and there; and the blood had besprinkled the bushes to such an extent that in coming out of the woods my cape was spattered with it; it was a veritable shambles.

I quote this testimony, not to base any accusations upon it, but simply to give precision to our indictment. I will not lay stress upon it as evidence, for I wish to keep to the rule which I have laid down—to have records of nothing but German sources of information.

I will quote here the text of an order of the day addressed by General Stenger, in command of the Fifty-eighth German Brigade, on the 26th of August, to the troops under his orders:

From this day forward no further prisoners will be taken. All prisoners will be massacred. The wounded, whether in arms or not in arms, shall be massacred. Even the prisoners already gathered in convoys will be massacred. No living enemy must remain behind us.

Signed—First Lieutenant in Command of the Company, Stoy; Colonel Commanding the Regiment, Neubauer; General in Command of the Brigade, Stenger.

About thirty soldiers of Stenger's Brigade (112th and 142d Regiments of Baden Infantry) were questioned. I have read their depositions, taken under oath and signed with their own names; all confirming the fact that this order of the day was given to them on the 26th of August. In one place by the Major Mosebach, in another by Lieut. Curtius, &c. Most of these witnesses said that they were ignorant whether the order was carried out, but three among them testified that it was carried out under their own eyes in the Forest of Thiaville, where ten or twelve wounded French, already made prisoners by a battalion, were done away with; two others of the witnesses saw the order carried out along the road of Thiaville, where several wounded, found in the ditches by the company as it marched past, were killed.



Of course, I cannot here produce the original autograph of General Stenger, nor am I here called upon to furnish the names of the German prisoners who gave this testimony. But I shall have no trouble to establish entirely similar crimes on the faith of German autographs.

For instance, we find in the notebook of Private Albert Delfosse (111th Infantry of Reserves, Fourteenth Reserve Corps,) (Fig. 13:)

In the woods (near Saint-Remy, 4th or 5th of September)—Found a very fine cow and a calf killed; and again the corpses of Frenchmen horribly mutilated.

Must we understand that these bodies were mutilated by loyal weapons, torn perhaps by shells? This may be, but it would be a charitable interpretation, which is belied by this newspaper heading, (Figs. 14 and 15:)

JAUERSCHES TAGEBLATT Amtlicher Anzeiger Fuer Stadt und Kreis Jauer Jauer, Sonntag, Den 18, Oktober, 1914. Nr. 245. 106, Jahrgang.

This is a heading of a newspaper picked up in a German trench. Jauer is a city of Silesia, about fifty kilometers west of Breslau, where two battalions of the 154th Regiment of Saxon Infantry are garrisoned. One Sunday morning, Oct. 18, doubtless at the hour when the inhabitants—women and children—were wending their way to church, there was distributed throughout the quiet little town, and through the hamlets and villages of the district, the issue of this local paper with the following inscription: "A day of honor for our regiment, Sept. 24, 1914," as the title of an article of some two hundred lines, sent from the front by a member of the regiment—the sub-officer Klemt of the First Company, 154th Infantry Regiment.



The sub-officer Klemt relates how, on the 24th of September, his regiment having left Hannonville in the morning, accompanied by Austrian batteries, suddenly came up against a double fire of infantry and artillery. Their losses were terrible, and yet the enemy was still invisible. Finally, says this officer, it was found that the bullets came from above, from trees which the French soldiers had climbed. From this point let me quote verbatim, (Fig. 16:)



They're brought down from the trees like squirrels, to get a hot reception with bayoneted stock; they'll need no more doctors' care. We are not fighting loyal enemies, but treacherous brigands. [Note—It is scarcely necessary to point out that it is no more "treacherous," but quite as lawful, to fire from the branches of a tree as from a window, or from a trench, and that, on the contrary, it is rather more venturesome and more courageous, as the sequel of this story will show.] We crossed the clearing at a bound. The foe is hidden here and there among the bushes, and now we are upon them. No quarter will be given. We fire standing, at will; very few fire kneeling; nobody dreams of shelter. We finally reach a slight depression in the ground, and there the red trousers are lying in masses, here and there—dead or wounded. We club or stab the wounded, for we know that these rascals, as soon as we are gone by, will fire from behind. We find one Frenchman lying at full length upon his face, but he is counterfeiting death. A kick from a robust fusilier gives him notice that we are there. Turning over he asks for quarter, but he gets the reply—"Oh! is that the way, blackguard, that your tools work?" and he is pinned to the ground. On one side of me I hear curious cracklings. They're the blows which a soldier of the 154th is vigorously showering upon the bald pate of a Frenchman with the stock of his gun; he very wisely chose for this work a French gun, for fear of breaking his own. Some men of particularly sensitive soul grant the French wounded the grace to finish them with a bullet, but others scatter here and there, wherever they can, their clubbings and stabbings. Our adversaries have fought bravely. They were elite troops that we had before us. They had allowed us to come within thirty, and even within ten, meters—too close. Their arms and knapsacks thrown down in heaps showed that they wanted to fly, but upon the appearance of our "gray phantoms" terror paralyzed them, and, on the narrow path in which they crowded, the German bullets brought them the order to halt! There they are at the very entrance of their leafy hiding places, lying down moaning and asking for quarter, but whether their wounds are light or grievous, the brave fusiliers saved their country the expensive care which would have to be given to such a number of enemies.

Now the recital continues very ornate, very literary, and the writer relates how his Imperial Highness Prince Oscar of Prussia, being advised of the exploits (perhaps, indeed, other exploits than these) of the 154th and of the Regiment of Grenadiers, which forms the Brigade with the 154th, declared them both worthy of the name of "King's Brigade," and the recital closes with this phrase: "When night came on, with a prayer of thankfulness on our lips we fell asleep to await the coming day." Then adding, by way of postscript, a little phrase "Heimkehr vom Kampf." He carries the notebook—prose and verse together—to his Lieutenant, who countersigns it: "Certified as correct, De Niem, Lieutenant Commanding the Company," and then he sends his paper to his town of Jauer, where he is quite confident that he will find some newspaper publisher to accept it, printers to set it up, and a whole population to enjoy it. Now, let me ask any reader—whatever be his country—if he can imagine it possible for such a tale to be spread abroad in any paper in his language, in his native town, for the edification of his wife and his children. In what other country than in Germany is such a thing conceivable? Not in France, at all events. Now, if my readers want another document to show how customary it is in the German Army to mutilate the wounded, well, I will borrow one from the notebook of Private Paul Gloede of the Ninth Battalion of Pioneers, Ninth Corps, (Figs. 17 and 18:)

Aug. 12, 1914, in Belgium.—One can get an idea of the fury of our soldiers in seeing the destroyed villages. Not one house left untouched. Everything eatable is requisitioned by the unofficered soldiers. Several heaps of men and women put to execution. Young pigs are running about looking for their mothers. Dogs chained, without food or drink. And the houses about them on fire. But the just anger of our soldiers is accompanied also by pure vandalism. In the villages, already emptied of their inhabitants, the houses are set on fire. I feel sorry for this population. If they have made use of disloyal weapons, after all, they are only defending their own country. The atrocities which these non-combatants are still committing are revenged after a savage fashion. Mutilations of the wounded are the order of the day.

