path: root/74726-0.txt

*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK 74726 ***


  [Illustration: THE VICTORIOUS GENERALS

  General Foch, Commander-in-Chief of all Allied forces. General
  Pershing, Commander-in-Chief of the American armies. Field Marshal
  Haig, head of the British armies. General d’Esperey (French) to
  whom Bulgaria surrendered. General Diaz, Commander-in-Chief of the
  Italian armies. General Marshall (British), head of the Mesopotamian
  expedition. General Allenby (British), who redeemed Palestine from the
  Turks.]




  COMPLETE EDITION

  HISTORY OF THE
  WORLD WAR

  An Authentic Narrative of
  The World’s Greatest War

  BY FRANCIS A. MARCH, Ph.D.

  In Collaboration with

  RICHARD J. BEAMISH

  Special War Correspondent
  and Military Analyst

  With an Introduction
  BY GENERAL PEYTON C. MARCH
  Chief of Staff of the United States Army

  With Exclusive Photographs by
  JAMES H. HARE and DONALD THOMPSON
  World-Famed War Photographers

  and with Reproductions from the Official Photographs
  of the United States, Canadian, British,
  French and Italian Governments

  MCMXIX
  LESLIE-JUDGE COMPANY
  NEW YORK




  Copyright, 1918

  FRANCIS A. MARCH


  This history is an original work and is fully protected by the
  copyright laws, including the right of translation. All persons are
  warned against reproducing the text in whole or in part without the
  permission of the publishers.




WAR DEPARTMENT,

OFFICE OF THE CHIEF OF STAFF,

WASHINGTON.


                                                      November 14, 1918.

With the signing of the Armistice on November 11, 1918, the World
War has been practically brought to an end. The events of the past
four years have been of such magnitude that the various steps, the
numberless battles, and the growth of Allied power which led up to
the final victory are not clearly defined even in the minds of many
military men. A history of this great period which will state in an
orderly fashion this series of events will be of the greatest value to
the future students of the war, and to everyone of the present day who
desires to refer in exact terms to matters which led up to the final
conclusion.

The war will be discussed and re-discussed from every angle and the
sooner such a compilation of facts is available, the more valuable it
will be. I understand that this History of the World War intends to put
at the disposal of all who are interested, such a compendium of facts
of the past period of over four years; and that the system employed
in safeguarding the accuracy of statements contained in it will
produce a document of great historical value without entering upon any
speculative conclusions as to cause and effect of the various phases of
the war or attempting to project into an historical document individual
opinions. With these ends in view, this History will be of the greatest
value.

                                                P. C. March.

                                                General,
                                                  Chief of Staff,
                                                     United States Army.




FOREWORD


This is a popular narrative history of the world’s greatest war.
Written frankly from the viewpoint of the United States and the Allies,
it visualizes the bloodiest and most destructive conflict of all the
ages from its remote causes to its glorious conclusion and beneficent
results. The world-shaking rise of new democracies is set forth,
and the enormous national and individual sacrifices producing that
resurrection of human equality are detailed.

Two ideals have been before us in the preparation of this necessary
work. These are simplicity and thoroughness. It is of no avail to
describe the greatest of human events if the description is so
confused that the reader loses interest. Thoroughness is an historical
essential beyond price. So it is that official documents prepared in
many instances upon the field of battle, and others taken from the
files of the governments at war, are the basis of this work. Maps
and photographs of unusual clearness and high authenticity illuminate
the text. All that has gone into war making, into the regeneration of
the world, are herein set forth with historical particularity. The
stark horrors of Belgium, the blighting terrors of chemical warfare,
the governmental restrictions placed upon hundreds of millions of
civilians, the war sacrifices falling upon all the civilized peoples of
earth, are in these pages.

It is a work that mankind can well read and treasure.




CONTENTS

VOLUME I


  INTRODUCTION BY GENERAL MARCH

                                                                    PAGE

  CHAPTER I. A WAR FOR INTERNATIONAL FREEDOM

  A Conflict that was Inevitable--The Flower of Manhood on
  the Fields of France--Germany’s Defiance to the World--Heroic
  Belgium--Four Autocratic Nations against Twenty-four
  Committed to the Principles of Liberty--America’s
  Titanic Effort--Four Million Men Under Arms, Two
  Million Overseas--France the Martyr Nation--The British
  Empire’s Tremendous Share in the Victory--A River of
  Blood Watering the Desert of Autocracy                               1


  CHAPTER II. THE WORLD SUDDENLY TURNED UPSIDE DOWN

  The War Storm Breaks--Trade and Commerce Paralyzed--Homeward
  Rush of Travelers--Stock Markets Closed--The
  Tide of Desolation Following in the Wake of War                     21


  CHAPTER III. WHY THE WORLD WENT TO WAR

  The Balkan Ferment--Russia, the Dying Giant Among
  Autocracies--Turkey the “Sick Man” of Europe--Scars
  Left by the Balkan War--Germany’s Determination to
  Seize a Place in the Sun                                            41


  CHAPTER IV. THE PLOTTER BEHIND THE SCENE

  The Assassination at Sarajevo--The Slavic Ferment--Austria’s
  Domineering Note--The Plotters of Potsdam--The
  Mailed Fist of Militarism Beneath the Velvet Glove of
  Diplomacy--Mobilization and Declarations of War                     58


  CHAPTER V. THE GREAT WAR BEGINS

  Germany Invades Belgium and Luxemburg--French Invade
  Alsace--England’s “Contemptible Little Army” Lands
  in France and Belgium--The Murderous Gray-Green Tide--Heroic
  Retreat of the British from Mons--Belgium Overrun--Northern
  France Invaded--Marshal Joffre Makes Ready to Strike                88


  CHAPTER VI. THE TRAIL OF THE BEAST IN BELGIUM

  Barbarities that Shocked Humanity--Planned as Part of the
  Teutonic Policy of _Schrecklichkeit_--How the German and the
  Hun Became Synonymous Terms--The Unmatchable
  Crimes of a War-Mad Army--A Record of Infamy Written
  in Blood and Tears--Official Reports                               117


  CHAPTER VII. THE FIRST BATTLE OF THE MARNE

  Joffre’s Masterly Plan--The Enemy Trapped Between
  Verdun and Paris--Gallieni’s “Army in Taxicabs”--Foch,
  the “Savior of Civilization,” Appears--His Mighty
  Thrust Routs the Army of Hausen--Joffre Salutes Foch
  as “The First Strategist in Europe”--The Battle that
  Won the Baton of a Marshal                                         153


  CHAPTER VIII. JAPAN IN THE WAR

  Tsing-Tau Seized by the Mikado--German “Gibraltar”
  of Far East Surrendered After Short Siege--Japan’s Aid to
  the Allies in Money, Ships, Men and Nurses--German
  Propaganda in the Far East Fails                                   170


  CHAPTER IX. CAMPAIGN IN THE EAST

  Invasion of East Prussia--Von Hindenburg and Masurian
  Lakes--Battle of Tannenberg--Augustovo--Russians Capture
  Lemberg--The Offer to Poland                                       184


  CHAPTER X. NEW METHODS AND HORRORS OF WARFARE

  Tanks--Poison Gas--Flame Projectors--Airplane Bombs--Trench
  Mortars--Machine Guns--Modern Uses of Airplanes
  for Liaison and Attacks on Infantry--Radio--Rifle
  and Hand Grenades--A War of Intensive Artillery
  Preparation--A Debacle of Insanities, Terrible Wounds and
  Horrible Deaths                                                    212




ILLUSTRATIONS

VOLUME I

                                                                    PAGE

  THE VICTORIOUS GENERALS                                 _Frontispiece_

  KINGS AND CHIEF EXECUTIVES OF THE PRINCIPAL
    POWERS ASSOCIATED AGAINST THE GERMAN ALLIANCE                      2

  THE “TIGER OF FRANCE”                                               14

  THE RIGHT HONORABLE DAVID LLOYD GEORGE                              36

  FRANCIS JOSEPH I OF AUSTRIA, THE “OLD EMPEROR”
    ON A STATE OCCASION                                               44

  THE KAISER AND HIS SIX SONS                                         82

  KING ALBERT AT THE HEAD OF THE HEROIC SOLDIERS OF BELGIUM           94

  A SCENE FROM EARLY TRENCH WARFARE                                  114

  GERMAN ATROCITIES                                                  126

  THE SUPREME EXPONENTS OF GERMAN FRIGHTFULNESS                      148

  GENERAL PERSHING AND MARSHAL JOFFRE                                156

  MARSHAL FERDINAND FOCH, COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF OF THE ALLIED ARMIES    162

  COSSACKS OF THE DON ATTACKING PRUSSIAN CAVALRY                     188

  THE MADE-TO-ORDER INFERNO OF THE FLAME-THROWER                     230

  TYPES OF LAND BATTLESHIPS DEVELOPED BY ALLIES AND GERMANS          234




THE WORLD WAR




CHAPTER I

A WAR FOR INTERNATIONAL FREEDOM


“My Fellow Countrymen: The armistice was signed this morning.
Everything for which America fought has been accomplished. The war thus
comes to an end.”

Speaking to the Congress and the people of the United States, President
Wilson made this declaration on November 11, 1918. A few hours before
he made this statement, Germany, the empire of blood and iron, had
agreed to an armistice, terms of which were the hardest and most
humiliating ever imposed upon a nation of the first class. It was
the end of a war for which Germany had prepared for generations, a
war bred of a philosophy that Might can take its toll of earth’s
possessions, of human lives and liberties, when and where it will.
That philosophy involved the cession to imperial Germany of the best
years of young German manhood, the training of German youths to be
killers of men. It involved the creation of a military caste, arrogant
beyond all precedent, a caste that set its strength and pride against
the righteousness of democracy, against the possession of wealth and
bodily comforts, a caste that visualized itself as part of a power-mad
Kaiser’s assumption that he and God were to shape the destinies of
earth.

When Marshal Foch, the foremost strategist in the world, representing
the governments of the Allies and the United States, delivered to the
emissaries of Germany terms upon which they might surrender, he brought
to an end the bloodiest, the most destructive and the most beneficent
war the world has known. It is worthy of note in this connection that
the three great wars in which the United States of America engaged have
been wars for freedom. The Revolutionary War was for the liberty
of the colonies; the Civil War was waged for the freedom of manhood
and for the principle of the indissolubility of the Union; the World
War, beginning 1914, was fought for the right of small nations to
self-government and for the right of every country to the free use of
the high seas.

  [Illustration: KINGS AND CHIEF EXECUTIVES OF THE PRINCIPAL POWERS
  ASSOCIATED AGAINST THE GERMAN ALLIANCE]

More than four million American men were under arms when the conflict
ended. Of these, more than two million were upon the fields of France
and Italy. These were thoroughly trained in the military art. They had
proved their right to be considered among the most formidable soldiers
the world has known. Against the brown rock of that host in khaki, the
flower of German savagery and courage had broken at Château-Thierry.
There the high tide of Prussian militarism, after what had seemed to
be an irresistible dash for the destruction of France, spent itself
in the bloody froth and spume of bitter defeat. There the Prussian
Guard encountered the Marines, the Iron Division and the other heroic
organizations of America’s new army. There German soldiers who had
been hardened and trained under German conscription before the war, and
who had learned new arts in their bloody trade, through their service
in the World War, met their masters in young Americans taken from the
shop, the field, and the forge, youths who had been sent into battle
with a scant six months’ intensive training in the art of war. Not only
did these American soldiers hold the German onslaught where it was
but, in a sudden, fierce, resistless counter-thrust they drove back in
defeat and confusion the Prussian Guard, the Pommeranian Reserves, and
smashed the morale of that German division beyond hope of resurrection.

The news of that exploit sped from the Alps to the North Sea Coast,
through all the camps of the Allies, with incredible rapidity. “The
Americans have held the Germans. They can fight,” ran the message.
New life came into the war-weary ranks of heroic poilus and into the
steel-hard armies of Great Britain. “The Americans are as good as the
best. There are millions of them, and millions more are coming,” was
heard on every side. The transfusion of American blood came as magic
tonic, and from that glorious day there was never a doubt as to the
speedy defeat of Germany. From that day the German retreat dated. The
armistice signed on November 11, 1918, was merely the period finishing
the death sentence of German militarism, the first word of which was
uttered at Château-Thierry.

Germany’s defiance to the world, her determination to force her will
and her “kultur” upon the democracies of earth, produced the conflict.
She called to her aid three sister autocracies: Turkey, a land ruled
by the whims of a long line of moody misanthropic monarchs; Bulgaria,
the traitor nation cast by its Teutonic king into a war in which its
people had no choice and little sympathy; Austria-Hungary, a congeries
of races in which a Teutonic minority ruled with an iron scepter.

Against this phalanx of autocracy, twenty-four nations arrayed
themselves. Populations of these twenty-eight warring nations far
exceeded the total population of all the remainder of humanity. The
conflagration of war literally belted the earth. It consumed the most
civilized of capitals. It raged in the swamps and forests of Africa.
To its call came alien peoples speaking words that none but themselves
could translate, wearing garments of exotic cut and hue amid the smart
garbs and sober hues of modern civilization. A twentieth century Babel
came to the fields of France for freedom’s sake, and there was born an
internationalism making for the future understanding and peace of the
world. The list of the twenty-eight nations entering the World War and
their populations follow:

  Countries            Population

  United States       110,000,000
  Austria-Hungary      50,000,000
  Belgium               8,000,000
  Bulgaria              5,000,000
  Brazil               23,000,000
  China               420,000,000
  Costa Rica              425,000
  Cuba                  2,500,000
  France[A]            90,000,000
  Guatemala             2,000,000
  Germany              67,000,000
  Great Britain[A]    440,000,000
  Greece                5,000,000
  Haiti                 2,000,000
  Honduras                600,000
  Italy                37,000,000
  Japan                54,000,000
  Liberia               2,000,000
  Montenegro              500,000
  Nicaragua               700,000
  Panama                  400,000
  Portugal[A]          15,000,000
  Roumania              7,500,000
  Russia              180,000,000
  San Marino               10,000
  Serbia                4,500,000
  Siam                  6,000,000
  Turkey               42,000,000
                     ------------
      Total         1,575,135,000

  [A] Including colonies.

The following nations, with their populations, took no part in the
World War:

  Countries            Population

  Abyssinia             8,000,000
  Afghanistan           6,000,000
  Andorra                   6,000
  Argentina             8,000,000
  Bhutan                  250,000
  Chile                 5,000,000
  Colombia              5,000,000
  Denmark               3,000,000
  Ecuador               1,500,000
  Mexico               15,000,000
  Monaco                   20,000
  Nepal                 4,000,000
  Holland[B]           40,000,000
  Norway                2,500,000
  Paraguay                800,000
  Persia                9,000,000
  Peru                  3,400,000
  Salvador              1,250,000
  Spain                20,000,000
  Sweden                5,500,000
  Switzerland           3,750,000
  Uruguay               1,100,000
  Venezuela             2,800,000
                     ------------
  Total               145,876,000

  [B] Including colonies.

Never before in the history of the world were so many races and peoples
mingled in a military effort as those that came together under the
command of Marshal Foch. If we divide the human races into white,
yellow, red and black, all four were largely represented. Among the
white races there were Frenchmen, Italians, Portuguese, English,
Scottish, Welsh, Irish, Canadians, Australians, South Africans (of
both British and Dutch descent), New Zealanders; in the American army,
probably every other European nation was represented, with additional
contingents from those already named, so that every branch of the
white race figured in the ethnological total.

There were representatives of many Asiatic races, including not only
the volunteers from the native states of India, but elements from the
French colony in Cochin China, with Annam, Cambodia, Tonkin, Laos,
and Kwang Chau Wan. England and France both contributed many African
tribes, including Arabs from Algeria and Tunis, Senegalese, Saharans,
and many of the South African races. The red races of North America
were represented in the armies of both Canada and the United States,
while the Maoris, Samoans, and other Polynesian races were likewise
represented. And as, in the American Army, there were men of German,
Austrian, and Hungarian descent, and, in all probability, contingents
also of Bulgarian and Turkish blood, it may be said that Foch commanded
an army representing the whole human race, united in defense of the
ideals of the Allies.

  [Illustration: TERRITORIES OCCUPIED BY THE ALLIES UNDER THE ARMISTICE
  OF NOVEMBER 11, 1918

Dotted area, invaded territory of Belgium, France, Luxembourg and
Alsace-Lorraine to be evacuated in fourteen days; area in small
squares, part of Germany west of the Rhine to be evacuated in
twenty-five days and occupied by Allied and U. S. troops; lightly
shaded area to east of Rhine, neutral zone; black semi-circles,
bridge-heads of thirty kilometers radius in the neutral zone to be
occupied by Allied armies.]

It will be seen that more than ten times the number of neutral persons
were engulfed in the maelstrom of war. Millions of these suffered
from it during the entire period of the conflict, four years three
months and fifteen days, a total of 1,567 days. For almost four years
Germany rolled up a record of victories on land and of piracies on and
under the seas.

Little by little, day after day, piracies dwindled as the murderous
submarine was mastered and its menace strangled. On the land, the
Allies, under the matchless leadership of Marshal Ferdinand Foch and
the generous co-operation of Americans, British, French and Italians,
under the great Generals Pershing, Haig, Pétain and Diaz, wrested the
initiative from von Hindenburg and Ludendorf, late in July, 1918. Then,
in one hundred and fifteen days of wonderful strategy and the fiercest
fighting the world has ever witnessed, Foch and the Allies closed upon
the Germanic armies the jaws of a steel trap. A series of brilliant
maneuvers dating from the battle of Château-Thierry in which the
Americans checked the Teutonic rush, resulted in the defeat and rout on
all the fronts of the Teutonic commands.

