Richmond times-dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1914-current, 1915-05-13

his sober moments. and there Is evil.
dence that intoxication was extreme
ly prevalent among tho German army,
both In Belgium and France, for plenty
OF wine was to be found In the viii
lagos and country houses which were
pillaEed. Many Of the worst outrages
appear to have been perpetrated by
men under the influence of drink. I'm
fortunately little seems to have been
done to rcpress this source OF dan
ger.
UNPRECEDENTED KILLING
OF NONCOMBATANT
I'm the present war, howcver-and
this is the gravest charge against the
German. army--the evidence shows that
the killing Of noncombatants was car
ried out to an extent for which no
previous war between nations claim
Ing to be civilized (for such cases as
the atrocities perpetrated by the Turks
on the Bulgarian Christlons in 1876,
and On the Armenian Christians In
1898 and 1896. do not belong to that
categnry) furnishes any precedent.
That this killing was done as part of
deliberate plan is clear from the fact
herein before set forth regarding Lou
vain Aerschot. Dinant and other towns.
The killing was done under orders in
each place. ii began at a certain
liked date Some of the officers who
carried out the work did it reluctantly.
and said they were obeying directions
from their chiefs. The same remarks
apply TO the destruction OF property.
House burning was part of the pro-
gram. and villages, even large parts
OF city. were given to the flames as
part of the terrorizing policy.
Citizens of neutral states who
visited Belgium in December and jan
uary report that the German authori-
ties do not deny that noncombatants
were Systematically killed in large
numbers during the first week Of the
Invasion. and this. so far as we know,
has never been officially denied. II it
were denied. the flight and continued
voluntary exile of thousands OF
Belgian refugees would go far to
contradict denial, for there is no his
torical parallel in modern times for
the flight Of a large part of nation
before invader
The German government have, how
ever. sought to justify their seventies
on the grounds OF military necessity,
and have excused them as retaliation
for cases in which civilians fred on
German troops There may have been
cases In which such firing occurred. but
no proof has ever been given, or. to
our knowledge. attempted to be given,
or such cases. nor of the stories of
shocking outraees perpetrated by Bel
CLAN men and women on German SOL
diers. :"
Referring 10 statement by the
Chancellor Of the German empire on
September IL last that Belgians had
committed outrages on the German SOL
dters, the committee says:
NO evidence whatever seems to have
been adduced to prove this, and, though
there may be cases in which Individual
Belgians fred on the Germans. the
statement that the whole civilian
Is utterly opposed to the fact.
An invading army may be entitled
to shoot n sight a civilian caught red
handed, or any one who, though not
caught redhanded, is proved guilty
on inquiry. But this was not the prac-
tice followed by the German troops.
They do not seem to have made any
inquiry. They seized the civilians of
the village indiscriminately and killed
them. or such is they selected from
among them. without the least regard
to guilt or innocence. The mere crime
'civilisten haben geschossen,' was
enough to hand over a whole village
or district. and even outlying places, to
ruthless slaughter
HUMANITY HAS NOT
WHOLLY DISAPPEARED
We gladly record the instances
where the evidence shows that human
ity has not wholly disappeared from
some members Of the German army. and
that they realized that the responsible
heads OF that organization was employ
ing them. not In war. but in butchery
I am merely executing orders. and 1
should be shot IL / did not execute
them. said an officer to witness at
Louvain. At Brussels another officer
says: have not done one-hundredth
part OF what we have been ordered to
do by the high German military au-
That these acts should have been
perpetrated on the peaceful population
of an nnoffending country which was
not at war with its invaders. but
merely defending Its own neutrality,
guaranteed by the invading power. may
excite amazement, and even incredulity
II was with amazement and almost
with incredulity that the committee
hrst read the dispositions relating to
such acts. But when the evidence re-
garding Liege was followed by that
regarding Aerschot. Louvain, Andenne
Dinant and the other towns and VII
lagos. the cumulative effect OF such
mass OF concurrent testimony became
irresistible, and we were driven to the
conclusion that the things described
had really happened. The question then
arose how they could have happened.
Not mere military license. for the dis
cipline of the German army is pro-
verbally stringent and its obedience
explicit Not from any special ferocity
OF the troops, for whoever has Travelled
among the German peasantry knows
that they are as kindly and good
natured as any people in Europe. and
those who can recall the war OF 1870
Will remember that no charges reeem-
bling those proved by these dlsposi-
lions We're then established The OK
cesses recently committed in Belgium
were, moreover. too widespread and
too uniform In their character to be
mere sporadic outhursts OF passion OF
rapacity.
The explanation seems to he that
these excuses were committed-in some
cases ordered: in others allowed--on a
system and in pursuance of a set pur-
pose. That purpose was to strike
terror into the civil population and dis
hearten the Belgian troops. so as to
crush down resistance and extinguIsh
the very spirit OF self-defense The
pretext that civilians had fred upon
the invading troops was used to Justify