This was written as early as the 12th of August—the tenth day after the invasion of innocent Belgium—and these wounded creatures that were tortured had done nothing more than defend their land against Germany—their native land—which Germany had sworn, not only to respect but, if need be, to defend. And yet, in many countries pharisees reading these lines will go forward tranquilly to their churches, or their temples, or their banking houses, or their foreign offices, saying: "In what do these things concern us?" "Ja, ja, this is war." Yes, it is war, but war such as was never made by the soldiers of Marceau, such as never will be made by the soldiers of Joffre, such as never has been made and never will be made by France—"Mother of Arts, of Arms, and of Laws." Yes, it is war, but war such as Attila would not have carried on if he had subscribed to certain stipulations; for, in subscribing them, he would have awakened to the notion, which alone distinguishes the civilized man from the barbarian, distinguishes a nation from a horde—respect for the word once given. Yes, it is war, but war the theory of which could only be made up by such pedant megalomaniacs as the Julius von Hartmanns, the Bernhardis, and the Treitschkes; the theory which accords to the elect people the right to uproot from the laws and customs of war what centuries of humanity, of Christianity, and chivalry have at great pains injected into it; the theory of systematic and organized ferocity; today exposed to public reprobation, not only as an odious thing, but no less silly and absurd. For have we not reached the ridiculous when the incendiaries of Louvain, and Malines, and Rheims, the assassins of women and children, and of the wounded, already find it necessary to repudiate their actions, at least in words, and to impose upon the servility of their ninety-three Kulturtraeger such denials as this: "It is not true that we are making war in contempt of the law of nations, nor that our soldiers are committing acts of cruelty, or of insubordination, or indiscipline.... We will carry this conflict through to the end as a civilized people, and we answer for this upon our good name and upon our honor!" Why this humble and pitiful repudiation? Perhaps because their theory of war rested upon the postulate of their invincibility, and that, in the first shiver of their defeat upon the Marne, it collapsed, and now their repudiation quickly follows—in dread of the lex talionis.



]

I will stop here. I leave the conclusion to the allied armies, already in sight of victory.

NOTE.—General Stenger's order of the day, mentioned on page [Transcriber's Note: blank in original], was communicated orally by various officers in various units of the brigade. Consequently, the form in which we have received it may possibly be incomplete or altered. In face of any doubt, the French Government has ordered an inquiry to be made into the prisoners' camps. Not one of the prisoners to whom our magistrates presented the order of the day in the above-mentioned form found a word to alter. They one and all declared that this was the order of the day which had been orally given in the ranks, repeated from man to man; many added the names of the officers who had communicated the order to them; some related in what a vile way it had been carried out under their eyes. All the evidence of these German soldiers was collected in a legal manner, under the sanction of an oath, and it is after reading their depositions that I wrote the order of the day.

The text of all this evidence was transmitted to all the French Embassies and Legations in foreign countries on the 24th of October, 1914. Every neutral wishing to clear his conscience is at liberty to obtain it from the representatives of the French Republic, who will certainly respond willingly.



THE RECRUIT.

By HORTENSE FLEXNER.

He had a woodland look—half-startled, gay— As if his eyes, light-thirsty, had not learned To wake accustomed on earth's joyous day, A child, whose merriment and wonder burned In harmless flame, even his uniform Was but a lie to hide his wind-wild grace, Whose limbs were rounded youth, too supple, warm, To hold the measure of the street-made pace. Music and marching—colors in the sky— The crowded station, then the train—farewell! For all he had the glance, exultant, shy, That seemed to marvel, "More to see—to tell!" Yet with his breathing moved, hid by his coat, A numbered, metal disk, strapped round his throat!



American Reply to Britain's Blockade Order

By William J. Bryan, American Secretary of State

With the publication on April 6, 1915, of its note in reply to the British Government's Order in Council, proclaiming a virtual blockade against commerce to and from Germany—printed in the April, 1915, number of THE NEW YORK TIMES CURRENT HISTORY—the American Government rested its case. The text of the note to Great Britain follows:

WASHINGTON, March 30, 1915.

The Secretary of State to the American Ambassador at London:

You are instructed to deliver the following to his Majesty's Government in reply to your Nos. 1,795 and 1,798 of March 15: The Government of the United States has given careful consideration to the subjects treated in the British notes of March 13 and March 15, and to the British Order in Council of the latter date.

These communications contain matters of grave importance to neutral nations. They appear to menace their rights of trade and intercourse, not only with belligerents but also with one another. They call for frank comment in order that misunderstandings may be avoided. The Government of the United States deems it its duty, therefore, speaking in the sincerest spirit of friendship, to make its own view and position with regard to them unmistakably clear.

The Order in Council of the 15th of March would constitute, were its provisions to be actually carried into effect as they stand, a practical assertion of unlimited belligerent rights over neutral commerce within the whole European area and an almost unqualified denial of the sovereign rights of the nations now at peace.

This Government takes it for granted that there can be no question what those rights are. A nation's sovereignty over its own ships and citizens under its own flag on the high seas in time of peace is, of course, unlimited, and that sovereignty suffers no diminution in time of war, except in so far as the practice and consent of civilized nations has limited it by the recognition of certain now clearly determined rights which it is conceded may be exercised by nations which are at war.

A belligerent nation has been conceded the right of visit and search, and the right of capture and condemnation, if upon examination a neutral vessel is found to be engaged in unneutral service or to be carrying contraband of war intended for the enemy's Government or armed forces.

It has been conceded the right to establish and maintain a blockade of an enemy's ports and coasts and to capture and condemn any vessel taken in trying to break the blockade. It is even conceded the right to detain and take to its own ports for judicial examination all vessels which it suspects for substantial reasons to be engaged in unneutral or contraband service and to condemn them if the suspicion is sustained. But such rights, long clearly defined both in doctrine and practice, have hitherto been held to be the only permissible exceptions to the principle of universal equality of sovereignty on the high seas as between belligerents and nations not engaged in war.

It is confidently assumed that his Majesty's Government will not deny that it is a rule sanctioned by general practice that, even though a blockade should exist and the doctrine of contraband as to unblockaded territory be rigidly enforced, innocent shipments may be freely transported to and from the United States through neutral countries to belligerent territory, without being subject to the penalties of contraband traffic or breach of blockade, much less to detention, requisition, or confiscation.

Moreover, the rules of the Declaration of Paris of 1856—among them that free ships make free goods—will hardly at this day be disputed by the signatories of that solemn agreement.