In that titanic effort, America’s share was that of the final deciding
factor. A nation unjustly titled the “Dollar Nation,” believed by
Germany and by other countries to be soft, selfish and wasteful, became
over night hard as tempered steel, self-sacrificing with an altruism
that inspired the world and thrifty beyond all precedent in order that
not only its own armies but the armies of the Allies might be fed and
munitioned.

Leading American thought and American action, President Wilson stood
out as the prophet of the democracies of the world. Not only did he
inspire America and the Allies to a military and naval effort beyond
precedent, but he inspired the civilian populations of the world to
extraordinary effort, efforts that eventually won the war. For the
decision was gained quite as certainly on the wheat fields of Western
America, in the shops and the mines and the homes of America as it was
upon the battlefield.

This effort came in response to the following appeal by the President:

  These, then, are the things we must do, and do well, besides
  fighting--the things without which mere fighting would be fruitless:

  We must supply abundant food for ourselves and for our armies, and
  our seamen not only, but also for a large part of the nations with
  whom we have now made common cause, in whose support and by whose
  sides we shall be fighting;

  We must supply ships by the hundreds out of our shipyards to carry
  to the other side of the sea, submarines or no submarines, what will
  every day be needed there; and--

  Abundant materials out of our fields and our mines and our factories
  with which not only to clothe and equip our own forces on land and
  sea but also to clothe and support our people for whom the gallant
  fellows under arms can no longer work, to help clothe and equip the
  armies with which we are co-operating in Europe, and to keep the
  looms and manufactories there in raw material;

  Coal to keep the fires going in ships at sea and in the furnaces of
  hundreds of factories across the sea;

  Steel out of which to make arms and ammunition both here and there;

  Rails for worn-out railways back of the fighting fronts;

  Locomotives and rolling stock to take the place of those every day
  going to pieces;

  Everything with which the people of England and France and Italy and
  Russia have usually supplied themselves, but cannot now afford the
  men, the materials, or the machinery to make.

  I particularly appeal to the farmers of the South to plant abundant
  foodstuffs as well as cotton. They can show their patriotism in no
  better or more convincing way than by resisting the great temptation
  of the present price of cotton and helping, helping upon a large
  scale, to feed the nation and the peoples, everywhere who are
  fighting for their liberties and for our own. The variety of their
  crops will be the visible measure of their comprehension of their
  national duty.

The response was amazing in its enthusiastic and general compliance.
No autocracy issuing a ukase could have been obeyed so explicitly. Not
only did the various classes of workers and individuals observe the
President’s suggestions to the letter, but they yielded up individual
right after right in order that the war work of the government might
be expedited. Extraordinary powers and functions were granted by the
people through Congress, and it was not until peace was declared that
these rights and powers returned to the people.

These governmental activities ceased functioning after the war:

  Food administration;

  Fuel administration;

  Espionage act;

  War trade board;

  Alien property custodian (with extension of time for certain duties);

  Agricultural stimulation;

  Housing construction (except for ship-builders);

  Control of telegraphs and telephones;

  Export control.

These functions were extended:

  Control over railroads: to cease within twenty-one months after the
    proclamation of peace.

  The War Finance Corporation: to cease to function six months after
    the war, with further time for liquidation.

  The Capital Issues Committee: to terminate in six months after the
    peace proclamation.

  The Aircraft Board: to end in six months after peace was proclaimed;
    and the government operation of ships, within five years after the
    war was officially ended.

  [Illustration: THE “TIGER OF FRANCE”

  Georges Benjamin Eugene Clemenceau, world-famous Premier of France,
  who by his inspiring leadership maintained the magnificent morale of
  his countrymen in the face of the terrific assaults of the enemy.]

President Wilson, generally acclaimed as the leader of the world’s
democracies, phrased for civilization the arguments against autocracy
in the great peace conference after the war. The President headed the
American delegation to that conclave of world re-construction. With him
as delegates to the conference were Robert Lansing, Secretary of State;
Henry White, former Ambassador to France and Italy; Edward M. House and
General Tasker H. Bliss.

Representing American Labor at the International Labor conference
held in Paris simultaneously with the Peace Conference were Samuel
Gompers, president of the American Federation of Labor; William Green,
secretary-treasurer of the United Mine Workers of America; John R.
Alpine, president of the Plumbers’ Union; James Duncan, president
of the International Association of Granite Cutters; Frank Duffy,
president of the United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners, and
Frank Morrison, secretary of the American Federation of Labor.

Estimating the share of each Allied nation in the great victory,
mankind will conclude that the heaviest cost in proportion to pre-war
population and treasure was paid by the nations that first felt the
shock of war, Belgium, Serbia, Poland and France. All four were the
battle-grounds of huge armies, oscillating in a bloody frenzy over once
fertile fields and once prosperous towns.

Belgium, with a population of 8,000,000, had a casualty list of more
than 350,000; France, with its casualties of 4,000,000 out of a
population (including its colonies) of 90,000,000, is really the martyr
nation of the world. Her gallant poilus showed the world how cheerfully
men may die in defense of home and liberty. Huge Russia, including
hapless Poland, had a casualty list of 7,000,000 out of its entire
population of 180,000,000. The United States out of a population of
110,000,000 had a casualty list of 236,117 for nineteen months of war;
of these 53,169 were killed or died of disease; 179,625 were wounded;
and 3,323 prisoners or missing.

To the glory of Great Britain must be recorded the enormous effort
made by its people, showing through operations of its army and navy.
The British Empire, including the Colonies, had a casualty list of
3,049,992 men out of a total population of 440,000,000. Of these
658,665 were killed; 2,032,122 were wounded, and 359,204 were reported
missing. It raised an army of 7,000,000, and fought seven separate
foreign campaigns, in France, Italy, Dardanelles, Mesopotamia,
Macedonia, East Africa and Egypt. It raised its navy personnel from
115,000 to 450,000 men. Co-operating with its allies on the sea, it
destroyed approximately one hundred and fifty German and Austrian
submarines. It aided materially the American navy and transport service
in sending overseas the great American army whose coming decided the
war. The British navy and transport service during the war made the
following record of transportation and convoy:

Twenty million men, 2,000,000 horses, 130,000,000 tons of food,
25,000,000 tons of explosives and supplies, 51,000,000 tons of oil and
fuels, 500,000 vehicles. In 1917 alone 7,000,000 men, 500,000 animals,
200,000 vehicles and 9,500,000 tons of stores were conveyed to the
several war fronts.

The German losses were estimated at 1,588,000 killed or died of
disease; 4,000,000 wounded; and over 750,000 prisoners and missing.

A tabulation of the estimates of casualties and the money cost of
the war reveals the enormous price paid by humanity to convince a
military-mad Germanic caste that Right and not Might must hereafter
rule the world. These figures do not include Serbian losses, which are
unavailable. Following is the tabulation:

THE ENTENTE ALLIES

  Russia                         7,000,000
  France                         4,000,000
  British Empire (official)      3,049,992
  Italy                          1,000,000
  Belgium                          350,000
  Roumania                         200,000
  United States (official)         236,117
                                ----------
    Total                       15,836,109

THE CENTRAL POWERS

  Germany                        6,338,000
  Austria-Hungary                4,500,000
  Turkey                           750,000
  Bulgaria                         200,000
                                ----------
    Total                       11,788,000

Grand total of estimated casualties, 27,624,109, of which the dead
alone number perhaps 7,000,000.

THE ENTENTE ALLIES

  Russia                   $30,000,000,000
  Britain                   52,000,000,000
  France                    32,000,000,000
  United States             40,000,000,000
  Italy                     12,000,000,000
  Roumania                   3,000,000,000
  Serbia                     3,000,000,000
                          ----------------
    Total                 $172,000,000,000

THE CENTRAL POWERS

  Germany                  $45,000,000,000
  Austria-Hungary           25,000,000,000
  Turkey                     5,000,000,000
  Bulgaria                   2,000,000,000
                          ----------------
    Total                  $77,000,000,000

Grand total of estimated cost in money, $249,000,000,000.

Was the cost too heavy? Was the price of international liberty paid
in human lives and in sacrifices untold too great for the peace that
followed?

Even the most practical of money changers, the most sentimental
pacifist, viewing the cost in connection with the liberation of whole
nations, with the spread of enlightened liberty through oppressed and
benighted lands, with the destruction of autocracy, of the military
caste, and of Teutonic kultur in its materialistic aspect, must agree
that the blood was well shed, the treasure well spent.

Millions of gallant, eager youths learned how to die fearlessly and
gloriously. They died to teach vandal nations that nevermore will
humanity permit the exploitation of peoples for militaristic purposes.

As Milton, the great philosopher poet, phrased the lesson taught to
Germany on the fields of France:

  They err who count it glorious to subdue
  By conquest far and wide, to overrun
  Large countries, and in field great battles win,
  Great cities by assault; what do these worthies
  But rob and spoil, burn, slaughter, and enslave
  Peaceable nations, neighboring or remote
  Made captive, yet deserving freedom more
  Than those their conquerors, who leave behind
  Nothing but ruin wheresoe’er they rove
  And all the flourishing works of peace destroy.




CHAPTER II

THE WORLD SUDDENLY TURNED UPSIDE DOWN


Demoralization, like the black plague of the middle ages, spread in
every direction immediately following the first overt acts of war.
Men who were millionaires at nightfall awoke the next morning to find
themselves bankrupt through depreciation of their stock-holdings.
Prosperous firms of importers were put out of business. International
commerce was dislocated to an extent unprecedented in history.

The greatest of hardships immediately following the war, however, were
visited upon those who unhappily were caught on their vacations or on
their business trips within the area affected by the war. Not only men,
but women and children, were subjected to privations of the severest
character. Notes which had been negotiable, paper money of every
description, and even silver currency suddenly became of little value.
Americans living in hotels and pensions facing this sudden shrinkage in
their money, were compelled to leave the roofs that had sheltered them.
That which was true of Americans was true of all other nationalities,
so that every embassy and the office of every consul became a miniature
Babel of excited, distressed humanity.

The sudden seizure of railroads for war purposes in Germany, France,
Austria and Russia, cut off thousands of travelers in villages that
were almost inaccessible. Europeans being comparatively close to their
homes, were not in straits as severe as the Americans whose only hope
for aid lay in the speedy arrival of American gold. Prices of food
soared beyond all precedent and many of these hapless strangers went
under. Paris, the brightest and gayest city in Europe, suddenly became
the most sombre of dwelling places. No traffic was permitted on the
highways at night. No lights were permitted and all the cafés were
closed at eight o’clock. The gay capital was placed under iron military
rule.

Seaports, and especially the pleasure resorts in France, Belgium and
England, were placed under a military supervision. Visitors were
ordered to return to their homes and every resort was shrouded with
darkness at night. The records of those early days are filled with
stories of dramatic happenings.

On the night of July 31st Jean Leon Jaurès, the famous leader of French
Socialists, was assassinated while dining in a small restaurant near
the Paris Bourse. His assassin was Raoul Villein. Jaurès had been
endeavoring to accomplish a union of French and German Socialists with
the aim of preventing the war. The object of the assassination appeared
to have been wholly political.

On the same day stock exchanges throughout the United States were
closed, following the example of European stock exchanges. Ship
insurance soared to prohibitive figures. Reservists of the French and
German armies living outside of their native land were called to the
colors and their homeward rush still further complicated transportation
for civilians. All the countries of Europe clamored for gold. North
and South America complied with the demand by sending cargoes of the
precious metal overseas. The German ship Kron Prinzessin with a cargo
of gold, attempted to make the voyage to Hamburg, but a wireless
warning that Allied cruisers were waiting for it off the Grand Banks of
Newfoundland, compelled the big ship to turn back to safety in America.

Channel boats bearing American refugees from the Continent to London
were described as floating hells. London was excited over the war and
holiday spirit, and overrun with five thousand citizens of the United
States tearfully pleading with the American Ambassador for money for
transportation home or assurances of personal safety.

  [Illustration: WHERE THE WORLD WAR BEGAN]

The condition of the terror-stricken tourists fleeing to the friendly
shores of England from Continental countries crowded with soldiers
dragging in their wake heavy guns, resulted in an extraordinary
gathering of two thousand Americans at a hotel one afternoon and the
formation of a preliminary organization to afford relief. Some people
who attended the meeting were already beginning to feel the pinch of
want with little prospects of immediate succor. One man and wife, with
four children, had six cents when he appealed to Ambassador Page after
an exciting escape from German territory.

Oscar Straus, worth ten millions, struck London with nine dollars.
Although he had letters of credit for five thousand, he was unable
to cash them in Vienna. Women hugging newspaper bundles containing
expensive Paris frocks and millinery were herded in third-class
carriages and compelled to stand many hours. They reached London
utterly fatigued and unkempt, but mainly cheerful, only to find the
hotels choked with fellow countrymen fortunate to reach there sooner.

The Ambassador was harassed by anxious women and children who asked
many absurd questions which he could not answer. He said:

“The appeals of these people are most distressing. They are very much
excited, and no small wonder. I regret I have no definite news of the
prospects or plans of the government for relief. I have communicated
their condition to the Department of State and expect a response and
assurances of coming aid as soon as possible. That the government will
act I have not the slightest doubt. I am confident that Washington will
do everything in her power for relief. How soon, I cannot tell. I have
heard many distressing tales during the last forty-eight hours.”

A crowd filled the Ambassador’s office on the first floor of the
flat building, in Victoria Street, which was mainly composed of
women, school teachers, art students, and other persons doing Europe
on a shoestring. Many were entirely out of money and with limited
securities, which were not negotiable.

The action of the British Government extending the bank holiday till
Thursday of that week was discouraging news for the new arrivals from
the Continent, as it was uncertain whether the express and steamship
companies would open in the morning for the cashing of checks and the
delivery of mail, as was announced the previous Saturday.

Doctors J. Riddle Goffe, of New York; Frank F. Simpson, of Pittsburgh;
Arthur D. Ballon of Vistaburg, Mich., and B. F. Martin, of Chicago,
formed themselves into a committee, and asked the co-operation of the
press in America to bring about adequate assistance for the marooned
Americans, and to urge the bankers of the United States to insist on
their letters of credit and travelers’ checks being honored so far as
possible by the agents in Europe upon whom they were drawn.

Dr. Martin and Dr. Simpson, who left London on Saturday for Switzerland
to fetch back a young American girl, were unable to get beyond Paris,
and they returned to London. Everywhere they found trains packed with
refugees whose only object in life apparently was to reach the channel
boats, accepting cheerfully the discomforts of those vessels if only
able to get out of the war.

Rev. J. P. Garfield, of Claremore, N. H., gave the following account of
his experiences in Holland:

“On sailing from the Hook of Holland near midnight we pulled out just
as the boat train from The Hague arrived. The steamer paused, but as
she was filled to her capacity she later continued on her voyage,
leaving fully two hundred persons marooned on the wharf.

“Our discomforts while crossing the North Sea were great. Every seat
was filled with sleepers, the cabins were given to women and children.
The crowd, as a rule, was helpful and kindly, the single men carrying
the babies and people lending money to those without funds. Despite the
refugee conditions prevailing it was noticeable that many women on the
Hook wharf clung tenaciously to band boxes containing Parisian hats.”

Travelers from Cologne said that searchlights were operated from the
tops of the hotels all night searching for airplanes, and machine guns
were mounted on the famous Cologne Cathedral. They also reported that
tourists were refused hotel accommodations at Frankfort because they
were without cash.

Men, women and children sat in the streets all night. The trains were
stopped several miles from the German frontier and the passengers,
especially the women and children, suffered great hardships being
forced to continue their journey on foot.

Passengers arriving at London from Montreal on the Cunard Line steamer
Andania, bound for Southampton, reported the vessel was met at sea by
a British torpedo boat and ordered by wireless to stop. The liner then
was led into Plymouth as a matter of precaution against mines. Plymouth
was filled with soldiers, and searchlights were seen constantly
flashing about the harbor.

Otis B. Kent, an attorney for the Interstate Commerce Commission, of
Washington, arrived in London after an exciting journey from Petrograd.
Unable to find accommodations at a hotel he slept on the railway
station floor. He said:

“I had been on a trip to Sweden to see the midnight sun. I did not
realize the gravity of the situation until I saw the Russian fleet
cleared for action. This was only July 26th, at Kronstadt, where the
shipyards were working overtime.

“I arrived at the Russian capital on the following day. Enormous
demonstrations were taking place. I was warned to get out and left on
the night of the 28th for Berlin. I saw Russian soldiers drilling at
the stations and artillery constantly on the move.

“At Berlin I was warned to keep off the streets for fear of being
mistaken for an Englishman. At Hamburg the number of warnings was
increased. Two Russians who refused to rise in a café when the German
anthem was played were attacked and badly beaten. I also saw two
Englishmen attacked in the street, but they finally were rescued by the
police.

“There was a harrowing scene when the Hamburg-American Line steamer
Imperator canceled its sailing. She left stranded three thousand
passengers, most of them short of money, and the women wailing. About
one hundred and fifty of us were given passage in the second class of
the American Line steamship Philadelphia, for which I was offered $400
by a speculator.

“The journey to Flushing was made in a packed train, its occupants
lacking sleep and food. No trouble was encountered on the frontier.”