His Majesty's Government, like the Government of the United States, have often and explicitly held that these rights represent the best usage of warfare in the dealings of belligerents with neutrals at sea. In this connection I desire to direct attention to the opinion of the Chief Justice of the United States in the case of the Peterhof, which arose out of the civil war, and to the fact that that opinion was unanimously sustained in the award of the Arbitration Commission of 1871, to which the case was presented at the request of Great Britain. From that time to the Declaration of London of 1909, adopted with modifications by the Order in Council of the 23d of October last, these rights have not been seriously questioned by the British Government. And no claim on the part of Great Britain of any justification for interfering with the clear rights of the United States and its citizens as neutrals could be admitted. To admit it would be to assume an attitude of unneutrality toward the present enemies of Great Britain, which would be obviously inconsistent with the solemn obligations of this Government in the present circumstances. And for Great Britain to make such a claim would be for her to abandon and set at nought the principles for which she has consistently and earnestly contended in other times and circumstances.

The note of his Majesty's principal Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, which accompanies the Order in Council, and which bears the same date, notifies the Government of the United States of the establishment of a blockade which is, if defined by the terms of the Order in Council, to include all the coasts and ports of Germany and every port of possible access to enemy territory. But the novel and quite unprecedented feature of that blockade, if we are to assume it to be properly so defined, is that it embraces many neutral ports and coasts, bars access to them, and subjects all neutral ships seeking to approach them to the same suspicion that would attach to them were they bound for the ports of the enemies of Great Britain, and to unusual risks and penalties.

It is manifest that such limitations, risks, and liabilities placed upon the ships of a neutral power on the seas, beyond the right of visit and search and the right to prevent the shipment of contraband already referred to, are a distinct invasion of the sovereign rights of the nation whose ships, trade, or commerce is interfered with.

The Government of the United States is, of course, not oblivious to the great changes which have occurred in the conditions and means of naval warfare since the rules hitherto governing legal blockade were formulated. It might be ready to admit that the old form of "close" blockade, with its cordon of ships in the immediate offing of the blockaded ports, is no longer practicable in the face of an enemy possessing the means and opportunity to make an effective defense by the use of submarines, mines, and air craft; but it can hardly be maintained that, whatever form of effective blockade may be made use of, it is impossible to conform at least to the spirit and principles of the established rules of war.

If the necessities of the case should seem to render it imperative that the cordon of blockading vessels be extended across the approaches to any neighboring neutral port or country, it would seem clear that it would still be easily practicable to comply with the well-recognized and reasonable prohibition of international law against the blockading of neutral ports, by according free admission and exit to all lawful traffic with neutral ports through the blockading cordon.

This traffic would, of course, include all outward-bound traffic from the neutral country and all inward-bound traffic to the neutral country, except contraband in transit to the enemy. Such procedure need not conflict in any respect with the rights of the belligerent maintaining the blockade, since the right would remain with the blockading vessels to visit and search all ships either entering or leaving the neutral territory which they were in fact, but not of right, investing.

The Government of the United States notes that in the Order in Council his Majesty's Government give as their reason for entering upon a course of action, which they are aware is without precedent in modern warfare, the necessity they conceive themselves to have been placed under to retaliate upon their enemies for measures of a similar nature, which the latter have announced it their intention to adopt, and which they have to some extent adopted, but the Government of the United States, recalling the principles upon which his Majesty's Government have hitherto been scrupulous to act, interprets this as merely a reason for certain extraordinary activities on the part of his Majesty's naval forces and not as an excuse for or prelude to any unlawful action.

If the course pursued by the present enemies of Great Britain should prove to be in fact tainted by illegality and disregard of the principles of war sanctioned by enlightened nations, it cannot be supposed, and this Government does not for a moment suppose, that his Majesty's Government would wish the same taint to attach to their own actions or would cite such illegal acts as in any sense or degree a justification for similar practices on their part in so far as they affect neutral rights.

It is thus that the Government of the United States interprets the language of the note of his Majesty's principal Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, which accompanies the copy of the Order in Council, which was handed to the Ambassador of the United States by the Government in London and by him transmitted to Washington.

This Government notes with gratification that "wide discretion is afforded to the prize court in dealing with the trade of neutrals in such a manner as may in the circumstances be deemed just, and that full provision is made to facilitate claims by persons interested in any goods placed in the custody of the Marshal of the prize court under the order." That "the effect of the Order in Council is to confer certain powers upon the executive officers of his Majesty's Government," and that "the extent to which these powers will be actually exercised and the degree of severity with which the measure of blockade authorized will be put into operation are matters which will depend on the administrative orders issued by the Government and the decisions of the authorities especially charged with the duty of dealing with individual ships and cargoes, according to the merits of each case."

This Government further notes with equal satisfaction the declaration of the British Government that "the instructions to be issued by his Majesty's Government to the fleet and to the customs officials and executive committees concerned will impress upon them the duty of acting with the utmost dispatch consistent with the object in view, and of showing in every case such consideration for neutrals as may be compatible with that object, which is succinctly stated, to establish a blockade to prevent vessels from carrying goods for or coming from Germany."

In view of these assurances formally given to this Government, it is confidently expected that the extensive powers conferred by the Order in Council on the executive officers of the Crown will be restricted by orders issued by the Government, directing the exercise of their discretionary powers in such a manner as to modify in practical application those provisions of the Order in Council, which, if strictly enforced, would violate neutral rights and interrupt legitimate trade. Relying on the faithful performance of these voluntary assurances by his Majesty's Government, the United States takes it for granted that the approach of American merchantmen to neutral ports situated upon the long line of coast affected by the Order in Council will not be interfered with when it is known that they do not carry goods which are contraband of war or goods destined to or proceeding from ports within the belligerent territory affected.

The Government of the United States assumes with the greater confidence that his Majesty's Government will thus adjust their practice to the recognized rules of international law because it is manifest that the British Government have adopted an extraordinary method of "stopping cargoes destined for or coming from the enemy's territory," which, owing to the existence of unusual conditions in modern warfare at sea, it will be difficult to restrict to the limits which have been heretofore required by the law of nations. Though the area of operations is confined to "European waters, including the Mediterranean," so great an area of the high seas is covered and the cordon of ships is so distant from the territory affected that neutral vessels must necessarily pass through the blockading force in order to reach important neutral ports which Great Britain as a belligerent has not the legal right to blockade and which, therefore, it is presumed she has no intention of claiming to blockade.

The Scandinavian and Danish ports, for example, are open to American trade. They are also free, so far as the actual enforcement of the Order in Council is concerned, to carry on trade with German Baltic ports, although it is an essential element of blockade that it bear with equal severity upon all neutrals.

This Government, therefore, infers that the commanders of his Majesty's ships of war, engaged in maintaining the so-called blockade, will be instructed to avoid an enforcement of the proposed measures of non-intercourse in such a way as to impose restrictions upon neutral trade more burdensome than those which have been regarded as inevitable, when the ports of a belligerent are actually blockaded by the ships of its enemy.

The possibilities of serious interruption of American trade under the Order in Council are so many, and the methods proposed are so unusual, and seem liable to constitute so great an impediment and embarrassment to neutral commerce, that the Government of the United States, if the Order in Council is strictly enforced, apprehends many interferences with its legitimate trade which will impose upon his Majesty's Government heavy responsibilities for acts of the British authorities clearly subversive of the rights of neutral nations on the high seas. It is, therefore, expected that the Majesty's Government, having considered these possibilities, will take the steps necessary to avoid them, and, in the event that they should unhappily occur, will be prepared to make full reparation for every act which, under the rules of international law, constitutes a violation of neutral rights.

As stated in its communication of Oct. 22, 1914, "this Government will insist that the rights and duties of the United States and its citizens in the present war be defined by the existing rules of international law and the treaties of the United States irrespective of the provisions of the Declaration of London, and that this Government reserves to itself the right to enter a protest or demand in each case, in which those rights and duties so defined are violated or their free exercise interfered with by the authorities of the British Government."

In conclusion you will reiterate to his Majesty's Government that this statement of the view of the Government of the United States is made in the most friendly spirit, and in accordance with the uniform candor which has characterized the relations of the two Governments in the past, and which has been in large measure the foundation of the peace and amity existing between the two nationals without interruption for a century.

BRYAN.



Germany's Conditions of Peace

The First Authoritative German Presentation of the Idea

By Dr. Bernhard Dernburg, Late German Colonial Secretary of State

That Germany would be willing to make peace on the basis of a free neutral sea, guaranteed by the powers, was indicated in a letter written by Dr. Bernhard Dernburg, ex-Colonial Secretary of Germany, and read at a pro-German mass meeting held in Portland, Me., on April 17, 1915. After an explanatory note Dr. Dernburg divided into numbered clauses his letter, as follows:

(1) Whatever peace is concluded should be of a permanent nature; no perfunctory patching up should be permitted. The horror of all the civilized nations of the Old World slaughtering one another, every one convinced of the perfect righteousness of their own cause—a recurrence, if it could not be avoided absolutely, should be made most remote, so as to take the weight from our minds that all this young blood of the best manhood of Europe might be spilled in vain.

(2) For this purpose it must be borne in mind that the world has changed considerably since the last big conflagration, and that all the countries striving for humanity and civilization are now one big family, with interests, spiritual as well as commercial, interlocking to a degree that no disturbance of any part of the civilized globe can exist without seriously affecting the rest. A disturbance in one quarter must make quite innocent bystanders involuntary victims, to the serious detriment of spiritual peace and commercial pursuits.

The great highway on which thoughts and things travel are the high seas. I can with full authority disclaim any ambition by my country as to world dominion. She is much too modest, on the one hand, and too experienced, on the other hand, not to know that such a state will never be tolerated by the rest. Events have shown that world dominion can only be practiced by dominion of the high seas. The aim of Germany is to have the seas, as well as the narrows, kept permanently open for the free use of all nations in times of war as well as in times of peace. The sea is nobody's property and must be free to everybody. The seas are the lungs from which humanity draws a fresh breath of enterprise, and they must not be stopped up.

I, personally, would go so far as to neutralize all the seas and narrows permanently by a common and effective agreement guaranteed by all the powers, so that any infringement on that score would meet with the most severe punishment that can be meted out to any transgressor.

(3) A free sea is useless except combined with the freedom of cable and mail communications with all countries, whether belligerent or not. I should like to see all the cables jointly owned by the interested nations and a world mail system over sea established by common consent. But, more than this, an open sea demands an open policy. This means that, while every nation must have the right, for commercial and fiscal purposes, to impose whatever duties it thinks fit, these duties must be equal for all exports and imports for whatever destination and from whatever source. It would be tantamount to world empire, in fact, if a country owning a large part of the globe could make discriminating duties between the motherland and dominions or colonies as against other nations.

This has been of late the British practice. German colonies have always been open to every comer, including the motherland, on equal terms. Such equality of treatment should be the established practice for all the future. The only alternative to an open sea and free intercourse policy would be a Chinese wall around each country. If there is no free intercourse every country must become self-sufficient. Germany has proved that it can be done. But this policy would mean very high customs barriers, discrimination, unbounded egotism, and a world bristling in arms. While the free sea policy stands for the true aims of international relations, namely, in exchange of goods, which must benefit either party, to be mutually satisfactory, it will engender friendly feeling among all the peoples, advance civilization, and thereby have a sure tendency toward disarmament.

(4) Germany has been taxed with disregarding treaty obligations, tearing up a scrap of paper—a solemn engagement of international character regarding Belgium. I have the less reason to enter into this matter since—if it was a breach of international law at all—it has been followed up by all other belligerents by destroying other parts of that code so essential to the welfare of the community of nations. Two German men-of-war have been destroyed in neutral waters. The protests that the Government of this country had to make against Great Britain's treatment of international sea law and the rights of the neutrals are too numerous to be recounted. Chinese neutrality has been violated in the grossest way.

In disregard of all conventions, China is now being subjected to demands incompatible with the rights of self-respecting nations. Egypt and Cyprus have been annexed by Great Britain, disregarding all treaties. Germany's diplomatic representatives have been driven from China, Morocco, and Egypt—all countries sovereign at the time. The Declaration of London, which had been set up by the Government of the United States as the governing document, had to be dropped as such. There is practically no part of international law that could stand the test. Justice toward neutrals compels that international law should be re-established in a codified form, with sufficient guarantees so as to save, as far as possible, all the neutrals from possible implication in a war in which they do not take part.

(5) Germany does not strive for territorial aggrandizement in Europe; she does not believe in conquering and subjugating unwilling nations—this on account of a spirit of justice and her knowledge of history. No such attempts have ever been permanently successful.

Belgium commands the main outlet of Western German trade, is the natural foreland of the empire, and has been conquered with untold sacrifice of blood and treasure. It offers to German trade the only outlet to an open sea and it has been politically established, maintained, and defended by England in order to keep these natural advantages from Germany.

The love for small peoples that England heralds now will never stand investigation, as shown by the destruction of the small Boer republics. So Belgium cannot be given up. However, these considerations could be disregarded if all the other German demands, especially a guaranteed free sea, were fully complied with and the natural commercial relationship of Belgium to Germany was considered in a just and workable form. In this case Germany will not fail when the times come to help in rebuilding the country; in fact, she is doing so now.

(6) Germany is a country smaller in size than California, but populated thirty-five times as thickly as that State. She loves and fosters family life, and sees her future in the raising of large families of healthy children under the home roof and under the national flag. German parents have no desire to expatriate every year a considerable number of their children. This implies that her industrial development, which would alone give occupation to the yearly increase of pretty nearly a million people, should go on unhampered.

The activity of her people should have an outlet in the development of such foreign parts as need or wish for development. Great Britain has shown very little foresight in constantly opposing such efforts, playing Morocco into the hands of France, a nation that remained stationary for forty-four years, with little more than half of the population of Germany, and with a system equally undermining religion and morality in keeping families small for the sake of worldly comforts.