Theodore Hetzler, of the Fifth Avenue Bank, was appointed chairman
of the meeting for preliminary relief of the stranded tourists, and
committees were named to interview officials of the steamship companies
and of the hotels, to search for lost baggage, to make arrangements for
the honoring of all proper checks and notes, and to confer with the
members of the American embassy.

Oscar Straus, who arrived from Paris, said that the United States
embassy there was working hard to get Americans out of France. Great
enthusiasm prevailed at the French capital, he said, owing to the
announcement that the United States Government was considering a plan
to send transports to take Americans home.

The following committees were appointed at the meeting:

Finance--Theodore Hetzler, Fred I. Kent and James G. Cannon;
Transportation--Joseph F. Day, Francis M. Weld and George D. Smith, all
of New York; Diplomatic--Oscar S. Straus, Walter L. Fisher and James
Byrne; Hotels--L. H. Armour, of Chicago, and Thomas J. Shanley, New
York.

The committee established headquarters where Americans might register
and obtain assistance. Chandler Anderson, a member of the International
Claims Commission, arrived in London from Paris. He said he had been
engaged with the work of the commission at Versailles, when he was
warned by the American embassy that he had better leave France. He
acted promptly on this advice and the commission was adjourned until
after the war. Mr. Anderson had to leave his baggage behind him because
the railway company would not register it. He said the city of Paris
presented a strange contrast to the ordinary animation prevailing
there. Most of the shops were closed. There were no taxis in the
streets, and only a few vehicles drawn by horses.

The armored cruiser Tennessee, converted for the time being into a
treasure ship, left New York on the night of August 6th, 1914, to
carry $7,500,000 in gold to the many thousand Americans who were in
want in European countries. Included in the $7,500,000 was $2,500,000
appropriated by the government. Private consignments in gold in sums
from $1,000 to $5,000 were accepted by Colonel Smith, of the army
quartermaster’s department, who undertook their delivery to Americans
in Paris and other European ports.

The cruiser carried as passengers Ambassador Willard, who returned to
his post at Madrid, and army and naval officers assigned as military
observers in Europe. On the return trip accommodations for 200
Americans were available.

The dreadnaught Florida, after being hastily coaled and provisioned,
left the Brooklyn Navy Yard under sealed orders at 9.30 o’clock the
morning of August 6th and proceeded to Tompkinsville, where she dropped
anchor near the Tennessee.

The Florida was sent to protect the neutrality of American ports and
prohibit supplies to belligerent ships. Secretary Daniels ordered her
to watch the port of New York and sent the Mayflower to Hampton Roads.
Destroyers guarded ports along the New England coast and those at
Lewes, Del., to prevent violations of neutrality at Philadelphia and
in that territory. Any vessel that attempted to sail for a belligerent
port without clearance papers was boarded by American officials.

The Texas and Louisiana, at Vera Cruz, and the Minnesota, at Tampico,
were ordered to New York, and Secretary Daniels announced that other
American vessels would be ordered north as fast as room could be found
for them in navy yard docks.

At wireless stations, under the censorship ordered by the President, no
code messages were allowed in any circumstances. Messages which might
help any of the belligerents in any way were barred.

The torpedo-boat destroyer Warrington and the revenue cutter
Androscoggin arrived at Bar Harbor on August 6th, to enforce neutrality
regulations and allowed no foreign ships to leave Frenchman’s Bay
without clearance papers. The United States cruiser Milwaukee sailed
the same day from the Puget Sound Navy Yard to form part of the coast
patrol to enforce neutrality regulations.

Arrangements were made in Paris by Myron T. Herrick, the American
Ambassador, acting under instructions from Washington, to take over
the affairs of the German embassy, while Alexander H. Thackara, the
American Consul General, looked after the affairs of the German
consulate.

President Poincaré and the members of the French cabinet later issued
a joint proclamation to the French nation in which was the phrase
“mobilization is not war.”

  [Illustration: THE RIGHT HONORABLE DAVID LLOYD GEORGE

  British Premier, who headed the coalition cabinet which carried
  England through the war to victory.]

The marching of the soldiers in the streets with the English,
Russian and French flags flying, the singing of patriotic songs and the
shouting of “On to Berlin!” were much less remarkable than the general
demeanor and cold resolution of most of the people.

The response to the order of mobilization was instant, and the stations
of all the railways, particularly those leading to the eastward,
were crowded with reservists. Many women accompanied the men until
close to the stations, where, softly crying, farewells were said. The
troop trains left at frequent intervals. All the automobile busses
disappeared, having been requisitioned by the army to carry meat, the
coachwork of the vehicles being removed and replaced with specially
designed bodies. A large number of taxicabs, private automobiles and
horses and carts also were taken over by the military for transport
purposes.

The wildest enthusiasm was manifested on the boulevards when the news
of the ordering of the mobilization became known. Bodies of men formed
into regular companies in ranks ten deep, paraded the streets waving
the tri-color and other national emblems and cheering and singing the
“Marseillaise” and the “Internationale,” at the same time throwing
their hats in the air. On the sidewalks were many weeping women and
children. All the stores and cafés were deserted.

All foreigners were compelled to leave Paris or France before the end
of the first day of mobilization by train but not by automobile. Time
tables were posted on the walls of Paris giving the times of certain
trains on which these people might leave the city.

American citizens or British subjects were allowed to remain in
France, except in the regions on the eastern frontier and near certain
fortresses, provided they made declaration to the police and obtained a
special permit.

As to Italy’s situation, Rome was quite calm and the normal aspect
made tourists decide that Italy was the safest place. Austria’s note
to Serbia was issued without consulting Italy. One point of the Triple
Alliance provided that no member should take action in the Balkans
before an agreement with the other allies. Such an agreement did not
take place. The alliance was of defensive, not aggressive, character
and could not force an ally to follow any enterprise taken on the sole
account and without a notice, as such action taken by Austria against
Serbia. It was felt even then that Italy would eventually cast its lot
with the Entente Allies.

Secretary of the Treasury William G. McAdoo; John Skelton Williams,
Comptroller of the Currency; Charles S. Hamblin and William P. G.
Harding, members of the Federal Reserve Board, went to New York early
in August, 1914, where they discussed relief measures with a group of
leading bankers at what was regarded as the most momentous conference
of the kind held in the country in recent years.

The New York Clearing House Committee, on August 2d, called a meeting
of the Clearing House Association, to arrange for the immediate
issuance of clearing house certificates. Among those at the conference
were J. P. Morgan and his partner, Henry P. Davison; Frank A.
Vanderlip, president of the National City Bank, and A. Barton Hepburn,
chairman of the Chase National Bank.




CHAPTER III

WHY THE WORLD WENT TO WAR


While it is true that the war was conceived in Berlin, it is none
the less true that it was born in the Balkans. It is necessary in
order that we may view with correct perspective the background of
the World War, that we gain some notion of the Balkan States and the
complications entering into their relations. These countries have been
the adopted children of the great European powers during generations
of rulers. Russia assumed guardianship of the nations having a
preponderance of Slavic blood; Roumania with its Latin consanguinities
was close to France and Italy; Bulgaria, Greece, and Balkan Turkey were
debatable regions wherein the diplomats of the rival nations secured
temporary victories by devious methods.

The Balkans have fierce hatreds and have been the site of sudden
historic wars. At the time of the declaration of the World War, the
Balkan nations were living under the provisions of the Treaty of
Bucharest, dated August 10, 1913. Greece, Roumania, Bulgaria, Serbia
and Montenegro were signers, and Turkey acquiesced in its provisions.

The assassination at Sarajevo had sent a convulsive shudder throughout
the Balkans. The reason lay in the century-old antagonism between the
Slav and the Teuton. Serbia, Montenegro and Russia had never forgiven
Austria for seizing Bosnia and Herzegovina and making these Slavic
people subjects of the Austrian crown. Bulgaria, Roumania and Turkey
remained cold at the news of the assassination. German diplomacy was
in the ascendant at these courts and the prospect of war with Germany
as their great ally presented no terrors for them. The sympathies of
the people of Greece were with Serbia, but the Grecian Court, because
the Queen of Greece was the only sister of the German Kaiser, was
whole heartedly with Austria. Perhaps at the first the Roumanians were
most nearly neutral. They believed strongly that each of the small
nations of the Balkan region as well as all of the small nations that
had been absorbed but had not been digested by Austria, should cut
itself from the leading strings held by the large European powers.
There was a distinct undercurrent for a federation resembling that of
the United States of America between these peoples. This was expressed
most clearly by M. Jonesco, leader of the Liberal party of Roumania
and generally recognized as the ablest statesman of middle Europe. He
declared:

  [Illustration: PROVISIONS OF THE TREATY OF BUCHAREST, 1913]

“I always believed, and still believe, that the Balkan States cannot
secure their future otherwise than by a close understanding among
themselves, whether this understanding shall or shall not take the form
of a federation. No one of the Balkan States is strong enough to resist
the pressure from one or another of the European powers.

  [Illustration: © _Underwood and Underwood, N. Y._

  FRANCIS JOSEPH I OF AUSTRIA, THE “OLD EMPEROR,” ON A STATE OCCASION

  Francis Joseph died before the war had settled the fate of the
  Hapsburgs. The end came on November 21, 1916, in the sixty-eighth
  year of his reign. His life was tragic. He lived to see his brother
  executed, his Queen assassinated, and his only son a suicide, with
  always before him the specter of the disintegration of his many-raced
  empire.]

“For this reason I am deeply grieved to see in the Balkan coalition of
1912 Roumania not invited. If Roumania had taken part in the first one,
we should not have had the second. I did all that was in my power and
succeeded in preventing the war between Roumania and the Balkan League
in the winter of 1912-13.

“I risked my popularity, and I do not feel sorry for it. I employed all
my efforts to prevent the second Balkan war, which, as is well known,
was profitable to us. I repeatedly told the Bulgarians that they ought
not to enter it because in that case we would enter it too. But I was
not successful in my efforts.

“During the second Balkan war I did all in my power to end it as
quickly as possible. At the conference at Bucharest I made efforts,
as Mr. Pashich and Mr. Venizelos know very well, to secure for beaten
Bulgaria the best terms. My object was to obtain a new coalition of
all the Balkan States, including Roumania. Had I succeeded in this the
situation would be much better. No reasonable man will deny that the
Balkan States are neutralizing each other at the present time, which
in itself makes the whole situation all the more miserable.

“In October, 1913, when I succeeded in facilitating the conclusion of
peace between Greece and Turkey, I was pursuing the same object of the
Balkan coalition. On my return from Athens I endeavored, though without
success, to put the Greco-Turkish relations on a basis of friendship,
being convinced that the well-understood interest of both countries
lies not only in friendly relations, but even in an alliance between
them.

“The dissensions that exist between the Balkan States can be settled in
a friendly way without war. The best moment for this would be after the
general war, when the map of Europe will be remade. The Balkan country
which would start war against another Balkan country would commit, not
only a crime against her own future, but an act of folly as well.

“The destiny and future of the Balkan States, and of all the small
European peoples as well, will not be regulated by fratricidal wars,
but, with this great European struggle, the real object of which is to
settle the question whether Europe shall enter an era of justice, and
therefore happiness for the small peoples, or whether we will face a
period of oppression more or less gilt-edged. And as I always believed
that wisdom and truth will triumph in the end, I want to believe, too,
that, in spite of the pessimistic news reaching me from the different
sides of the Balkan countries, there will be no war among them in
order to justify those who do not believe in the vitality of the small
peoples.”

The conference at Rome, April 10, 1918, to settle outstanding questions
between the Italians and the Slavs of the Adriatic, drew attention to
those Slavonic peoples in Europe who were under non-Slavonic rule.
At the beginning of the war there were three great Slavonic groups
in Europe: First, the Russians with the Little Russians, speaking
languages not more different than the dialect of Yorkshire is from the
dialect of Devonshire; second, a central group, including the Poles,
the Czechs or Bohemians, the Moravians, and Slovaks, this group thus
being separated under the four crowns of Russia, Germany, Austria and
Hungary; the third, the southern group, included the Sclavonians,
the Croatians, the Dalmatians, Bosnians, Herzegovinians, the Slavs,
generally called Slovenes, in the western part of Austria, down to
Gorizia, and also the two independent kingdoms of Montenegro and Serbia.

Like the central group, this southern group of Slavs was divided
under four crowns, Hungary, Austria, Montenegro, and Serbia; but, in
spite of the fact that half belong to the Western and half to the
Eastern Church, they are all essentially the same people, though
with considerable infusion of non-Slavonic blood, there being a good
deal of Turkish blood in Bosnia and Herzegovina. The languages,
however, are practically identical, formed largely of pure Slavonic
materials, and, curiously, much more closely connected with the eastern
Slav group--Russia and Little Russia--than with the central group,
Polish and Bohemian. A Russian of Moscow will find it much easier
to understand a Slovene from Gorizia than a Pole from Warsaw. The
Ruthenians, in southern Galicia and Bukowina, are identical in race and
speech with the Little Russians of Ukrainia.

Of the central group, the Poles have generally inclined to Austria,
which has always supported the Polish landlords of Galicia against
the Ruthenian peasantry; while the Czechs have been not so much
anti-Austrian as anti-German. Indeed, the Hapsburg rulers have again
and again played these Slavs off against their German subjects. It was
the Southern Slav question as affecting Serbia and Austria, that gave
the pretext for the present war. The central Slav question affecting
the destiny of the Poles--was a bone of contention between Austria
and Germany. It is the custom to call the Southern Slavs “Jugoslavs”
from the Slav word Yugo, “south,” but as this is a concession to
German transliteration many prefer to write the word “Yugoslav,” which
represents its pronunciation. The South Slav question was created by
the incursions of three Asiatic peoples--Huns, Magyars, Turks--who
broke up the originally continuous Slav territory that ran from the
White Sea to the confines of Greece and the Adriatic.

  [Illustration: THE MIXTURE OF RACES IN SOUTH CENTRAL EUROPE]

This was the complex of nationalities, the ferment of races existing
in 1914. Out of the hatreds engendered by the domination over the
liberty-loving Slavic peoples by an arrogant Teutonic minority grew the
assassinations at Sarajevo. These crimes were the expression of hatred
not for the heir apparent of Austria but for the Hapsburgs and their
Germanic associates.

By a twist of the wheel of fate, the same Slavic peoples whose
determination to rid themselves of the Teutonic yoke, started the war,
also bore rather more than their share in the swift-moving events that
decided and closed the war.

Russia, the dying giant among the great nations, championed the Slavic
peoples at the beginning of the war. It entered the conflict in aid of
little Serbia, but at the end Russia bowed to Germany in the infamous
peace treaty at Brest-Litovsk. Thereafter during the last months of
the war Russia was virtually an ally of its ancient enemy, Turkey,
the “Sick Man of Europe,” and the central German empires. With these
allies the Bolshevik government of Russia attempted to head off the
Czecho-Slovak regiments that had been captured by Russia during its
drive into Austria and had been imprisoned in Siberia. After the peace
consummated at Brest-Litovsk, these regiments determined to fight on
the side of the Allies and endeavored to make their way to the western
front.

No war problems were more difficult than those of the Czecho-Slovaks.
Few have been handled so masterfully. Surrounded by powerful enemies
which for centuries have been bent on destroying every trace of Slavic
culture, they had learned how to defend themselves against every trick
or scheme of the brutal Germans.

The Czecho-Slovak plan in Russia was of great value to the Allies
all over the world, and was put at their service by Professor Thomas
G. Masaryk. He went to Russia when everything was adrift and got
hold of Bohemian prisoners here and there and organized them into a
compact little army of 50,000 to 60,000 men. Equipped and fed, he
moved them to whatever point had most power to thoroughly disrupt the
German plans. They did much to check the German army for months. They
resolutely refused to take any part in Russian political affairs, and
when it seemed no longer possible to work effectively in Russia, this
remarkable little band started on a journey all round the world to get
to the western front. They loyally gave up most of their arms under
agreement with Lenine and Trotzky that they might peacefully proceed
out of Russia via Vladivostok.

While they were carrying out their part of the agreement, and well on
the way, they were surprised by telegrams from Lenine and Trotzky to
the Soviets in Siberia ordering them to take away their arms and intern
them.

The story of what occurred then was told by two American engineers,
Emerson and Hawkins, who, on the way to Ambassador Francis, and not
being able to reach Bologda, joined a band of four or five thousand.
The engineers were with them three months, while they were making it
safe along the lines of the railroad for the rest of the Czecho-Slovaks
to get out, and incidentally for Siberians to resume peaceful
occupations. They were also supported by old railway organizations
which had stuck bravely to them without wages and which every little
while were “shot up” by the Bolsheviki.

Distress in Russia would have been much more intense had it not been
for the loyalty of the railway men in sticking to their tasks. Some
American engineers at Irkutsk, on a peaceful journey, out of Russia,
on descending from the cars were met with a demand to surrender, and
shots from machine guns. Some, fortunately, had kept hand grenades, and
with these and a few rifles went straight at the machine guns. Although
outnumbered, the attackers took the guns and soon afterward took the
town. The Czecho-Slovaks, in the beginning almost unarmed, went against
great odds and won for themselves the right to be considered a nation.

Seeing the treachery of Lenine and Trotzky, they went back toward the
west and made things secure for their men left behind. They took town
after town with the arms they first took away from the Bolsheviki and
Germans; but in every town they immediately set up a government, with
all the elements of normal life. They established police and sanitary
systems, opened hospitals, and had roads repaired, leaving a handful
of men in the midst of enemies to carry on the plans of their leaders.
American engineers speaking of the cleanliness of the Czecho-Slovak
army, said that they lived like Spartans.