England, furthermore, constantly obstructed the German endeavor to reclaim for the benefit of all of the world the granary in Mesopotamia. A permanent peace will mean that this German activity must get a wide scope without infringement upon the rights of others. Germany should be encouraged to continue her activities in Africa and Asia Minor, which can only result in permanent benefit to all the world. Americans have a saying "that it will never do good to sit on a safety valve."

There is nothing in the program of my country which would not be beneficial to the rest of the world, especially the United States. That this is so the events of the last months have conclusively shown, and a better appreciation of what Germany really stands for has recently taken place. So, if I plead the cause of my country, I am not pleading as a German alone, but as a citizen of a country who wishes to be a useful and true member of the universality of nations, contributing by humanitarian aims and by the enhancement of personal freedom to the happiness of even the lowliest members of the great world community.

I am proud to say that I cannot only give this assurance, but produce facts, and I beg to refer to the modern system of social reforms which Germany inaugurated and carries through at an expense which is every year larger by half than the expense of the military system.

The brunt of this war has not been borne by the men who fight, but by the women who suffer, and it will be one of the proudest and most coveted achievements that Germany will gain in rewarding in a dignified and permanently beneficial way the enormous sacrifices of womanhood, to alleviate to the extent of the possible the hardships and sorrows that this war has brought upon them.



The Allies' Conditions of Peace

By Sir Edward Grey

Sir Edward Grey, presiding at a lecture on the war by Mr. Buchan, delivered March 22, 1915, reviewed the origin and causes of the conflict. Germany, he said, refused every suggestion made to her for settling the dispute by means of a conference. On her must rest for all time the appalling responsibility for having plunged Europe into this war. One essential condition of peace must be the restoration to Belgium of her independence and reparation to her for the cruel wrong done to her. England claims for herself and her allies claim for themselves, and together will secure for Europe, the right of independent sovereignty for the different nations, the right to pursue a national existence in the light of general liberty.

The occasion of our meeting this afternoon is to hear a lecture from my friend Mr. Buchan on the strategy of the war, and he is sure to make it informing and interesting. His friends know him as a man of fine public spirit and patriotism, in whom a crisis such as this in his country's history arouses the noblest feelings. I am sorry that an engagement makes it necessary for me to return soon to the Foreign Office, and therefore it will be a great disappointment to me not to hear the whole of the lecture. I take the opportunity to make my apology now, and also to make one or two remarks on the origin and issues of the war. While we are engaged in considering the particular methods by which the war may be prosecuted to a successful conclusion do not let us lose sight even for a moment of the character and origin of this war and of the main issues for which we are fighting. Hundreds of millions of money have been spent, hundreds of thousands of lives have been lost, and millions have been maimed and wounded in Europe during the last few months. And all this might have been avoided by the simple method of a conference or a joint discussion between the powers concerned which might have been held in London, at The Hague, or wherever and in whatever form Germany would have consented to have it. It would have been far easier to have settled by conference the dispute between Austria-Hungary and Serbia, which Germany made the occasion for this war, than it was to get successfully through the Balkan crisis of two years ago. Germany knew from her experience of the conference in London which settled the Balkan crisis that she could count upon our good will for peace in any conference of the powers. We had sought no diplomatic triumph in the Balkan Conference; we did not give ourselves to any intrigue; we pursued impartially and honorably the end of peace, and we were ready last July to do the same again.

In recent years we have given Germany every assurance that no aggression upon her would receive any support from us. We withheld from her one thing—we would not give an unconditional promise to stand aside, however aggressive Germany herself might be to her neighbors. Last July, before the outbreak of the war, France was ready to accept a conference; Italy was ready to accept a conference; Russia was ready to accept a conference; and we know now that after the British proposal for a conference was made, the Emperor of Russia himself proposed to the German Emperor that the dispute should be referred to The Hague. Germany refused every suggestion made to her for settling the dispute in this way. On her rests now, and must rest for all time, the appalling responsibility for having plunged Europe into this war and for having involved herself and the greater part of the Continent in the consequences of it.

We know now that the German Government had prepared for war as only people who plan can prepare. This is the fourth time within living memory that Prussia had made war in Europe. In the Schleswig-Holstein war, in the war against Austria in 1866, in the war against France in 1870, as we now know from all the documents that have been revealed, it was Prussia who planned and prepared these wars. The same thing has occurred again, and we are determined that it shall be the last time that war shall be made in this way.

We had assured Belgium that never would we violate her neutrality so long as it was respected by others. I had given this pledge to Belgium long before the war. On the eve of the war we asked France and Germany to give the same pledge. France at once did so. Germany declined to give it. When, after that, Germany invaded Belgium we were bound to oppose Germany with all our strength, and if we had not done so at the first moment, is there any one who now believes that when Germany attacked the Belgians, when she shot down combatants and non-combatants in a way that violated all the rules of war of recent times and the laws of humanity of all time—is there any one who thinks it possible now that we could have sat still and looked on without eternal disgrace?

Now what is the issue for which we are fighting? In due time the terms of peace will be put forward by our Allies in concert with us—in accordance with the alliance that exists between us—and published to the world. One essential condition must be the restoration to Belgium of her independence, national life, and free possession of her territory, and reparation to her as far as reparation is possible for the cruel wrong done to her. That is part of the great issue for which we, with our allies, are contending, and the great part of the issue is this—We wish the nations of Europe to be free to live their independent lives, working out their own form of government for themselves, and their own national developments, whether they be great nations or small States, in full liberty. This is our ideal. The German ideal—we have had it poured out by German professors and publicists since the war began—is that of the Germans as a superior people, to whom all things are lawful in the securing of their own power, against whom resistance of any sort is unlawful—a people establishing a domination over the nations of the Continent, imposing a peace which is not to be liberty for every nation, but subservience to Germany. I would rather perish or leave the Continent altogether than live on it under such conditions.

After this war we and the other nations of Europe must be free to live, not menaced continually by talk of "supreme war lords," and "shining armor," and the sword continually "rattled in the scabbard," and heaven continually invoked as the accomplice of Germany, and not having our policy dictated and our national destinies and activities controlled by the military caste of Prussia. We claim for ourselves and our allies claim for themselves, and together we will secure for Europe, the right of independent sovereignty for the different nations, the right to pursue a national existence, not in the shadow of Prussian hegemony and supremacy, but in the light of equal liberty.

All honor for ever be given from us whom age and circumstances have kept at home to those who have voluntarily come forward to risk their lives, and give their lives on the field of battle on land and on sea. They have their reward in enduring fame and honor. And all honor be from us to the brave armies and navies of our Allies, who have exhibited such splendid courage and noble patriotism. The admiration they have aroused, and their comradeship in arms, will be an ennobling and enduring memory between us, cementing friendships and perpetuating national good will. For all of us who are serving the State at home or in whatever capacity, whether officials, or employers, or wage earners, doing our utmost to carry on the national life in this time of stress, there is the knowledge that there can be no nobler opportunity than that of serving one's country when its existence is at stake, and when the cause is just and right; and never was there a time in our national history when the crisis was so great and so imperative, or the cause more just and right.