The whole story is a remarkable evidence of the struggle of these
little people for self-government.

The emergence of the Czecho-Slovak nation has been one of the most
remarkable and noteworthy features of the war. Out of the confusion of
the situation, with the possibility of the resurrection of oppressed
peoples, something of the dignity of old Bohemia was comprehended,
and it was recognized that the Czechs were to be rescued from Austria
and the Slovaks from Hungary, and united in one country with entire
independence. This was undoubtedly due, in large measure, to the
activities of Professor Masaryk, the president of the National
Executive Council of the Czecho-Slovaks. His four-year exile in the
United States had the establishment of the new nation as its fruit.

Professor Masaryk called attention to the fact that there is a
peculiar discrepancy between the number of states in Europe and the
number of nationalities--twenty-seven states to seventy nationalities.
He explained, also, that almost all the states are mixed, from the
point of nationality. From the west of Europe to the east, this is
found to be true, and the farther east one goes the more mixed do the
states become. Austria is the most mixed of all the states. There is
no Austrian language, but there are nine languages, and six smaller
nations or remnants of nations. In all of Germany there are eight
nationalities besides the Germans, who have been independent, and who
have their own literature. Turkey is an anomaly, a combination of
various nations overthrown and kept down.

Since the eighteenth century there has been a continuing strong
movement from each nation to have its own state. Because of the mixed
peoples, there is much confusion. There are Roumanians in Austria, but
there is a kingdom of Roumania. There are Southern Slavs, but there
are also Serbia and Montenegro. It is natural that the Southern Slavs
should want to be united as one state. So it is with Italy.

There was no justice in Poland being separated in three parts to serve
the dynasties of Prussia, Russia and Austria. The Czecho-Slovaks of
Austria and Hungary claimed a union. The national union consists in an
endeavor to make the suppressed nations free, to unite them in their
own states, and to readjust the states that exist; to force Austria and
Prussia to give up the states that should be free.

In the future, said Doctor Masaryk, there are to be sharp ethnological
boundaries. The Czecho-Slovaks will guarantee the minorities absolute
equality, but they will keep the German part of their country, because
there are many Bohemians in it, and they do not trust the Germans.




CHAPTER IV

THE PLOTTER BEHIND THE SCENE


One factor alone caused the great war. It was not the assassination
at Sarajevo, not the Slavic ferment of anti-Teutonism in Austria
and the Balkans. The only cause of the world’s greatest war was the
determination of the German High Command and the powerful circle
surrounding it that “_Der Tag_” had arrived. The assassination at
Sarajevo was only the peg for the pendant of war. Another peg would
have been found inevitably had not the projection of that assassination
presented itself as the excuse.

Germany’s military machine was ready. A gray-green uniform that at
a distance would fade into misty obscurity had been devised after
exhaustive experiments by optical, dye and cloth experts co-operating
with the military high command. These uniforms had been standardized
and fitted for the millions of men enrolled in Germany’s regular and
reserve armies. Rifles, great pyramids of munitions, field kitchens,
traveling post-offices, motor lorries, a network of military railways
leading to the French and Belgian border, all these and more had been
made ready. German soldiers had received instructions which enabled
each man at a signal to go to an appointed place where he found
everything in readiness for his long forced marches into the territory
of Germany’s neighbors.

More than all this, Germany’s spy system, the most elaborate and
unscrupulous in the history of mankind, had enabled the German High
Command to construct in advance of the declaration of war concrete gun
emplacements in Belgium and other invaded territory. The cellars of
dwellings and shops rented or owned by German spies were camouflaged
concrete foundations for the great guns of Austria and Germany. These
emplacements were in exactly the right position for use against the
fortresses of Germany’s foes. Advertisements and shop-signs were used
by spies as guides for the marching German armies of invasion.

  [Illustration: GERMANY’S POSSESSIONS IN AFRICA PRIOR TO 1914]

In brief, Germany had planned for war. She was approximately ready for
it. Under the shelter of such high-sounding phrases as “We demand our
place in the sun,” and “The seas must be free,” the German people were
educated into the belief that the hour of Germany’s destiny was at hand.

German psychologists, like other German scientists, had co-operated
with the imperial militaristic government for many years to bring the
Germanic mind into a condition of docility. So well did they understand
the mentality and the trends of character of the German people that it
was comparatively easy to impose upon them a militaristic system and
philosophy by which the individual yielded countless personal liberties
for the alleged good of the state. Rigorous and compulsory military
service, unquestioning adherence to the doctrine that might makes right
and a cession to “the All-Highest,” as the Emperor was styled, of
supreme powers in the state, are some of the sufferances to which the
German people submitted.

German propaganda abroad was quite as vigorous as at home, but
infinitely less successful. The German High Command did not expect
England to enter the war. It counted upon America’s neutrality with
a leaning toward Germany. It believed that German colonization in
South Africa and South America would incline these vast domains toward
friendship for the Central Empire. How mistaken the propagandists and
psychologists were events have demonstrated.

It was this dream of world-domination by Teutonic kultur that supplied
the motive leading to the world’s greatest war. Bosnia, an unwilling
province of Austria-Hungary, at one time a province of Serbia and
overwhelmingly Slavic in its population, had been seething for years
with an anti-Teutonic ferment. The Teutonic court at Vienna, leading
the minority Germanic party in Austria-Hungary, had been endeavoring
to allay the agitation among the Bosnian Slavs. In pursuance of that
policy, Archduke Francis Ferdinand, heir-presumptive to the thrones of
Austria and Hungary, and his morganatic wife, Sophia Chotek, Duchess of
Hohenberg, on June 28, 1914, visited Sarajevo, the capital of Bosnia.
On the morning of that day, while they were being driven through the
narrow streets of the ancient town, a bomb was thrown at them, but
they were uninjured. They were driven through the streets again in the
afternoon, for purpose of public display. A student, just out of his
’teens, one Gavrilo Prinzep, attacked the royal party with a magazine
pistol and killed both the Archduke and his wife.

Here was the excuse for which Germany had waited. Here was the dawn of
“The Day.” The Germanic court of Austria asserted that the crime was
the result of a conspiracy, leading directly to the Slavic court of
Serbia. The Serbians in their turn declared that they knew nothing of
the assassination. They pointed out the fact that Sophia Chotek was a
Slav, and that Francis Ferdinand was more liberal than any other member
of the Austrian royal household, and finally, that he, more than any
other member of the Austrian court, understood and respected the Slavic
character and aspirations.

At six o’clock on the evening of July 23d, Austria sent an ultimatum
to Serbia, presenting eleven demands and stipulating that categorical
replies must be delivered before six o’clock on the evening of
July 25th. Although the language in which the ultimatum was couched
was humiliating to Serbia, the answer was duly delivered within the
stipulated time.

The demands of the Austrian note in brief were as follows:

  1. The Serbian Government to give formal assurance of its
  condemnation of Serb propaganda against Austria.

  2. The next issue of the Serbian “Official Journal” was to contain a
  declaration to that effect.

  3. This declaration to express regret that Serbian officers had taken
  part in the propaganda.

  4. The Serbian Government to promise that it would proceed rigorously
  against all guilty of such activity.

  5. This declaration to be at once communicated by the King of Serbia
  to his army, and to be published in the official bulletin as an order
  of the day.

  6. All anti-Austrian publications in Serbia to be suppressed.

  7. The Serbian political party known as the “National Union” to be
  suppressed, and its means of propaganda to be confiscated.

  8. All anti-Austrian teaching in the schools of Serbia to be
  suppressed.

  9. All officers, civil and military, who might be designated by
  Austria as guilty of anti-Austrian propaganda to be dismissed by the
  Serbian Government.

  10. Austrian agents to co-operate with the Serbian Government in
  suppressing all anti-Austrian propaganda, and to take part in the
  judicial proceedings conducted in Serbia against those charged with
  complicity in the crime at Sarajevo.

  11. Serbia to explain to Austria the meaning of anti-Austrian
  utterances of Serbian officials at home and abroad, since the
  assassination.

To the first and second demands Serbia unhesitatingly assented.

To the third demand, Serbia assented, although no evidence was given to
show that Serbian officers had taken part in the propaganda.

The Serbian Government assented to the fourth, fifth, sixth, seventh
and eighth demands also.

Extraordinary as was the ninth demand, which would allow the Austrian
Government to proscribe Serbian officials, so eager for peace and
friendship was the Serbian Government that it assented to it, with the
stipulation that the Austrian Government should offer some proof of the
guilt of the proscribed officers.

The tenth demand, which in effect allowed Austrian agents to control
the police and courts of Serbia, it was not possible for Serbia
to accept without abrogating her sovereignty. However, it was not
unconditionally rejected, but the Serbian Government asked that it be
made the subject of further discussion, or be referred to arbitration.

The Serbian Government assented to the eleventh demand, on the
condition that if the explanations which would be given concerning the
alleged anti-Austrian utterances of Serbian officials would not prove
satisfactory to the Austrian Government, the matter should be submitted
to mediation or arbitration.

Behind the threat conveyed in the Austrian ultimatum was the menacing
figure of militant Germany. The veil that had hitherto concealed the
hands that worked the string, was removed when Germany, under the
pretense of localizing the quarrel to Serbian and Austrian soil,
interrogated France and England, asking them to prevent Russia from
defending Serbia in the event of an attack by Austria upon the Serbs.
England and France promptly refused to participate in a tragedy which
would deliver Serbia to Austria as Bosnia had been delivered. Russia,
bound by race and creed to Serbia, read into the ultimatum of Teutonic
kultur a determination for warfare. Mobilization of the Russian forces
along the Austrian frontier was arranged, when it was seen that
Serbia’s pacific reply to Austria’s demands would be contemptuously
disregarded by Germany and Austria.

During the days that intervened between the issuance of the ultimatum
and the actual declaration of war by Germany against Russia on
Saturday, August 1st, various sincere efforts were made to stave off
the world-shaking catastrophe. Arranged chronologically, these events
may thus be summarized: Russia, on July 24th, formally asked Austria
if she intended to annex Serbian territory by way of reprisal for the
assassination at Sarajevo. On the same day Austria replied that it had
no present intention to make such annexation. Russia then requested an
extension of the forty-eight-hour time limit named in the ultimatum.

Austria, on the morning of Saturday, July 25th, refused Russia’s
request for an extension of the period named in the ultimatum. On the
same day, the newspapers published in Petrograd printed an official
note issued by the Russian Government warning Europe generally that
Russia would not remain indifferent to the fate of Serbia. These
newspapers also printed the appeal of the Serbian Crown Prince to the
Czar dated on the preceding day, urging that Russia come to the rescue
of the menaced Serbs. Serbia’s peaceful reply surrendering on all
points except one, and agreeing to submit that to arbitration, was sent
late in the afternoon of the same day, and that night Austria declared
the reply to be unsatisfactory and withdrew its minister from Belgrade.

England commenced its attempts at pacification on the following day,
Sunday, July 26th. Sir Edward Grey spent the entire Sabbath in the
Foreign Office and personally conducted the correspondence that was
calculated to bring the dispute to a peaceful conclusion. He did
not reckon, however, with a Germany determined upon war, a Germany
whose manufacturers, ship-owners and Junkers had combined with its
militarists to achieve “Germany’s place in the sun” even though
the world would be stained in the blood of the most frightful war
this earth has ever known. Realization of this fact did not come
to Sir Edward Grey until his negotiations with Germany and with
Austria-Hungary had proceeded for some time. His first suggestion
was that the dispute between Russia and Austria be committed to the
arbitration of Great Britain, France, Italy and Germany. Russia
accepted this but Germany and Austria rejected it. Russia had
previously suggested that the dispute be settled by a conference
between the diplomatic heads at Vienna and Petrograd. This also was
refused by Austria.

Sir Edward Grey renewed his efforts on Monday, July 27th, with an
invitation to Germany to present suggestions of its own, looking toward
a settlement. This note was never answered. Germany took the position
that its proposition to compel Russia to stand aside while Austria
punished Serbia had been rejected by England and France and it had
nothing further to propose.

  [Illustration: THE GERMAN CONFEDERATION IN 1815]

During all this period of negotiation the German Foreign Office, to all
outward appearances at least, had been acting independently of the
Kaiser, who was in Norway on a vacation trip. He returned to Potsdam on
the night of Sunday, July 26th. On Monday morning the Czar of Russia
received a personal message from the Kaiser, urging Russia to stand
aside that Serbia might be punished. The Czar immediately replied with
the suggestion that the whole matter be submitted to The Hague. No
reply of any kind was ever made to this proposal by Germany.

All suggestions and negotiations looking forward to peace were brought
to a tragic end on the following day, Tuesday, July 28th, when Austria
declared war on Serbia, having speedily mobilized troops at strategic
points on the Serbian border. Russian mobilization, which had been
proceeding only in a tentative way, on the Austrian border, now became
general, and on July 30th, mobilization of the entire Russian army was
proclaimed.

Germany’s effort to exclude England from the war began on Thursday,
July 30th. A note, sounding Sir Edward Grey on the question of British
neutrality in the event of war was received, and a curt refusal to
commit the British Empire to such a proposal was the reply. Sir Edward
Grey, in a last determined effort to avoid a world war, suggested
to Germany, Austria, Serbia and Russia that the military operations
commenced by Austria should be recognized as merely a punitive
expedition. He further suggested that when a point in Serbian territory
previously fixed upon should have been reached, Austria would halt and
would submit her further action to arbitration in the conference of the
Powers. Russia agreed unreservedly to this proposition. Austria gave a
half-hearted assent to the principle involved. Germany made no reply.

The die was cast for war on the following day, July 31st, when Germany
made a dictatorial and arrogant demand upon Russia that mobilization of
that nation’s military forces be stopped within twelve hours. Russia
made no reply, and on Saturday, August 1st, Germany set the world
aflame with the dread of war’s horror by her declaration of war upon
Russia.

Germany’s responsibility for this monumental crime against the
peace of the world is eternally fixed upon her, not only by these
outward and visible acts and negotiations, not only by her years of
patient preparation for the war into which she plunged the world.
The responsibility is fastened upon her forever by the revelations
of her own ambassador to England during this fateful period. Prince
Lichnowsky, in a remarkable communication which was given to the world,
laid bare the machinations of the German High Command and its advisers.
He was a guest of the Kaiser at Kiel on board the Imperial yacht Meteor
when the message was received informing the Kaiser of the assassination
at Sarajevo. His story continues.

  Being unacquainted with the Vienna viewpoint and what was going on
  there, I attached no very far-reaching significance to the event;
  but, looking back, I could feel sure that in the Austrian aristocracy
  a feeling of relief outweighed all others. His Majesty regretted
  that his efforts to win over the Archduke to his ideas had thus been
  frustrated by the Archduke’s assassination....

  I went on to Berlin and saw the Chancellor, von Bethmann-Hollweg. I
  told him that I regarded our foreign situation as very satisfactory
  as it was a long time indeed since we had stood so well with
  England. And in France there was a pacifist cabinet. Herr von
  Bethmann-Hollweg did not seem to share my optimism. He complained of
  the Russian armaments. I tried to tranquilize him with the argument
  that it was not to Russia’s interest to attack us, and that such an
  attack would never have English or French support, as both countries
  wanted peace.

  I went from him to Dr. Zimmermann (the under Secretary) who was
  acting for Herr von Jagow (the Foreign Secretary), and learned from
  him that Russia was about to call up nine hundred thousand new
  troops. His words unmistakably denoted ill-humor against Russia,
  who, he said, stood everywhere in our way. In addition, there were
  questions of commercial policy that had to be settled. That General
  von Moltke was urging war was, of course, not told to me. I learned,
  however, that Herr von Tschirschky (the German Ambassador at Vienna)
  had been reproved because he said that he had advised Vienna to show
  moderation toward Serbia.

Prince Lichnowsky went to his summer home in Silesia, quite unaware of
the impending crisis. He continues:

  When I returned from Silesia on my way to London, I stopped only
  a few hours in Berlin, where I heard that Austria intended to
  proceed against Serbia so as to bring to an end an unbearable state
  of affairs. Unfortunately, I failed at the moment to gauge the
  significance of the news. I thought that once more it would come to
  nothing; that even if Russia acted threateningly, the matter could
  soon be settled. I now regret that I did not stay in Berlin and
  declare there and then that I would have no hand in such a policy.

There was a meeting in Potsdam, as early as July 5th, between the
German and Austrian authorities, at which meeting war was decided on.
Prince Lichnowsky says:

  I learned afterwards that at the decisive discussion at Potsdam on
  July 5th the Austrian demand had met with the unconditional approval
  of all the personages in authority; it was even added that no harm
  would be done if war with Russia did come out of it. It was so stated
  at least in the Austrian report received at London by Count Mensdorff
  (the Austrian Ambassador to England).

  At this point I received instructions to endeavor to bring the
  English press to a friendly attitude in case Austria should deal
  the death-blow to “Greater-Serbian” hopes. I was to use all my
  influence to prevent public opinion in England from taking a stand
  against Austria. I remember England’s attitude during the Bosnian
  annexation crisis, when public opinion showed itself in sympathy
  with the Serbian claims to Bosnia; I recalled also the benevolent
  promotion of nationalist hopes that went on in the days of Lord
  Byron and Garibaldi; and on these and other grounds I thought it
  extremely unlikely that English public opinion would support a
  punitive expedition against the Archduke’s murderers. I thus felt
  it my duty to enter an urgent warning against the whole project,
  which I characterized as venturesome and dangerous, I recommended
  that counsels of moderation be given Austria, as I did not believe
  that the conflict could be localized (that is to say, it could not be
  limited to a war between Austria and Serbia).

  Herr von Jagow answered me that Russia was not prepared; that there
  would be more or less of a rumpus; but that the more firmly we
  stood by Austria, the more surely would Russia give way. Austria
  was already blaming us for flabbiness and we could not flinch. On
  the other hand, Russian sentiment was growing more unfriendly all
  the time, and we must simply take the risk. I subsequently learned
  that this attitude was based on advices from Count Pourtales (the
  German Ambassador in Petrograd), that Russia would not stir under any
  circumstances; information which prompted us to spur Count Berchtold
  on in his course. On learning the attitude of the German Government
  I looked for salvation through English mediation, knowing that Sir
  Edward Grey’s influence in Petrograd could be used in the cause of
  peace. I therefore, availed myself of my friendly relations with the
  Minister to ask him confidentially to advise moderation in Russia in
  case Austria demanded satisfaction from the Serbians, as it seemed
  likely she would.

  The English press was quiet at first, and friendly to Austria,
  the assassination being generally condemned. By degrees, however,
  more and more voices made themselves heard, in the sense that,
  however necessary it might be to take cognizance of the crime, any
  exploitation of it for political ends was unjustifiable. Moderation
  was enjoined upon Austria. When the ultimatum came out, all the
  papers, with the exception of the _Standard_, were unanimous in
  condemning it. The whole world, outside of Berlin and Vienna,
  realized that it meant war, and a world war too. The English
  fleet, which happened to have been holding a naval review, was not
  demobilized.

The British Government labored to make the Serbian reply conciliatory,
and “the Serbian answer was in keeping with the British efforts.” Sir
Edward Grey then proposed his plan of mediation upon the two points
which Serbia had not wholly conceded. Prince Lichnowsky writes:

  Mr. Cambon (for France), Marquis Imperiali (for Italy), and I were to
  meet, with Sir Edward in the chair, and it would have been easy to
  work out a formula for the debated points, which had to do with the
  co-operation of imperial and royal officials in the inquiries to be
  conducted at Belgrade. By the exercise of good-will everything could
  have been settled in one or two sittings, and the mere acceptance
  of the British proposal would have relieved the strain and further
  improved our relations with England. I seconded this plan with all my
  energies. In vain. I was told (by Berlin) that it would be against
  the dignity of Austria. Of course, all that was needed was one hint
  from Berlin to Count Berchtold (the Austrian Foreign Minister); he
  would have satisfied himself with a diplomatic triumph and rested
  on the Serbian answer. That hint was never given. On the contrary,
  pressure was brought in favor of war....

  After our refusal Sir Edward asked us to come forward with our
  proposal. We insisted on war. No other answer could I get (from
  Berlin) than that it was a colossal condescension on the part of
  Austria not to contemplate any acquisition of territory. Sir Edward
  justly pointed out that one could reduce a country to vassalage
  without acquiring territory; that Russia would see this, and
  regard it as a humiliation not to be put up with. The impression
  grew stronger and stronger that we were bent on war. Otherwise our
  attitude toward a question in which we were not directly concerned
  was incomprehensible. The insistent requests and well-defined
  declarations of M. Sasanof, the Czar’s positively humble telegrams,
  Sir Edward’s repeated proposals, the warnings of Marquis San Guiliano
  and of Bollati, my own pressing admonitions were all of no avail.
  Berlin remained inflexible--Serbia must be slaughtered.

  Then, on the 29th, Sir Edward decided upon his well-known warning.
  I told him I had always reported (to Berlin) that we should have to
  reckon with English opposition if it came to a war with France. Time
  and again the Minister said to me, “If war breaks out it will be the
  greatest catastrophe the world has ever seen.” And now events moved
  rapidly. Count Berchtold at last decided to come around, having up to
  that point played the rôle of “Strong man” under guidance of Berlin.
  Thereupon we (in answer to Russia’s mobilization) sent our ultimatum
  and declaration of war--after Russia had spent a whole week in
  fruitless negotiation and waiting.

  Thus ended my mission in London. It had suffered shipwreck, not on
  the wiles of the Briton but on the wiles of our own policy. Were
  not those right who saw that the German people were pervaded with
  the spirit of Treitschke and Bernhardi, which glorifies war as an
  end instead of holding it in abhorrence as an evil thing? Properly
  speaking militarism is a school for the people and an instrument
  to further political ends. But in the patriarchal absolutism of
  a military monarchy, militarism exploits politics to further its
  own ends, and can create a situation which a democracy freed from
  junkerdom would not tolerate.

  That is what our enemies think; that is what they are bound to think
  when they see that in spite of capitalistic industrialism and in
  spite of socialistic organizations, the living, as Nietzsche said,
  are still ruled by the dead. The democratization of Germany, the
  first war aim proposed by our enemies, will become a reality.

This is the frank statement of a great German statesman made long
before Germany received its knock-out blow. It was written when German
militarism was sweeping all before it on land, and when the U-boat was
at the height of its murderous powers on the high seas.

No one in nor out of Germany has controverted any of its statements and
it will forever remain as one of the counts in the indictment against
Germany and the sole cause of the world’s greatest misery, the war.

America’s outstanding authority on matters of international conduct,
former Secretary of State Elihu Root, declared that the World War was a
mighty and all-embracing struggle between two conflicting principles of
human right and human duty; it was a conflict between the divine right
of kings to govern mankind through armies and nobles, and the right
of the peoples of the earth who toil and endure and aspire to govern
themselves by law under justice, and in the freedom of individual
manhood.

After the declaration of war against Russia by Germany, events marched
rapidly and inevitably toward the general conflagration. Germany’s
most strenuous efforts were directed toward keeping England out of the
conflict. We have seen in the revelations of Prince Lichnowsky how
eager was England to divert Germany’s murderous purpose. There are some
details, however, required to fill in the diplomatic picture.

President Poincaré, of the French Republic, on July 30th, asked the
British Ambassador in Paris for an assurance of British support. On the
following day he addressed a similar letter to King George of England.
Both requests were qualifiedly refused on the ground that England
wished to be free to continue negotiations with Germany for the purpose
of averting the war. In the meantime, the German Government addressed
a note to England offering guarantees for Belgian integrity, providing
Belgium did not side with France, offering to respect the neutrality of
Holland and giving assurance that no French territory in Europe would
be annexed if Germany won the war. Sir Edward Grey described this as a
“shameful proposal,” and rejected it on July 30th.

On July 31st England sent a note to France and Germany asking
for a statement of purpose concerning Belgian neutrality. France
immediately announced that it would respect the treaty of 1839 and its
reaffirmation in 1870, guaranteeing Belgium’s neutrality. This treaty
was entered into by Germany, England, France, Austria and Russia.
Germany’s reply on August 1st was a proposal that she would respect the
neutrality of Belgium if England would stay out of the war. This was
promptly declined. On August 2d the British cabinet agreed that if the
German fleet attempted to attack the coast of France the British fleet
would intervene. Germany, the next day, sent a note agreeing to refrain
from naval attacks on France provided England would remain neutral,
but declined to commit herself as to the neutrality of Belgium. Before
this, however, on August 2d, Germany had announced to Belgium its
intention to enter Belgium for the purpose of attacking France. The
Belgian Minister in London made an appeal to the British Foreign Office
and was informed that invasion of Belgium by Germany would be followed
by England’s declaration of war. Monday, August 3d, was signalized by
Belgium’s declaration of its neutrality and its firm purpose to defend
its soil against invasion by France, England, Germany or any other
nation.

  [Illustration: _Photo by Underwood and Underwood, N. Y._

  THE KAISER AND HIS SIX SONS

  The ex-Emperor and his sons leading a procession in Berlin soon after
  the declaration of war. It was noted that in spite of their martial
  appearance the royal family were extremely careful to keep out of
  range of the Allied guns. From left to right they are: The Kaiser,
  Crown Prince Frederick Wilhelm, Princes Eitel Friedrich, Adalbert,
  August, Oscar and Joachim.]

The actual invasion of Belgium commenced on the morning of August 4th,
when twelve regiments of Uhlans crossed the frontier near Vise, and
came in contact with a Belgian force driving it back upon Liége. King
Albert of Belgium promptly appealed to England, Russia and France for
aid in repelling the invader. England sent an ultimatum to Germany
fixing midnight of August 4th as the time for expiration of the
ultimatum. This demanded that satisfactory assurances be furnished
immediately that Germany would respect the neutrality of Belgium. No
reply was made by Germany and England’s declaration of war followed.

Chancellor von Bethmann-Hollweg, of the German Empire, wrote Germany’s
infamy into history when, in a formal statement, he acknowledged that
the invasion of Belgium was “a wrong that we will try to make good
again as soon as our military ends have been reached.” To Sir Edward
Vochen, British Ambassador to Germany, he addressed the inquiry: “Is
it the purpose of your country to make war upon Germany for the sake
of a scrap of paper?” The treaty of 1839-1870 guaranteeing Belgium’s
neutrality was the scrap of paper.

With the entrance of England into the war, the issue between autocracy
and democracy was made plain before the people of the world. Austria,
and later Turkey, joined with Germany; France, and Japan, by reason of
their respective treaty obligations joined England and Russia. Italy
for the time preferred to remain neutral, ignoring her implied alliance
with the Teutonic empires. How other nations lined up on the one side
and the other is indicated by the State Department’s list of war
declarations, and diplomatic severances, which follows:

  Austria against Belgium, Aug. 28, 1914.

  Austria against Japan, Aug. 27, 1914.

  Austria against Montenegro, Aug. 9, 1914.

  Austria against Russia, Aug. 6, 1914.

  Austria against Serbia, July 28, 1914.

  Belgium against Germany, Aug. 4, 1914.

  Brazil against Germany, Oct. 26, 1917.

  Bulgaria against Serbia, Oct. 14, 1915.

  China against Austria, Aug. 14, 1917.

  China against Germany, Aug. 14, 1917.

  Costa Rica against Germany, May 23, 1918.

  Cuba against Germany, April 7, 1917.

  Cuba against Austria-Hungary, Dec. 16, 1917.

  France against Austria, Aug. 13, 1914.

  France against Bulgaria, Oct. 16, 1915.

  France against Germany, Aug. 3, 1914.

  France against Turkey, Nov. 5, 1914.

  Germany against Belgium, Aug. 4, 1914.

  Germany against France, Aug. 3, 1914.

  Germany against Portugal, March 9, 1916.

  Germany against Roumania, Sept. 14, 1916.

  Germany against Russia, Aug. 1, 1914.

  Great Britain against Austria, Aug. 13, 1914.

  Great Britain against Bulgaria, Oct. 15, 1915.

  Great Britain against Germany, Aug. 4, 1914.

  Great Britain against Turkey, Nov. 5, 1914.

  Greece against Bulgaria, Nov. 28, 1916. (Provisional Government.)

  Greece against Bulgaria, July 2, 1917. (Government of Alexander.)

  Greece against Germany, Nov. 28, 1916. (Provisional Government.)

  Greece against Germany, July 2, 1917. (Government of Alexander.)

  Guatemala against Germany and Austria-Hungary, April 22, 1918.

  Haiti against Germany, July 15, 1918.

  Honduras against Germany, July 19, 1918.

  Italy against Austria, May 24, 1915.

  Italy against Bulgaria, Oct. 19, 1915.

  Italy against Germany, Aug. 28, 1916.

  Italy against Turkey, Aug. 21, 1915.

  Japan against Germany, Aug. 23, 1914.

  Liberia against Germany, Aug. 4, 1917.

  Montenegro against Austria, Aug. 8, 1914.

  Montenegro against Germany, Aug. 9, 1914.

  Nicaragua against Germany, May 24, 1918.

  Panama against Germany, April 7, 1917.

  Panama against Austria, Dec. 10, 1917.

  Portugal against Germany, Nov. 23, 1914. (Resolution passed
  authorizing military intervention as ally of England.)

  Portugal against Germany, May 19, 1915. (Military aid granted.)

  Roumania against Austria, Aug. 27, 1916. (Allies of Austria also
  consider it a declaration.)

  Russia against Germany, Aug. 7, 1914.

  Russia against Bulgaria, Oct. 19, 1915.

  Russia against Turkey, Nov. 3, 1914.

  San Marino against Austria, May 24, 1915.

  Serbia against Bulgaria, Oct. 16, 1915.

  Serbia against Germany, Aug. 6, 1914.

  Serbia against Turkey, Dec. 2, 1914.

  Siam against Austria, July 22, 1917.

  Siam against Germany, July 22, 1917.

  Turkey against Allies, Nov. 23, 1914.

  Turkey against Roumania, Aug. 29, 1916.

  United States against Germany, April 6, 1917.

  United States against Austria-Hungary, Dec. 7, 1917.


SEVERANCE OF DIPLOMATIC RELATIONS

The Nations that formally severed relations whether afterward declaring
war or not, are as follows:

  Austria against Japan, Aug. 26, 1914.

  Austria against Portugal, March 16, 1916.

  Austria against Serbia, July 26, 1914.

  Austria against United States, April 8, 1917.

  Bolivia against Germany, April 14, 1917.

  Brazil against Germany, April 11, 1917.

  China against Germany, March 14, 1917.

  Costa Rica against Germany, Sept. 21, 1917.

  Ecuador against Germany, Dec. 7, 1917.

  Egypt against Germany, Aug. 13, 1914.

  France against Austria, Aug. 10, 1914.

  Greece against Turkey, July 2, 1917. (Government of Alexander.)

  Greece against Austria, July 2, 1917. (Government of Alexander.)

  Guatemala against Germany, April 27, 1917.

  Haiti against Germany, June 17, 1917.

  Honduras against Germany, May 17, 1917.

  Nicaragua against Germany, May 18, 1917.

  Peru against Germany, Oct. 6, 1917.

  Santo Domingo against Germany, June 8, 1917.

  Turkey against United States, April 20, 1917.

  United States against Germany, Feb. 3, 1917.

  Uruguay against Germany, Oct. 7, 1917.




CHAPTER V

THE GREAT WAR BEGINS


Years before 1914, when Germany declared war against civilization, it
was decided by the German General Staff to strike at France through
Belgium. The records of the German Foreign Office prove that fact.
The reason for this lay in the long line of powerful fortresses along
the line that divides France from Germany and the sparsely spaced and
comparatively out-of-date forts on the border between Germany and
Belgium. True, there was a treaty guaranteeing the inviolability of
Belgian territory to which Germany was a signatory party. Some of the
clauses of that treaty were:

  Article 9. Belgium, within the limits traced in conformity with the
  principles laid down in the present preliminaries, shall form a
  perpetually neutral state. The five powers (England, France, Austria,
  Prussia and Russia), without wishing to intervene in the internal
  affairs of Belgium, guarantee her that perpetual neutrality as well
  as the integrity and inviolability of her territory in the limits
  mentioned in the present article.

  Article 10. By just reciprocity Belgium shall be held to observe this
  same neutrality toward all the other states and to make no attack on
  their internal or external tranquillity while always preserving the
  right to defend herself against any foreign aggression.

This agreement was followed on January 23, 1839, by a definitive
treaty, accepted by Belgium and by the Netherlands, which treaty
regulates Belgium’s neutrality as follows:

  Article 7. Belgium, within the limits defined in Articles 1, 2 and
  4, shall form an independent and perpetually neutral state. She is
  obligated to preserve this neutrality against all the other states.

To convert this solemn covenant into a “scrap of paper” it was
necessary that Germany should find an excuse for tearing it to pieces.
There was absolutely no provocation in sight, but that did not
deter the German High Command. That august body with no information
whatever to afford an excuse, alleged in a formal note to the Belgian
Government that the French army intended to invade Germany through
Belgian territory. This hypocritical and mendacious note and Belgium’s
vigorous reply follow:

  Note handed in on August 2, 1914, at 7 o’clock P. M., by Herr von
  Below-Saleske, German Minister, to M. Davignon, Belgian Minister for
  Foreign Affairs.

                                              BRUSSELS, 2d August, 1914.

                   IMPERIAL GERMAN LEGATION IN BELGIUM

                        (Highly confidential)

  The German Government has received reliable information according to
  which the French forces intend to march on the Meuse, by way of Givet
  and Namur. This information leaves no doubt as to the intention of
  France of marching on Germany through Belgian territory. The Imperial
  Government cannot avoid the fear that Belgium, in spite of its best
  will, will be in no position to repulse such a largely developed
  French march without aid. In this fact there is sufficient certainty
  of a threat directed against Germany.

  It is an imperative duty for the preservation of Germany to forestall
  this attack of the enemy.

  The German Government would feel keen regret if Belgium should regard
  as an act of hostility against herself the fact that the measures
  of the enemies of Germany oblige her on her part to violate Belgian
  territory.

  In order to dissipate any misunderstanding the German Government
  declares as follows:

  1. Germany does not contemplate any act of hostility against
  Belgium. If Belgium consents in the war about to commence to take
  up an attitude of friendly neutrality toward Germany, the German
  Government on its part undertakes, on the declaration of peace, to
  guarantee the kingdom and its possessions in their whole extent.

  2. Germany undertakes under the conditions laid down to evacuate
  Belgian territory as soon as peace is concluded.

  3. If Belgium preserves a friendly attitude, Germany is prepared,
  in agreement with the authorities of the Belgian Government, to
  buy against cash all that is required by her troops, and to give
  indemnity for the damages caused in Belgium.