South Africa's Romantic Blue Paper

Recording the Vision of "Oom Niklaas," the Boer Seer of Lichtenburg

[From THE NEW YORK TIMES, April 18, 1915.]

The South African "Blue Paper" is out. It is unique. However widely and however eagerly the official documents of the other countries involved in the present war may have been read, they could not be called romantic in any sense of the word.

The "Blue Paper" issued by the Union of South Africa presents a distinct contrast. In the third paragraph of the very first page of this weighty document, which deals with the recent rebellion, is the following unusual sentence:

It is not surprising, then, that in the ferment aroused by the gigantic struggle in Europe, which seemed to be shaking the world to its foundations, young men began to see visions and old men to dream dreams of what the outcome might be for South Africa.

And this is followed by a still stranger passage:

The times were not without their signs. There was a seer in Lichtenburg who had visions of strange import. Years ago and long before any one in this country had dreamed of war he beheld a great fight of bulls, six or seven of them, engaged in bloody combat; a gray bull had emerged victorious from the contest.

The bulls signified the great nations of Europe, and the gray bull was Germany. Thousands had discussed this strange vision and had remembered its prophetic character when, later, war actually broke out. The vision seemed ominous. Germany was predestined to triumph.

The seer is Niklaas van Rensburg, and he runs through this Government report like a scarlet thread through gray homespun. It is around his influence that the uprising of Sept. 15 is built. It is under his roof that all manner of lurid conspiracies are hatched. Not only do his words carry with the crowds that gather before his house to hear his prophecy, but his warnings shape the actions of some of the Transvaal Generals. The Government report will not go so far as to brand "Oom Niklaas" as a hoax. Says the preface:

It is desired to point out that the narrative of events has been compiled in as objective a manner as possible, and that it contains no statement which is not borne out by evidence in possession of the Government.

Evidently, to denounce visions of gray bulls as hocus-pocus would be to describe a puzzling situation much too subjectively, since the Government has apparently no evidence that these are not genuine prophecy. The best the Government can do is to call them "extraordinary and apparently quite authentic."

But the extraordinary part of it is that an illiterate old soothsayer should be considered important enough to be included in an official report.

His most famous and most influential prophecy, the one that will go down in the history of South Africa, was that which concerned General de la Rey and the fatal number 15.

The prophecy which came back to the minds of van Rensburg's followers when war broke out was one concerning General de la Rey, the intrepid soldier who had commanded the Lichtenburg burghers in the Boer war and since become President of the Western Transvaal Farmers' Association. Van Rensburg had always admired General de la Rey. He had frequently hinted to his circle that great things were in store for him. One of his visions had been well known to General de la Rey and his friends for some years. The report says:

The seer had beheld the number 15 on a dark cloud from which blood issued, and then General de la Rey returning home without his hat. Immediately afterward came a carriage covered with flowers.



This was several years ago. But the people did not forget the prophecy, and when war broke out in Europe the Western Transvaal—in the Lichtenburg-Wolmaransstad area, where van Rensburg's influence was strongest—was immediately aflame. The Government does not seek to minimize the importance of this influence:

When the war at last broke out, the effect in Lichtenburg was instantaneous. The prophecies of van Rensburg were eagerly recalled, and it was remembered that he had foretold a day on which the independence of the Transvaal would be restored.

Certain individuals could be seen daily cleaning their rifles and cartridges in order to be ready for the day. Within a week of the declaration of war between England and Germany the district was further profoundly stirred by the news (now become generally known) that a great meeting of local burghers was to be held at Treurfontein on the 15th of August, and that certain local officers were commandeering their burghers to come to this meeting armed and fully equipped for active service.

The outbreak of the war in Europe suddenly brought the Lichtenburger's prophecy down to earth and crystallized the dream. The commandants were evidently as convinced that independence was at hand as the crowd.

Careful inquiries by other local officers brought to light the following facts:

Veld Kornet, I.E. Claassen, and Commandant F.G.A. Wolmarans of Ward Onder Hartsrivier had been commandeering their own burghers as well as their political friends since the first week of August to come to the meeting which was to be held at Treurfontein on the 15th. The instructions given to these men were that they were to come with rifle, horse, saddle and bridle, and as much ammunitions and provisions as they could manage to bring.

The meeting was to be addressed by General de la Rey, and it was generally believed that the assembled burghers would march on Potchefstroom immediately after the meeting.

None doubted the truth of the seer's prophecy now. The Western Transvaal took it for its guide with implicit confidence.

The strange vision of the number 15, which had long been common knowledge, was now discussed with intense interest. The 15, it was said, signified the 15th of August, the day of the meeting. That would be the day which had been so long expected—the day of liberation.

Van Rensburg was now the oracle. His prophecies with regard to the great war had been signally fulfilled. Germany was at grips with England, and her triumph was looked upon as inevitable.

The day had arrived to strike a blow for their lost independence. Van Rensburg assured his following that the Union Government was "finished." Not a shot would be fired. The revolution would be complete and bloodless.

Between the 10th and the 15th the plotters in Lichtenburg were actively preparing for the day. There is evidence that German secret agents were working in concert with them. When doubters asked how they could be so certain that the 15 signified a day of the month—and of the month of August in particular—they were scornfully if illogically told that "in God's time a month sooner or later made no difference."

Of course, General de la Rey was the storm centre. He had been mentioned in the same vision with the number 15 and it was taken for granted that he would play the chief role in the Treurfontein meeting. De la Rey was the unquestioned ruler of the Western Transvaal. The report states:

He possessed an unrivaled influence and was looked up to as the uncrowned king of the West. His attitude at the meeting would sway the mass of his adherents and decide the question of peace or war.

Accordingly, General Louis Botha, Premier of the South African Union, summoned General de la Rey to Pretoria some days before the meeting, and persuaded him to use his best efforts to allay excitement.

On the 15th the meeting was held. The situation was a tense one. Not one of the burghers present doubted the outcome. Yet General de la Rey exhorted them to remain cool and calm. He urged them to await the turn of events in Europe. After his address a "strange and unusual silence" was observed, says the "Blue Paper."

A resolution was passed unanimously expressing complete confidence in the Government to act in the best interests of South Africa in the present world crisis. The burghers appeared to have taken their leader's advice to heart, as they dispersed quietly to their homes.

All danger of a rebellious movement had apparently been averted.

The only difficulty was that the prophecy of "Oom Niklaas" was still standing. The fact that the uprising had failed did not seem in the least to invalidate the vision. If the mysterious number did not mean Aug. 15, then perhaps it did mean Sept. 15.

Accordingly, preparations were laid for a rebellion for the latter date. The plot was engineered by Lieut. Colonel Solomon G. Maritz and General Christian Frederick Beyers. Maritz is a brilliant though unlettered Colonel who won distinction in the Boer war, while Beyers was the Commandant General of the South African Union forces. Beyers is dead now; Maritz and some of the prominent men associated in the conspiracy are in prison awaiting trial.