  4. If Belgium behaves in a hostile manner toward the German troops,
  and in particular raises difficulties against their advance by the
  opposition of the fortifications of the Meuse, or by destroying
  roads, railways, tunnels, or other engineering works, Germany will be
  compelled to consider Belgium as an enemy.

  In this case Germany will take no engagements toward Belgium, but
  she will leave the later settlement of relations of the two states
  toward one another to the decision of arms. The German Government has
  a justified hope that this contingency will not arise and that the
  Belgian Government will know how to take suitable measures to hinder
  its taking place. In this case the friendly relations which unite the
  two neighboring states will become closer and more lasting.


THE REPLY BY BELGIUM

  Note handed in by M. Davignon, Minister for Foreign Affairs, to Herr
  von Below-Saleske, German Minister.

                                              BRUSSELS, 3d August, 1914.
                                             (7 o’clock in the morning.)

  By the note of the 2d August, 1914, the German Government has made
  known that according to certain intelligence the French forces intend
  to march on the Meuse via Givet and Namur and that Belgium, in spite
  of her good-will, would not be able without help to beat off an
  advance of the French troops.

  The German Government felt it to be its duty to forestall this attack
  and to violate Belgian territory. Under these conditions Germany
  proposes to the King’s Government to take up a friendly attitude,
  and undertakes at the moment of peace to guarantee the integrity of
  the kingdom and of her possessions in their whole extent. The note
  adds that if Belgium raises difficulties to the forward march of
  the German troops Germany will be compelled to consider her as an
  enemy and to leave the later settlement of the two states toward one
  another to the decision of arms.

  This note caused profound and painful surprise to the King’s
  Government.

  The intentions which it attributed to France are in contradiction
  with the express declarations which were made to us on the 1st of
  August, in the name of the government of the republic.

  Moreover, if, contrary to our expectation, a violation of Belgian
  neutrality were to be committed by France, Belgium would fulfil all
  her international duties and her army would offer the most vigorous
  opposition to the invader.

  The treaties of 1839, confirmed by the treaties of 1870, establish
  the independence and the neutrality of Belgium under the guarantee
  of the powers, and particularly of the Government of his Majesty the
  King of Prussia.

  Belgium has always been faithful to her international obligations;
  she has fulfilled her duties in a spirit of loyal impartiality; she
  has neglected no effort to maintain her neutrality or to make it
  respected.

  The attempt against her independence with which the German Government
  threatens her would constitute a flagrant violation of international
  law. No strategic interest justifies the violation of that law.

  The Belgian government would, by accepting the propositions which are
  notified to her, sacrifice the honor of the nation while at the same
  time betraying her duties toward Europe.

  Conscious of the part Belgium has played for more than eighty years
  in the civilization of the world, she refuses to believe that the
  independence of Belgium can be preserved only at the expense of the
  violation of her neutrality.

  If this hope were disappointed the Belgian Government has firmly
  resolved to repulse by every means in her power any attack upon her
  rights.

The German attack upon Belgium and France came with terrible force
and suddenness. Twenty-four army corps, divided into three armies
clad in a specially designed and colored gray-green uniform, swept in
three mighty streams over the German borders with their objective the
heart of France. The Army of the Meuse was given the route through
Liége, Namur and Maubeuge. The Army of the Moselle violated the Duchy
of Luxemburg, which, under a treaty guaranteeing its independence
and neutrality, was not permitted to maintain an army. Germany was a
signatory party to this treaty also. The Army of the Rhine cut through
the Vosges Mountains and its route lay between the French cities of
Nancy and Toul.

  [Illustration: _Photo Trans-Atlantic News Service Co._

  KING ALBERT AT THE HEAD OF THE HEROIC SOLDIERS OF BELGIUM

  It is universally agreed that the Belgian monarch was no figurehead
  general but a real leader of his troops. These were the men who,
  facing annihilation, astonished the world by opposing the German
  military machine successfully enough to allow France to get her armies
  into shape and prevent the immediate taking of Paris that was planned
  by Germany.]

The heroic defense of the Belgian army at Liége against the Army of the
Meuse delayed the operation of Germany’s plans and in all probability
saved Paris. It was the first of many similar disappointments and
checks that Germany encountered during the war.

The defense of Liége continued for ten heroic days. Within that
interval the first British Expeditionary Forces were landed in France
and Belgium, the French army was mobilized to full strength. The little
Belgian army falling back northward on Antwerp, Louvain and Brussels,
threatened the German flank and approximately 200,000 German soldiers
were compelled to remain in the conquered section of Belgium to
garrison it effectively.

Liége fortifications were the design of the celebrated strategist
Brialmont. They consisted of twelve isolated fortresses which had been
permitted to become out of repair. No field works of any kind connected
them and they were without provision for defense against encircling
tactics and against modern artillery.

The huge 42-centimeter guns, the first of Germany’s terrible surprises,
were brought into action against these forts, and their concrete and
armored steel turrets were cracked as walnuts are cracked between the
jaws of a nut-cracker. The Army of the Meuse then made its way like a
gray-green cloud of poison gas through Belgium. A cavalry screen of
crack Uhlan regiments preceded it, and it made no halt worthy of note
until it confronted the Belgian army on the line running from Louvain
to Namur. The Belgians were forced back before Louvain on August 20th,
the Belgian Government removed the capital from Brussels to Antwerp,
and the German hosts entered evacuated Brussels.

During this advance of the Army of the Meuse, strong French detachments
invaded German soil, pouring into Alsace through the Belfort Gap. Brief
successes attended the bold stroke. Mûlhausen was captured and the
Metz-Strassburg Railroad was cut in several places. The French suffered
a defeat almost immediately following this first flush of victory, both
in Alsace and in Lorraine, where a French detachment had engaged with
the Army of the Moselle. The French army thereupon retreated to the
strong line of forts and earthworks defending the border between France
and Germany.

England’s first expeditionary force landed at Ostend, Calais and
Dunkirk on August 7th. It was dubbed England’s “contemptible little
army” by the German General Staff. That name was seized upon gladly by
England as a spur to volunteering. It brought to the surface national
pride and a fierce determination to compel Germany to recognize and to
reckon with the “contemptible little army.”

The contact between the French, Belgian and British forces was speedily
established and something like concert resistance to the advance of
the enemy was made possible. The German army, however, followed by a
huge equipment of motor kitchens, munition trains, and other motor
transport evidencing great care in preparation for the movement, swept
resistlessly forward until it encountered the French and British on a
line running from Mons to Charleroi.

The British army was assigned to a position between two French armies.
By some miscalculation, the French army that was to have taken its
position on the British left, never appeared. The French army on the
right was attacked and defeated at Charleroi, falling back in some
confusion. The German Army of the Moselle co-operating with the Army of
the Meuse then attacked the British and French, and a great flanking
movement by the German joint commands developed.

This was directed mainly at the British under command of Sir John
French. There followed a retreat that for sheer heroism and dogged
determination has become one of the great battles of all time.
The British, outflanked and outnumbered three to one, fought and
marched without cessation for six days and nights. Time after time
envelopment and disaster threatened them, but with a determination
that would not be beaten they fought off the best that Germany could
send against them, maintained contact with the French army on their
right, and delayed the German advance so effectively that a complete
disarrangement of all the German plans ensued. This was the second
great disappointment to Germany. It made possible the victory of the
Marne and the victorious peace of 1918. The story of that immortal
retreat is best told in the words of Sir John French, transmitting the
report of this encounter to the British War Office. It follows:

“The transport of the troops from England both by sea and by rail was
effected in the best order and without a check. Each unit arrived at
its destination well within the scheduled time.

“The concentration was practically complete on the evening of Friday,
the 21st ultimo, and I was able to make dispositions to move the force
during Saturday, the 22d, to positions I considered most favorable
from which to commence operations which the French commander-in-chief,
General Joffre, requested me to undertake in pursuance of his plans in
prosecution of the campaign.

“The line taken up extended along the line of the canal from Condé on
the west, through Mons and Binche on the east. This line was taken up
as follows:

“From Condé to Mons, inclusive, was assigned to the Second Corps, and
to the right of the Second Corps from Mons the First Corps was posted.
The Fifth Cavalry Brigade was placed at Binche.

“In the absence of my Third Army Corps I desired to keep the cavalry
divisions as much as possible as a reserve to act on my outer flank,
or move in support of any threatened part of the line. The forward
reconnoissance was intrusted to Brig. Gen. Sir Philip Chetwode, with
the Fifth Cavalry Brigade, but I directed General Allenby to send
forward a few squadrons to assist in this work.

“During the 22d and 23d these advanced squadrons did some excellent
work, some of them penetrating as far as Soignies, and several
encounters took place in which our troops showed to great advantage.

“2. At 6 A. M., on August 23d, I assembled the commanders of the
First and Second Corps and cavalry division at a point close to the
position and explained the general situation of the Allies, and what I
understood to be General Joffre’s plan. I discussed with them at some
length the immediate situation in front of us.

“From information I received from French headquarters I understood
that little more than one, or at most two, of the enemy’s army corps,
with perhaps one cavalry division, were in front of my position; and
I was aware of no attempted outflanking movement by the enemy. I was
confirmed in this opinion by the fact that my patrols encountered no
undue opposition in their reconnoitering operations. The observations
of my airplanes seemed to bear out this estimate.

“About 3 P. M. on Sunday, the 23d, reports began coming in to the
effect that the enemy was commencing an attack on the Mons line,
apparently in some strength, but that the right of the position from
Mons and Bray was being particularly threatened.

“The commander of the First Corps had pushed his flank back to some
high ground south of Bray, and the Fifth Cavalry Brigade evacuated
Binche, moving slightly south; the enemy thereupon occupied Binche.

“The right of the Third Division, under General Hamilton, was at
Mons, which formed a somewhat dangerous salient; and I directed the
commander of the Second Corps to be careful not to keep the troops on
this salient too long, but, if threatened seriously, to draw back the
center behind Mons. This was done before dark. In the meantime, about
5 P. M., I received a most unexpected message from General Joffre
by telegraph, telling me that at least three German corps, viz., a
reserve corps, the Fourth Corps and the Ninth Corps, were moving on my
position in front, and that the Second Corps was engaged in a turning
movement from the direction of Tournay. He also informed me that the
two reserve French divisions and the Fifth French Army on my right were
retiring, the Germans having on the previous day gained possession of
the passages of the Sambre, between Charleroi and Namur.

“3. In view of the possibility of my being driven from the Mons
position, I had previously ordered a position in rear to be
reconnoitered. This position rested on the fortress of Maubeuge on the
right and extended west to Jenlain, southwest to Valenciennes, on the
left. The position was reported difficult to hold, because standing
crops and buildings made the placing of trenches very difficult
and limited the field of fire in many important localities. It
nevertheless afforded a few good artillery positions.

“When the news of the retirement of the French and the heavy German
threatening on my front reached me, I endeavored to confirm it by
airplane reconnoissance; and as a result of this I determined to effect
a retirement to the Maubeuge position at daybreak on the 24th.

“A certain amount of fighting continued along the whole line
throughout the night and at daybreak on the 24th the Second Division
from the neighborhood of Harmignies made a powerful demonstration
as if to retake Binche. This was supported by the artillery of
both the First and Second Divisions, while the First Division took
up a supporting position in the neighborhood of Peissant. Under
cover of this demonstration the Second Corps retired on the line
Dour-Quaroule-Framéries. The Third Division on the right of the corps
suffered considerable loss in this operation from the enemy, who had
retaken Mons.

“The Second Corps halted on this line, where they partially intrenched
themselves, enabling Sir Douglas Haig with the First Corps gradually to
withdraw to the new position; and he effected this without much further
loss, reaching the line Bavai-Maubeuge about 7 P. M. Toward midday the
enemy appeared to be directing his principal effort against our left.

“I had previously ordered General Allenby with the cavalry to act
vigorously in advance of my left front and endeavor to take the
pressure off.

“About 7.30 A. M. General Allenby received a message from Sir Charles
Ferguson, commanding the Fifth Division, saying that he was very hard
pressed and in urgent need of support. On receipt of this message
General Allenby drew in the cavalry and endeavored to bring direct
support to the Fifth Division.

“During the course of this operation General De Lisle, of the Second
Cavalry Brigade, thought he saw a good opportunity to paralyze the
further advance of the enemy’s infantry by making a mounted attack on
his flank. He formed up and advanced for this purpose, but was held
up by wire about five hundred yards from his objective, and the Ninth
Lancers and the Eighteenth Hussars suffered severely in the retirement
of the brigade.

“The Nineteenth Infantry Brigade, which had been guarding the line of
communications, was brought up by rail to Valenciennes on the 22d and
23d. On the morning of the 24th they were moved out to a position south
of Quarouble to support the left flank of the Second Corps.

“With the assistance of the cavalry Sir Horace Smith-Dorrien was
enabled to effect his retreat to a new position; although, having two
corps of the enemy on his front and one threatening his flank, he
suffered great losses in doing so.

“At nightfall the position was occupied by the Second Corps to the west
of Bavai, the First Corps to the right. The right was protected by the
Fortress of Maubeuge, the left by the Nineteenth Brigade in position
between Jenlain and Bry, and the cavalry on the outer flank.

“4. The French were still retiring, and I had no support except such as
was afforded by the Fortress of Maubeuge; and the determined attempts
of the enemy to get round my left flank assured me that it was his
intention to hem me against that place and surround me. I felt that not
a moment must be lost in retiring to another position.

“I had every reason to believe that the enemy’s forces were somewhat
exhausted and I knew that they had suffered heavy losses. I hoped,
therefore, that his pursuit would not be too vigorous to prevent me
effecting my object.

“The operation, however, was full of danger and difficulty, not
only owing to the very superior force in my front, but also to the
exhaustion of the troops.

“The retirement was recommenced in the early morning of the 25th to a
position in the neighborhood of Le Cateau, and rear guards were ordered
to be clear of the Maubeuge-Bavai-Eih Road by 5.30 A. M.

“Two cavalry brigades, with the divisional cavalry of the Second Corps,
covered the movement of the Second Corps. The remainder of the cavalry
division, with the Nineteenth Brigade, the whole under the command of
General Allenby, covered the west flank.

“The Fourth Division commenced its detrainment at Le Cateau on Sunday,
the 23d, and by the morning of the 25th eleven battalions and a brigade
of artillery with divisional staff were available for service.

“I ordered General Snow to move out to take up a position with his
right south of Solesmes, his left resting on the Cambrai-Le Cateau Road
south of La Chaprie. In this position the division rendered great help
to the effective retirement of the Second and First Corps to the new
position.

“Although the troops had been ordered to occupy the Cambrai-Le
Cateau-Landrecies position, and the ground had, during the 25th, been
partially prepared and intrenched, I had grave doubts, owing to the
information I had received as to the accumulating strength of the
enemy against me--as to the wisdom of standing there to fight.

“Having regard to the continued retirement of the French on my right,
my exposed left flank, the tendency of the enemy’s western corps (II)
to envelope me, and, more than all, the exhausted condition of the
troops, I determined to make a great effort to continue the retreat
until I could put some substantial obstacle, such as the Somme or the
Oise, between my troops and the enemy, and afford the former some
opportunity of rest and reorganization. Orders were, therefore, sent to
the corps commanders to continue their retreat as soon as they possibly
could toward the general line Vermand-St. Quentin-Ribemont.

“The cavalry under General Allenby, were ordered to cover the
retirement.

“Throughout the 25th and far into the evening, the First Corps
continued its march on Landrecies, following the road along the eastern
border of the Forêt de Mormal, and arrived at Landrecies about 10
o’clock. I had intended that the corps should come further west so as
to fill up the gap between Le Cateau and Landrecies, but the men were
exhausted and could not get further in without rest.

“The enemy, however, would not allow them this rest, and about 9.30 P.
M. a report was received that the Fourth Guards Brigade in Landrecies
was heavily attacked by troops of the Ninth German Army Corps, who were
coming through the forest on the north of the town. This brigade fought
most gallantly, and caused the enemy to suffer tremendous loss in
issuing from the forest into the narrow streets of the town. This loss
has been estimated from reliable sources at from 700 to 1,000. At the
same time information reached me from Sir Douglas Haig that his First
Division was also heavily engaged south and east of Maroilles. I sent
urgent messages to the commander of the two French reserve divisions on
my right to come up to the assistance of the First Corps, which they
eventually did. Partly owing to this assistance, but mainly to the
skillful manner in which Sir Douglas Haig extricated his corps from an
exceptionally difficult position in the darkness of the night, they
were able at dawn to resume their march south toward Wassigny on Guise.

“By about 6 P. M. the Second Corps had got into position with their
right on Le Cateau, their left in the neighborhood of Caudry, and the
line of defense was continued thence by the Fourth Division toward
Seranvillers, the left being thrown back.

“During the fighting on the 24th and 25th the cavalry became a good
deal scattered, but by the early morning of the 26th, General Allenby
had succeeded in concentrating two brigades to the south of Cambrai.

“The Fourth Division was placed under the orders of the general officer
commanding the Second Army Corps.

“On the 24th the French cavalry corps, consisting of three divisions
under General Sordêt, had been in billets north of Avesnes. On my
way back from Bavai, which was my ‘Poste de Commandement’ during the
fighting of the 23d and 24th, I visited General Sordêt, and earnestly
requested his co-operation and support. He promised to obtain sanction
from his army commander to act on my left flank, but said that his
horses were too tired to move before the next day. Although he rendered
me valuable assistance later on in the course of the retirement, he was
unable, for the reasons given, to afford me any support on the most
critical day of all, viz., the 26th.

“At daybreak it became apparent that the enemy was throwing the bulk of
his strength against the left of the position occupied by the Second
Corps and the Fourth Division.