Beyers and Maritz did not trust entirely to the prophecy of the seer of Lichtenburg. Maritz had already obtained a guarantee from the authorities in German West Africa, with whom he had been in communication for some time, that in the event of Germany's victory the Free State and the Transvaal would be given their freedom. He had organized the back-veldt Boers into readiness to go over into German West Africa at a moment's notice. In the Free State, General de Wet was ready to aid the rebellion, and the Western Transvaal, already excited, could easily be swung into line.

The regiments of the west were to concentrate at Potchefstroom early in September for their annual training. At that time the members of the Government, among them General de la Rey, who is a member of the Legislative Assembly, would be in Cape Town for the session of the Parliament.

Everything made the 15th of September look like an auspicious date for the conspirators and those who believed in van Rensburg. But General de la Rey still remained the storm centre. He was the factor which upset all plans. He was the most difficult obstacle. A large personality, his influence could never be discounted. If he could be induced to join the conspiracy the cause was as good as won. Should he oppose the movement it was lost, for neither Beyers nor Major Kemp, a leader in his district in West Transvaal, could hope to do anything against General de la Rey in the west.

General de la Rey believed in the Lichtenburg prophet. A strong man, of extraordinary force and intelligence, the whole course of his plans might be altered by a new vision from van Rensburg. Beyers knew this, says the report, and saw the way by which he should win the General to the conspiracy.

There is evidence to prove that General Beyers set himself systematically to work in General de la Rey's mind in order to induce him to join the conspiracy.

General de la Rey was known to hold strong religious views, which colored his whole outlook. The seer, van Rensburg, who was always full of religious talk, had in this way acquired a considerable amount of influence over General de la Rey.

There is the best of evidence (General Beyers's own statement) for the belief that he himself did not scruple to work on General de la Rey's mind through his religious feelings.

Just how Beyers accomplished this has not yet been revealed, but there was material enough to his hand. The news from Europe was disquieting. The German drive to Paris seemed irresistible. It looked as if in a week or two Germany would have the Allies at her mercy.

The prophet saw visions in which 40,000 German soldiers were marching up and down the streets of London. He predicted significantly that the new South African State would have at its head "a man who feared God." The Government of Premier Botha and General Smuts, the Minister of Finance and Defense, was "finished." He had seen the English leaving the Transvaal and moving down toward Natal. When they had gone far away, a vulture flew from among them and returned to the Boers and settled down among them. That was Botha. As for Smuts, he would flee desperately to England and would never be seen in South Africa again. Through it all ran the strange number 15.

This was excellent material for the conspirators. But the problem was to get General de la Rey away from the Parliament session at Cape Town and into the Potchefstroom camp at the psychological moment. Beyers sent a series of urgent telegrams to Cape Town hinting at important business. He emphasized the need for General de la Rey's immediate presence in Potchefstroom. He had evidently not yet broached the conspiracy to the General, but hoped only to get him to the camp at the critical moment when his presence would prove the deciding factor.

]

Everything in Potchefstroom was in readiness. The Active Citizen Force concentrated here—about 1,600 men—was to start the uprising. The movement was to be promptly seconded throughout the Western Transvaal. The "Vierkleur" was to be hoisted, and a march made on Pretoria, men and horses being commandeered on the way. This was to take place on Tuesday, the 15th. There was an attempt to line up the prophet to add to the theatric effect, says the report.

On the night of the 14th the "Prophet" himself was specially sent for by motor car to be personally present on the 15th to witness the consummation of his prophecy. The conspirators hoped to profit by the impression he would undoubtedly make on those who still hesitated.

Unfortunately for them, however, the seer refused to leave his home, saying that "it was not yet clear to him that that was his path."

The signal for the revolt was to be the arrival of General Beyers and General de la Rey in the Potchefstroom camp. The latter was returning from Cape Town via Kimberley, and was due to arrive in Potchefstroom on the 15th. But for some reason he chose to come back through the Free State, and by the 15th was only at Johannesburg.

This upset plans. Beyers had to act quickly. He had his chauffeur overhaul his motor car, equip it with new tubes and covers, in readiness for "a long journey." In a short time the car was on its way to bring General de la Rey from Johannesburg to Pretoria, where Beyers would meet him.

There was no time to be lost. It was too late to stage the rebellion for the 15th, but Beyers arranged for it to be at 4 o'clock on the morning of Wednesday, the 16th.

General de la Rey arrived in Pretoria. General Beyers met him and asked him to go immediately with him to Potchefstroom.

The car came within sight of Johannesburg. A police cordon had been thrown around the town for the purpose of capturing three desperadoes, known as the "Foster gang," who were trying to escape in a motor car. The police were instructed to stop all motors and to examine in particular any car containing three men.

Beyers's car held three men. It was racing at high speed. It was, of course, challenged by the police and ordered to stop. But Beyers knew nothing of the "Foster gang" and the reason for the police cordon. Keyed up to the highest pitch of nervous tension, his immediate conclusion was that his plot had been discovered and that the police were after him. He believed he was trapped.

Meanwhile, Major Kemp at Potchefstroom grew more and more anxious as the hours slipped by. Midnight came, and no news of the two Generals. About 3 o'clock in the morning, says the report, an officer sharing the tent of a Lieutenant Colonel by the name of Kock, who was Kemp's confidant, was awakened by the entrance of a man. It proved to be Major Kemp. He leaned over Kock's bed and whispered something in his ear.

Kock, in a profoundly startled voice, exclaimed, "Oh, God!"

Kemp left immediately, and Kock then whispered to his friend: "General de la Rey is dood geskiet," (General de la Rey has been shot dead.)

The effect of this news on South Africa can be imagined. The whole country was aflame. This was what the number 15 meant. The General had indeed "returned home without his hat, followed by a carriage full of flowers."

Report ran through every town that General de la Rey had been deliberately assassinated by the Government. As a matter of fact, the report states that the shooting was purely accidental, done by the police under the belief that this motor car which would not halt at their command contained the "Foster gang." Beyers exhibited the motor-car everywhere, arousing sentiment to the highest pitch.

The rest was easy. The rank and file, at least, now believed firmly in the prophet. He had always said that General Botha would offer no resistance, that the revolution would be bloodless, and thousands went over to the cause led by Maritz and Beyers in this belief. But it was not until Oct. 12 that martial law was proclaimed in South Africa. The rebellion had begun.



THE BELLS OF BERLIN

[From Punch of London.]

(Which are said to be rung by order occasionally to announce some supposed German victory.)

The Bells of Berlin, how they hearten the Hun (Oh, dingle dong dangle ding dongle ding dee;) No matter what devil's own work has been done They chime a loud chant of approval, each one, Till the people feel sure of their place in the sun (Oh, dangle ding dongle dong dingle ding dee.)

If Hindenburg hustles an enemy squad (Oh, dingle dong dangle ding dongle ding dee,) The bells all announce that the alien sod Is damp with the death of some thousand men odd, Till the populace smiles with a gratified nod (Oh, dangle ding dongle dong dingle ding dee.)