“At this time the guns of four German army corps were in position
against them, and Sir Horace Smith-Dorrien reported to me that he
judged it impossible to continue his retirement at daybreak (as
ordered) in face of such an attack.

“I sent him orders to use his utmost endeavors to break off the action
and retire at the earliest possible moment, as it was impossible for me
to send him any support, the First Corps being at the moment incapable
of movement.

“The French Cavalry Corps, under General Sordêt, was coming up on our
left rear early in the morning, and I sent an urgent message to him to
do his utmost to come up and support the retirement of my left flank;
but owing to the fatigue of his horses he found himself unable to
intervene in any way.

“There had been no time to intrench the position properly, but the
troops showed a magnificent front to the terrible fire which confronted
them.

“The artillery, although outmatched by at least four to one, made a
splendid fight, and inflicted heavy losses on their opponents.

“At length it became apparent that, if complete annihilation was to be
avoided, a retirement must be attempted; and the order was given to
commence it about 3.30 P. M. The movement was covered with the most
devoted intrepidity and determination by the artillery, which had
itself suffered heavily, and the fine work done by the cavalry in the
further retreat from the position assisted materially in the final
completion of this most difficult and dangerous operation.

“Fortunately the enemy had himself suffered too heavily to engage in an
energetic pursuit.

“I cannot close the brief account of this glorious stand of the British
troops without putting on record my deep appreciation of the valuable
services rendered by Gen. Sir Horace Smith-Dorrien.

“I say without hesitation that the saving of the left wing of the army
under my command on the morning of the 26th of August, could never have
been accomplished unless a commander of rare and unusual coolness,
intrepidity, and determination had been present to personally conduct
the operation.

“The retreat was continued far into the night of the 26th and through
the 27th and 28th, on which date the troops halted on the line
Noyon-Chauny-La Fère, having then thrown off the weight of the enemy’s
pursuit.

“On the 27th and 28th I was much indebted to General Sordêt and the
French cavalry division which he commands for materially assisting my
retirement and successfully driving back some of the enemy on Cambrai.

“General D’Amade also, with the Sixty-first and Sixty-second French
Reserve Divisions, moved down from the neighborhood of Arras on the
enemy’s right flank and took much pressure off the rear of the British
forces.

“This closes the period covering the heavy fighting which commenced at
Mons on Sunday afternoon, 23d August, and which really constituted a
four days’ battle.

“At this point, therefore, I propose to close the present dispatch.

“I deeply deplore the very serious losses which the British forces have
suffered in this great battle; but they were inevitable in view of the
fact that the British army--only two days after a concentration by
rail--was called upon to withstand a vigorous attack of five Germany
army corps.

  [Illustration: A SCENE FROM EARLY TRENCH WARFARE

  From the woods in the background the British charge on an angle of
  the German breastworks under cover of artillery and machine-gun fire.
  This illustrates the early French warfare before the development of
  elaborate concrete structures like the Hindenburg line which the
  Germans later devised.]

“It is impossible for me to speak too highly of the skill evinced by
the two general officers commanding army corps; the self-sacrificing
and devoted exertions of their staffs; the direction of the troops by
divisional, brigade, and regimental leaders; the command of the smaller
units by their officers; and the magnificent fighting spirit displayed
by non-commissioned officers and men.

“I wish particularly to bring to your Lordship’s notice the admirable
work done by the Royal Flying Corps under Sir David Henderson. Their
skill, energy, and perseverance have been beyond all praise. They have
furnished me with the most complete and accurate information, which has
been of incalculable value in the conduct of the operations. Fired at
constantly both by friend and foe, and not hesitating to fly in every
kind of weather, they have remained undaunted throughout.

“Further, by actually fighting in the air, they have succeeded in
destroying five of the enemy’s machines.”

The combined French and British armies, including the forces that
had retreated from Alsace and Lorraine, gave way with increasing
stubbornness before von Kluck. That German general disregarding the
fortresses surrounding Paris, swung southward to make a junction with
the Army of the Crown Prince of Germany advancing through the Vosges
Mountains. General Manoury’s army opposed the German advance on the
entrenched line of Paris. General Gallieni commanding the garrison of
Paris, was ready with a novel mobile transport consisting of taxicabs
and fast trucks. The total number of soldiers in the French and British
armies now outnumbered those in the German armies opposed to them.

General Joffre, in supreme command of the French, had chosen the
battleground. He had set the trap with consummate skill. The word was
given; the trap was sprung; and the first battle of the Marne came as a
crashing surprise to Germany.




CHAPTER VI

THE TRAIL OF THE BEAST IN BELGIUM


Germany’s onrush into heroic Belgium speedily resolved itself into a
saturnalia that drenched the land with blood and roused the civilized
world into resentful horror. As the tide of barbarity swept forward
into Northern France, stories of the horrors filtered through the
close web of German censorship. There were denials at first by
German propagandists. In the face of truth furnished by thousands of
witnesses, the denials faded away.

What caused these atrocities? Were they the spontaneous expression of
dormant brutishness in German soldiers? Were they a sudden reversion of
an entire nation to bestiality?

The answer is that the private soldier as an individual was not
responsible. The carnage, the rapine, the wholesale desolation was
an integral part of the German policy of _schrecklichkeit_ or
frightfulness. This policy was laid down by Germany as part of its
imperial war code. In 1902 Germany issued a new war manual entitled
“Kriegsbrauch im Landkriege.” In it is written this cold-blooded
declaration:

  All measures which conduce to the attainment of the object of war are
  permissible and these may be summarized in the two ideas of violence
  and cunning. What is permissible includes every means of war without
  which the object of the war cannot be attained. All means which
  modern invention affords, including the fullest, most dangerous, and
  most massive means of destruction, may be utilized.

Brand Whitlock, United States Minister to Belgium, in a formal report
to the State Department, made this statement concerning Germany’s
policy in permitting these outrages:

“All these deliberate organized massacres of civilians, all these
murders and outrages, the violation of women, the killing of children,
wanton destruction, burning, looting and pillage, and whole towns
destroyed, were acts for which no possible military necessity can
be pleaded. They were wilfully committed as part of a deliberately
prepared and scientifically organized policy of terrorism.”

And now, having considered these outrages as part of the German policy
of terrorism, let us turn to the facts presented by those who made
investigations at first hand in devastated Belgium and Northern France.

Let us first return to the tragic story of the destruction of Louvain.
The first document comes in the form of a cable sent from the Belgian
Minister of Foreign Affairs under date of August 8, 1914:

“On Tuesday evening a body of German troops who had been driven back
retired in disorder upon the town of Louvain. Germans who were guarding
the town thought that the retiring troops were Belgians and fired
upon them. In order to excuse this mistake the Germans, in spite of
the most energetic denials on the part of the authorities, pretended
that Belgians had fired on the Germans, although all the inhabitants,
including policemen, had been disarmed for more than a week. Without
any examination and without listening to any protest the commanding
officer announced that the town would be immediately destroyed. All
inhabitants had to leave their homes at once; some were made prisoners;
women and children were put into a train of which the destination was
unknown; soldiers with fire bombs set fire to the different quarters
of the town; the splendid Church of St. Pierre, the markets, the
university and its scientific establishments, were given to the flames,
and it is probable that the Hotel de Ville, this celebrated jewel
of Gothic art, will also have disappeared in the disaster. Several
notabilities were shot at sight. Thus a town of 40,000 inhabitants,
which, since the fifteenth century, has been the intellectual and
scientific capital of the Low Countries, is a heap of ashes. Americans,
many of whom have followed the course at this illustrious alma mater
and have there received such cordial hospitality, cannot remain
insensible to this outrage on the rights of humanity and civilization
which is unprecedented in history.”

Minister Whitlock made the following report on the same outrage:

“A violent fusillade broke out simultaneously at various points in the
city (Louvain), notably at the Porte de Bruxelles, Porte de Tirlemont,
Rue Leopold, Rue Marie-Thérèse, Rue des Joyeuses Entrées. German
soldiers were firing at random in every street and in every direction.
Later fires broke out everywhere, notably in the University building,
the Library, in the old Church of St. Peter, in the Place du Peuple,
in the Rue de la Station, in the Boulevard de Tirlemont, and in the
Chaussée de Tirlemont. On the orders of their chiefs, the German
soldiers would break open the houses and set fire to them, shooting on
the inhabitants who tried to leave their dwellings. Many persons who
took refuge in their cellars were burned to death. The German soldiers
were equipped with apparatus for the purpose of firing dwellings,
incendiary pastils, machines for spraying petroleum, etc....

“Major von Manteuffel (of the German forces) sent for Alderman
Schmidt. Upon the latter’s arrival, the major declared that hostages
were to be held, as sedition had just broken out. He asked Father
Parijs, Mr. Schmidt, and Mgr. Coenraedts, First Vice-Rector of the
University, who was being held as a hostage, to make proclamations
to the inhabitants exhorting them to be calm and menacing them with
a fine of twenty million francs, the destruction of the city and the
hanging of the hostages, if they created disturbance. Surrounded by
about thirty soldiers and a few officers, Major Manteuffel, Father
Parijs, Mr. Schmidt and Mgr. Coenraedts left in the direction of the
station, and the alderman, in French, and the priest, in Flemish, made
proclamations at the street corners....

“Near the statue of Juste-Lipse, a Dr. Berghausen, a German surgeon,
in a highly excited condition, ran to meet the delegation. He shouted
that a German soldier had just been killed by a shot fired from the
house of Mr. David Fishbach. Addressing the soldiers, Dr. Berghausen
said: ‘The blood of the entire population of Louvain is not worth a
drop of the blood of a German soldier!’ Then one of the soldiers threw
into the interior of the house of Mr. Fishbach one of the pastils
which the German soldiers carried and immediately the house flared
up. It contained paintings of a high value. The old coachman, Joseph
Vandermosten, who had re-entered the house to try to save the life of
his master, did not return. His body was found the next day amidst the
ruins....

“The Germans made the usual claim that the civil population had fired
upon them and that it was necessary to take these measures, i. e., burn
the churches, the library and other public monuments, burn and pillage
houses, driving out and murdering the inhabitants, sacking the city
in order to punish and to spread terror among the people, and General
von Luttwitz had told me that it was reported that the son of the
burgomaster had shot one of their generals.

“But the burgomaster of Louvain had no son, and no officer was shot
at Louvain. The story of a general shot by the son of a burgomaster
was a repetition of a tragedy that had occurred at Aerschot, on the
19th, where the fifteen-year-old son of the burgomaster had been killed
by a firing squad, not because he had shot a general, but because an
officer had been shot, probably by Belgian soldiers retreating through
the town. The story of this tragedy is told by the boy’s mother, under
oath, before the Belgian Commission, and is so simple, so touching, so
convincing in its verisimilitude, that I attach a copy of it in extenso
to this report. It seems to afford an altogether typical example of
what went on all over the stricken land during those days of terror.
(In other places it was the daughter of the burgomaster who was said to
have shot a general.)

“The following facts may be noted: From the avowal of Prussian officers
themselves, there was not one single victim, among their men at the
barracks of St. Martin, Louvain, where it was claimed that the first
shot had been fired from a house situated in front of the Caserne. This
would appear to be impossible had the civilians fired upon them point
blank from across the street. It was said that when certain houses near
the barracks were burning, numerous explosions occurred, revealing the
presence of cartridges; but these houses were drinking houses much
frequented by German soldiers. It was said that Spanish students shot
from the schools in the Rue de la Station, but Father Catala, rector of
the school, affirms that the schools were empty....

“If it was necessary, for whatever reason, to do what was done at
Vise, at Dinant, at Aerschot, at Louvain, and in a hundred other towns
that were sacked, pillaged and burned, where masses were shot down
because civilians had fired on German troops, and if it was necessary
to do this on a scale never before witnessed in history, one might not
unreasonably assume that the alleged firing by civilians was done on a
scale, if not so thoroughly organized, at least somewhat in proportion
to the rage of destruction that punished it. And hence it would seem
to be a simple matter to produce at least convincing evidence that
civilians had fired on the soldiers; but there is no testimony to
that effect beyond that of the soldiers who merely assert it: _Man hat
geschossen_. If there were no more firing on soldiers by civilians in
Belgium than is proved by the German testimony, it was not enough to
justify the burning of the smallest of the towns that was overtaken by
that fate. And there is not a scintilla of evidence of organized bands
of francs-tireurs, such as were found in the war of 1870.”

  [Illustration: _From a painting by F. Gueldry to illustrate an
                   official report._

  GERMAN ATROCITIES

  At Senlis, Department of Oise, on September 2, 1914, French captives
  were made to walk in the open so as to be hit by French bullets. Many
  were killed and wounded. The townsman on the left was struck in the
  knee. A German officer asked to see the wound and shot him through the
  shoulder. On the right a German officer is seen torturing a wounded
  French soldier by beating him in the face with a stick.]

Under date of September 12, 1917, Minister Whitlock, in a report to the
State Department of the United States, made the following summary: “As
one studies the evidence at hand, one is struck at the outset by the
fact so general that it must exclude the hypothesis of coincidence,
and that is that these wholesale massacres followed immediately upon
some check, some reverse, that the German army had sustained. The
German army was checked by the guns of the forts to the east of Liége,
and the horrors of Vise, Verviers, Bligny, Battice, Hervy and twenty
villages follow. When they entered Liége, they burned the houses
along two streets and killed many persons, five or six Spaniards
among them. Checked before Namur they sacked Andenne, Bauvignies, and
Champignon, and when they took Namur they burned one hundred and fifty
houses. Compelled to give battle to the French army in the Belgian
Ardennes they ravaged the beautiful valley of the Semois; the complete
destruction of the village of Rossignlo and the extermination of its
entire male population took place there. Checked again by the French
on the Meuse, the awful carnage of Dinant results. Held on the Sambre
by the French, they burn one hundred houses at Charleroi and enact the
appalling tragedy of Tamines. At Mons, the English hold them, and after
that all over the Borinage there is a systematic destruction, pillage
and murder. The Belgian army drive them back from Malines and Louvain
is doomed. The Belgian army falling back and fighting in retreat took
refuge in the forts of Antwerp, and the burning and sack of Hougaerde,
Wavre, Ottignies, Grimde, Neerlinter, Weert, St. George, Shaffen and
Aerschot follow.

“The Belgian troops inflicted serious losses on the Germans in the
South of the Province of Limbourg and the towns of Lummen, Bilsen, and
Lanaeken are partially destroyed. Antwerp held out for two months,
and all about its outer line of fortifications there was blood and
fire, numerous villages were sacked and burned and the whole town of
Termonde was destroyed. During the battles of September the village of
Boortmeerbeek near Malines, occupied by the Germans, was retaken by
the Belgians, and when the Germans entered it again they burned forty
houses. Three times occupied by the Belgians and retaken by the Germans
Boortmeerbeek was three times punished in the same way. That is to say,
everywhere the German army met with a defeat it took it out, as we say
in America, on the civil population. And that is the explanation of the
German atrocities in Belgium.”

A committee of the highest honor and responsibility was appointed by
the British Government to investigate the whole subject of atrocities
in Belgium and Northern France. Its chairman was the Rt. Hon. Viscount
James Bryce, formerly British Ambassador to the United States. Its
other members were the Rt. Hon. Sir Frederick Pollock, the Rt.
Hon. Sir Edward Clark, Sir Alfred Hopkinson, Mr. H. A. L. Fisher,
Vice-Chancellor of the University of Sheffield, Mr. Harold Cox and Sir
Kenelm E. Digby.

The report of the commission bears upon its face the stamp of
painstaking search for truth, substantiates every statement made by
Minister Whitlock and makes known many horrible instances of cruelty
and barbarity. It makes the following deductions as having been proved
beyond question:

1. That there were in many parts of Belgium deliberate and
systematically organized massacres of the civil population, accompanied
by many isolated murders and other outrages.

2. That in the conduct of the war generally innocent civilians, both
men and women, were murdered in large numbers, women violated, and
children murdered.

3. That looting, house burning, and the wanton destruction of property
were ordered and countenanced by the officers of the German army, that
elaborate provision had been made for systematic incendiarism at the
very outbreak of the war, and that the burnings and destruction were
frequent where no military necessity could be alleged, being, indeed,
part of a system of general terrorization.

4. That the rules and usages of war were frequently broken,
particularly by the using of civilians, including women and children,
as a shield for advancing forces exposed to fire, to a less degree by
killing the wounded and prisoners and in the frequent abuse of the Red
Cross and the white flag.

The Bryce Commission’s report on the destruction of Dinant is an
example of testimony laid before them. It follows:

“A clear statement of the outrages at Dinant, which many travelers will
recall as a singularly picturesque town on the Meuse, is given by one
witness, who says that the Germans began burning houses in the Rue
St. Jacques on the 21st of August, and that every house in the street
was burned. On the following day an engagement took place between the
French and the Germans, and the witness spent the whole day in the
cellar of a bank with his wife and children. On the morning of the
23d, about 5 o’clock, firing ceased, and almost immediately afterward
a party of Germans came to the house. They rang the bell and began to
batter at the door and windows. The witness’ wife went to the door and
two or three Germans came in. The family were ordered out into the
street. There they found another family, and the two families were
driven with their hands above their heads along the Rue Grande. All the
houses in the street were burning.