If Tirpitz behaves like a brute on the brine (Oh, dingle dong dangle ding dongle ding dee,) The bells with a clash and a clamor combine To hint that the Hated One's on the decline, And the city gulps down the good tidings like wine, (Oh, dangle ding dongle dong dingle ding dee.)

The Bells of Berlin, are they cracked through and through (Oh, dingle dong dangle ding dongle ding dee,) Or deaf to the discord like Germany, too? For whether their changes be many or few, The worst of them is that they never ring true, (Oh, dangle ding dongle dong dingle ding dee.)



Warfare and British Labor

By Earl Kitchener, England's Secretary of State for War

In his speech delivered in the House of Lords on March 15, 1915, Earl Kitchener calls upon the whole nation to work, not only in supplying the manhood of the country to serve in the ranks, but in supplying the necessary arms, ammunition, and equipment for successful operations in various parts of the world.

For many weeks only trench fighting has been possible owing to the climatic conditions and waterlogged state of the ground. During this period of apparent inaction, it must not be forgotten that our troops have had to exercise the utmost individual vigilance and resource, and, owing to the proximity of the enemy's lines, a great strain has been imposed upon them. Prolonged warfare of this sort might be expected to affect the morale of an army, but the traditional qualities of patience, good temper, and determination have maintained our men, though highly tried, in a condition ready to act with all the initiative and courage required when the moment for an advance arrived. The recently published accounts of the fighting in France have enabled us to appreciate how successfully our troops have taken the offensive. The German troops, notwithstanding their carefully prepared and strongly intrenched positions, have been driven back for a considerable distance and the villages of Neuve Chapelle and L'Epinette have been captured and held by our army, with heavy losses to the enemy.

In these operations our Indian troops took a prominent part and displayed fine fighting qualities. I will in this connection read a telegram I have received from Sir John French:

Please transmit following message to Viceroy India: I am glad to be able to inform your Excellency that the Indian troops under General Sir James Willcocks fought with great gallantry and marked success in the capture of Neuve Chapelle and subsequent fighting which took place on the 10th, 11th, 12th and 13th of this month. The fighting was very severe and the losses heavy, but nothing daunted them. Their tenacity, courage and endurance were admirable and worthy of the best traditions of the soldiers of India.

I should like also to mention that the Canadian Division showed their mettle and have received the warm commendation of Sir John French for the high spirit and bravery with which they have performed their part. Our casualties during the three days' fighting, though probably severe, are not nearly so heavy as those suffered by the enemy, from whom a large number of prisoners have been taken.

Since I last spoke in this House substantial reinforcements have been sent to France. They include the Canadian Division, the North Midland Division, and the Second London Division, besides other units. These are the first complete divisions of the Territorial Force to go to France, where I am sure they will do credit to themselves and sustain the high reputation which the Territorials have already won for themselves there. The health of the troops has been remarkably good, and their freedom from enteric fever and from the usual diseases incidental to field operations is a striking testimony to the value of inoculation and to the advice and skill of the Royal Army Medical Corps and its auxiliary organizations.

The French army, except for a slight withdrawal at Soissons, owing to their reinforcements being cut off by the swollen state of the Aisne River, have made further important progress at various points on the long line they hold, especially in Champagne. Association with both our allies in the western theatre has only deepened our admiration of their resolute tenacity and fighting qualities.

In the Eastern theatre the violent German attacks on Warsaw have failed in their purpose, and a considerable concentration of German troops to attack the Russian positions in East Prussia, after causing a retirement, are now either well held or are being driven back. In the Caucasus fresh defeats have been inflicted by the Russians on the Turks, and the latter have also been repulsed by our forces in Egypt when they attempted to attack the Suez Canal. The operations now proceeding against the Dardanelles show the great power of the allied fleets, and, although at the present stage I can say no more than what is given in the public press on the subject, your Lordships may rest assured that the matter is well in hand.

The work of supplying and equipping new armies depends largely on our ability to obtain the war material required. Our demands on the industries concerned with the manufacture of munitions of war in this country have naturally been very great, and have necessitated that they and other ancillary trades should work at the highest possible pressure. The armament firms have promptly responded to our appeal, and have undertaken orders of vast magnitude. The great majority also of the employees have loyally risen to the occasion, and have worked, and are working, overtime and on night shifts in all the various workshops and factories in the country.

Notwithstanding these efforts to meet our requirements, we have unfortunately found that the output is not only not equal to our necessities, but does not fulfill our expectations, for a very large number of our orders have not been completed by the dates on which they were promised. The progress in equipping our new armies, and also in supplying the necessary war material for our forces in the field, has been seriously hampered by the failure to obtain sufficient labor, and by delays in the production of the necessary plant, largely due to the enormous demands not only of ourselves, but of our allies.

While the workmen generally, as I have said, have worked loyally and well, there have, I regret to say, been instances where absence, irregular timekeeping, and slack work have led to a marked diminution in the output of our factories. In some cases the temptations of drink account for this failure to work up to the high standard expected. It has been brought to my notice on more than one occasion that the restrictions of trade unions have undoubtedly added to our difficulties, not so much in obtaining sufficient labor, as in making the best use of that labor. I am confident, however, that the seriousness of the position as regards our supplies has only to be mentioned, and all concerned will agree to waive for the period of the war any of those restrictions which prevent in the very slightest degree our utilizing all the labor available to the fullest extent that is possible.

I cannot too earnestly point out that, unless the whole nation works with us and for us, not only in supplying the manhood of the country to serve in our ranks, but also in supplying the necessary arms, ammunition, and equipment, successful operations in the various parts of the world in which we are engaged will be very seriously hampered and delayed. I have heard rumors that the workmen in some factories have an idea that the war is going so well that there is no necessity for them to work their hardest. I can only say that the supply of war material at the present moment and for the next two or three months is causing me very serious anxiety, and I wish all those engaged in the manufacture and supply of these stores to realize that it is absolutely essential not only that the arrears in the deliveries of our munitions of war should be wiped off, but that the output of every round of ammunition is of the utmost importance, and has a large influence on our operations in the field.

The bill which my noble friend is about to place before the House as an amendment to the Defense of the Realm act is calculated to rectify this state of things as far as it is possible, and, in my opinion, it is imperatively necessary. In such a large manufacturing country as our own the enormous output of what we require to place our troops in the field thoroughly equipped and found with ammunition is undoubtedly possible, but this output can only be obtained by a careful and deliberate organization for developing the resources of the country so as to enable each competent workman to utilize in the most useful manner possible all his ability and energy in the common object which we all have in view, which is the successful prosecution and victorious termination of this war. [Cheers.] I feel sure that there is no business or manufacturing firm in this country that will object for one moment to any delay or loss caused in the product of their particular industry when they feel that they and their men are taking part with us in maintaining the soldiers in the field with those necessaries without which they cannot fight.