“The party was eventually put into a forge where there were a number
of other prisoners, about a hundred in all, and were kept there from
11 A. M. till 2 P. M. They were then taken to the prison. There they
were assembled in a courtyard and searched. No arms were found. They
were then passed through into the prison itself and put into cells.
The witness and his wife were separated from each other. During the
next hour the witness heard rifle shots continually and noticed in
the corner of a courtyard leading off the row of cells the body of a
young man with a mantle thrown over it. He recognized the mantle as
having belonged to his wife. The witness’ daughter was allowed to go
out to see what had happened to her mother, and the witness himself was
allowed to go across the courtyard half an hour afterward for the same
purpose. He found his wife lying on the floor in a room. She had bullet
wounds in four places but was alive and told her husband to return to
the children and he did so.

“About 5 o’clock in the evening, he saw the Germans bringing out
all the young and middle-aged men from the cells, and ranging their
prisoners, to the number of forty, in three rows in the middle of the
courtyard. About twenty Germans were drawn up opposite, but before
anything was done there was a tremendous fusillade from some point near
the prison and the civilians were hurried back to their cells. Half an
hour later the same forty men were brought back into the courtyard.
Almost immediately there was a second fusillade like the first and they
were driven back to the cells again.

“About 7 o’clock the witness and other prisoners were brought out of
their cells and marched out of the prison. They went between two lines
of troops to Roche Bayard, about a kilometer away. An hour later the
women and children were separated and the prisoners were brought back
to Dinant passing the prison on their way. Just outside the prison,
the witness saw three lines of bodies which he recognized as being
those of his neighbors. They were nearly all dead, but he noticed
movement in some of them. There were about one hundred and twenty
bodies. The prisoners were then taken up to the top of a hill outside
Dinant and compelled to stay there till 8 o’clock in the morning. On
the following day they were put into cattle trucks and taken thence to
Coblenz. For three months they remained prisoners in Germany.

“Unarmed civilians were killed in masses at other places near the
prison. About ninety bodies were seen lying on the top of one another
in a grass square opposite the convent. A witness asked a German
officer why her husband had been shot, and he told her that it was
because two of her sons had been in the civil guard and had shot at
the Germans. As a matter of fact, one of her sons was at that time in
Liége and the other in Brussels. It is stated that besides the ninety
corpses referred to above, sixty corpses of civilians were recovered
from a hole in the brewery yard and that forty-eight bodies of women
and children were found in a garden. The town was systematically set on
fire by hand grenades. Another witness saw a little girl of seven, one
of whose legs was broken and the other injured by a bayonet. We have
no reason to believe that the civilian population of Dinant gave any
provocation, or that any other defense can be put forward to justify
the treatment inflicted upon its citizens.”

The Bryce Commission reports the outrages in a number of Belgian
villages in this terse fashion:

“In Hofstade a number of houses had been set on fire and many corpses
were seen, some in houses, some in back yards, and some in the streets.
Two witnesses speak of having seen the body of a young man pierced by
bayonet thrusts with the wrists cut also. On a side road the corpse
of a civilian was seen on his doorstep with a bayonet wound in his
stomach and by his side the dead body of a boy of five or six with his
hands nearly severed. The corpses of a woman and boy were seen at the
blacksmith’s. They had been killed with the bayonet. In a café, a young
man, also killed with the bayonet, was holding his hands together as if
in the attitude of supplication.

“In the garden of a house in the main street, bodies of two women were
observed, and in another house, the body of a boy of sixteen with two
bayonet wounds in the chest. In Sempst a similar condition of affairs
existed. Houses were burning and in some of them were the charred
remains of civilians. In a bicycle shop a witness saw the burned corpse
of a man. Other witnesses speak of this incident. Another civilian,
unarmed, was shot as he was running away. As will be remembered,
all the arms had been given up some time before by the order of the
burgomaster.

“At Weerde four corpses of civilians were lying in the road. It was
said that these men had fired upon the German soldiers; but this is
denied. The arms had been given up long before. Two children were
killed in the village of Weerde, quite wantonly as they were standing
in the road with their mother. They were three or four years old and
were killed with the bayonet. A small barn burning close by formed a
convenient means of getting rid of the bodies. They were thrown into
the flames from the bayonets. It is right to add that no commissioned
officer was present at the time. At Eppeghem, on August 25th, a
pregnant woman who had been wounded with a bayonet was discovered in
the convent. She was dying. On the road six dead bodies of laborers
were seen.

“At Boortmeerbeek a German soldier was seen to fire three times at a
little girl five years old. Having failed to hit her, he subsequently
bayoneted her. He was killed with the butt end of a rifle by a Belgian
soldier who had seen him commit this murder from a distance. At Herent
the charred body of a civilian was found in a butcher’s shop, and in
a handcart twenty yards away was the dead body of a laborer. Two eye
witnesses relate that a German soldier shot a civilian and stabbed
him with a bayonet as he lay. He then made one of these witnesses,
a civilian prisoner, smell the blood on the bayonet. At Haecht the
bodies of ten civilians were seen lying in a row by a brewery wall. In
a laborer’s house, which had been broken up, the mutilated corpse of a
woman of thirty to thirty-five was discovered.”

Concerning the treatment of women and children in general, the report
continues: “The evidence shows that the German authorities, when
carrying out a policy of systematic arson and plunder in selected
districts, usually drew some distinction between the adult male
population on the one hand and the women and children on the other. It
was a frequent practice to set apart the adult males of the condemned
district with a view to the execution of a suitable number--preferably
of the younger and more vigorous--and to reserve the women and children
for milder treatment. The depositions, however, present many instances
of calculated cruelty, often going the length of murder, toward the
women and children of the condemned area.

“At Dinant sixty women and children were confined in the cellar of a
convent from Sunday morning till the following Friday, August 28th,
sleeping on the ground, for there were no beds, with nothing to drink
during the whole period, and given no food until Wednesday, when
somebody threw into the cellar two sticks of macaroni and a carrot for
each prisoner. In other cases the women and children were marched for
long distances along roads, as, for instance, the march of the women
from Louvain to Tirlemont, August 28th, the laggards pricked on by
the attendant Uhlans. A lady complains of having been brutally kicked
by privates. Others were struck at with the butt end of rifles. At
Louvain, at Liége, at Aerschot, at Malines, at Montigny, at Andenne,
and elsewhere, there is evidence that the troops were not restrained
from drunkenness, and drunken soldiers cannot be trusted to observe the
rules or decencies of war, least of all when they are called upon to
execute a preordained plan of arson and pillage. From the very first
women were not safe. At Liége women and children were chased about the
streets by soldiers.

“Witnesses recount how a great crowd of men, women and children from
Aerschot were marched to Louvain, and then suddenly exposed to a fire
from a mitrailleuse and rifles. ‘We were all placed,’ recounts a
sufferer, ‘in Station Street, Louvain, and the German soldiers fired on
us. I saw the corpses of some women in the street. I fell down, and a
woman who had been shot fell on top of me.’ Women and children suddenly
turned out into the streets, and, compelled to witness the destruction
of their homes by fire, provided a sad spectacle to such as were sober
enough to see.

“A humane German officer, witnessing the ruin of Aerschot, exclaimed
in disgust: ‘I am a father myself, and I cannot bear this. It is not
war but butchery.’ Officers as well as men succumbed to the temptation
of drink, with results which may be illustrated by an incident which
occurred at Campenhout. In this village there was a certain well-to-do
merchant (name given) who had a cellar of good champagne. On the
afternoon of the 14th or 15th of August three German cavalry officers
entered the house and demanded champagne. Having drunk ten bottles and
invited five or six officers and three or four private soldiers to join
them, they continued their carouse, and then called for the master and
mistress of the house.

“‘Immediately my mistress came in,’ says the valet de chambre, ‘one
of the officers who was sitting on the floor got up, and, putting
a revolver to my mistress’ temple, shot her dead. The officer was
obviously drunk. The other officers continued to drink and sing, and
they did not pay any great attention to the killing of my mistress. The
officer who shot my mistress then told my master to dig a grave and
bury my mistress. My master and the officer went into the garden, the
officer threatening my master with a pistol. My master was then forced
to dig the grave and to bury my mistress in it. I cannot say for what
reason they killed my mistress. The officer who did it was singing all
the time.’

“In the evidence before us there are cases tending to show that
aggravated crimes against women were sometimes severely punished. One
witness reports that a young girl who was being pursued by a drunken
soldier at Louvain appealed to a German officer, and that the offender
was then and there shot. Another describes how an officer of the
Thirty-second Regiment of the Line was led out to execution for the
violation of two young girls, but reprieved at the request or with the
consent of the girls’ mother. These instances are sufficient to show
that the maltreatment of women was no part of the military scheme of
the invaders, however much it may appear to have been the inevitable
result of the system of terror deliberately adopted in certain regions.
Indeed, so much is avowed. ‘I asked the commander why we had been
spared,’ says a lady in Louvain, who deposes to having suffered much
brutal treatment during the sack. He said: ‘We will not hurt you any
more. Stay in Louvain. All is finished.’ It was Saturday, August 29th,
and the reign of terror was over.

“The Germans used men, women and children of Belgium as screens for
advancing infantry, as is shown in the following: Outside Fort Fleron,
near Liége, men and children were marched in front of the Germans to
prevent the Belgian soldiers from firing. The progress of the Germans
through Mons was marked by many incidents of this character. Thus, on
August 22d, half a dozen Belgian colliers returning from work were
marching in front of some German troops who were pursuing the English,
and in the opinion of the witnesses, they must have been placed there
intentionally. An English officer describes how he caused a barricade
to be erected in a main thoroughfare leading out of Mons, when the
Germans, in order to reach a crossroad in the rear, fetched civilians
out of the houses on each side of the main road and compelled them to
hold up white flags and act as cover.

“Another British officer who saw this incident is convinced that
the Germans were acting deliberately for the purpose of protecting
themselves from the fire of the British troops. Apart from this
protection, the Germans could not have advanced, as the street was
straight and commanded by the British rifle fire at a range of 700 or
800 yards. Several British soldiers also speak of this incident, and
their story is confirmed by a Flemish witness in a side street.”

The French Government also appointed a commission, headed by M. Georges
Payelle. This body made an investigation of outrages committed by
German officers and soldiers in Northern France. Its report showed
conditions that outstripped in horror the war tactics of savages. It
makes the following accusations:

“In Rebais, two English cavalrymen who were surprised and wounded in
this commune were finished off with gunshots by the Germans when they
were dismounted and when one of them had thrown up his hands, showing
thus that he was unarmed.

“In the department of the Marne, as everywhere else, the German troops
gave themselves up to general pillage, which was carried out always
under similar conditions and with the complicity of their leaders.
The Communes of Heiltz-le-Maurupt, Suippes, Marfaux, Fromentieres
and Esternay suffered especially in this way. Everything which the
invader could carry off from the houses was placed on motor lorries and
vehicles. At Suippes, in particular, they carried off in this way a
quantity of different objects, among these sewing machines and toys.
A great many villages, as well as important country towns, were burned
without any reason whatever. Without doubt, these crimes were committed
by order, as German detachments arrived in the neighborhood with their
torches, their grenades, and their usual outfit for arson.

“At Marfaux nineteen private houses were burned. Of the Commune of
Glannes practically nothing remains. At Somme-Tourbe the entire
village has been destroyed, with the exception of the Mairie, the
church and two private buildings. At Auve nearly the whole town has
been destroyed. At Etrepy sixty-three families out of seventy are
homeless. At Huiron all of the houses, with the exception of five had
been burned. At Sermaize-les-Bains only about forty houses out of 900
remain. At Bignicourt-sur-Saultz thirty houses out of thirty-three are
in ruins.

“At Suippes, the big market town which has been practically burned out,
German soldiers carrying straw and cans of petrol have been seen in the
streets. While the mayor’s house was burning, six sentinels with fixed
bayonets were under orders to forbid any one to approach and to prevent
any help being given.

“All this destruction by arson, which only represents a small
proportion of the acts of the same kind in the Department of
Seine-et-Marne, was accomplished without the least tendency to
rebellion or the smallest act of resistance being recorded against the
inhabitants of the localities which are today more or less completely
destroyed. In some villages the Germans, before setting fire to them,
made one of their soldiers fire a shot from his rifle so as to be able
to pretend afterward that the civilian population had attacked them,
an allegation which is all the more absurd since at the time when the
enemy arrived, the only inhabitants left were old men, sick persons, or
people absolutely without any means of aggression.

“Numerous crimes against the person have also been committed. In the
majority of the communes hostages have been taken away; many of them
have not returned. At Sermaize-les-Bains, the Germans carried off
about one hundred and fifty people, some of whom were decked out with
helmets and coats and compelled, thus equipped, to mount guard over the
bridges.

“At Bignicourt-sur-Saultz thirty men and forty-five women and children
were obliged to leave with a detachment. One of the men--a certain
Emile Pierre--has not returned nor sent any news of himself. At
Corfelix, M. Jacqet, who was carried off on the 7th of September with
eleven of his fellow-citizens, was found five hundred meters from the
village with a bullet in his head.

“At Champuis, the curé, his maid-servant, and four other inhabitants
who were taken away on the same day as the hostages of Corfelix had not
returned at the time of our visit to the place.

“At the same place an old man of seventy, named Jacquemin, was tied
down in his bed by an officer and left in this state without food for
three days. He died a little time after. At Vert-la-Gravelle a farm
hand was killed. He was struck on the head with a bottle and his
chest was run through with a lance. The garde champetre Brulefer of le
Gault-la-Foret was murdered at Maclaunay, where he had been taken by
the Germans. His body was found with his head shattered and a wound on
his chest.

“At Champguyon, a commune which has been fired, a certain Verdier was
killed in his father-in-law’s house. The latter was not present at the
execution, but he heard a shot and next day an officer said to him,
‘Son shot. He is under the ruins.’ In spite of the search made the body
has not been found among them. It must have been consumed in the fire.

“At Sermaize, the roadmaker, Brocard, was placed among a number of
hostages. Just at the moment when he was being arrested with his son,
his wife and his daughter-in-law in a state of panic rushed to throw
themselves into the Saulx. The old man was able to free himself for a
moment and ran in all haste after them and made several attempts to
save them, but the Germans dragged him away pitilessly, leaving the two
wretched women struggling in the river. When Brocard and his son
were restored to liberty, four days afterward, and found the bodies,
they discovered that their wives had both received bullet wounds in the
head.

  [Illustration: © _Underwood and Underwood, N. Y._

  THE SUPREME EXPONENTS OF GERMAN FRIGHTFULNESS

  On the left, General von Bissing, military commander of Belgium. On
  the right, Grand Admiral von Tirpitz, who inspired the German
  submarine campaign.]

“At Triaucourt the Germans gave themselves up to the worst excesses.
Angered doubtless by the remark which an officer had addressed to a
soldier, against whom a young girl of nineteen, Mlle. Helene Proces,
had made complaint on account of the indecent treatment to which she
had been subjected, they burned the village and made a systematic
massacre of the inhabitants. They began by setting fire to the house
of an inoffensive householder, M. Jules Gand, and by shooting this
unfortunate man as he was leaving his house to escape the flames. Then
they dispersed among the houses in the streets, firing off their rifles
on every side. A young man, seventeen years, Georges Lecourtier, who
tried to escape was shot. M. Alfred Lallemand suffered the same fate.
He was pursued into the kitchen of his fellow-citizen Tautelier, and
murdered there, while Tautelier received three bullets in his hand.

“Fearing, not without reason, for their lives, Mlle. Proces, her mother
and her grandmother of seventy-one and her old aunt of eighty-one,
tried to cross the trellis which separates their garden from a
neighboring property with the help of a ladder. The young girl alone
was able to reach the other side and to avoid death by hiding in the
cabbages. As for the other women, they were struck down by rifle shots.
The village curé collected the brains of the aunt on the ground on
which they were strewn and had the bodies carried into Proces’ house.
During the following night, the Germans played the piano near the
bodies.

“While the carnage raged, the fire rapidly spread and devoured
thirty-five houses. An old man of seventy and a child of two months
perished in the flames. M. Igier, who was trying to save his cattle,
was pursued for 300 meters by soldiers, who fired at him ceaselessly.
By a miracle this man had the good fortune not to be wounded, but five
bullets went through his clothing.”

This summary merely hints at the atrocities that were perpetrated.
And these are the crimes that France and Belgium will remember after
indemnities have been paid, after borders have been re-established and
after generations shall have passed. The horrors of blazing villages,
of violated womanhood, of mutilated childhood, of stark and senseless
butcheries, will flash before the minds of French and Belgian men and
women when Germany’s name shall be mentioned long after the declaration
of peace.

_Schrecklichkeit_ had its day. It took its bloody toll of the fairest
and bravest of two gallant nations. It ravaged Poland as well and
wreaked its fiendish will on wounded soldiers on the battlefields.

But _Schrecklichkeit_ is dead. Belgium and France have shown that
murder and rape and arson cannot destroy liberty nor check the
indomitable ambitions of the free peoples of earth.

The lesson to Germany was taught at a terrible cost to humanity, but
it was taught in a fashion that nations hereafter who shall dream of
emulating the Hun will know in advance that frightfulness serves no end
except to feed the lust for destruction that exists only in the most
debased and brutish of men.




CHAPTER VII

THE FIRST BATTLE OF THE MARNE


France and civilization were saved by Joffre and Foch at the first
battle of the Marne in August, 1914.

Autocracy was destroyed by Foch at the second battle of the Marne, 1918.

This in a nutshell embraces the dramatic opening and closing episodes
of the World War on the soil of France. Bracketed between these two
glorious victories were the agonies of martyred France, the deaths and
life-long cripplings of millions of men, the up-rooting of arrogant
militarism, the liberation of captive nations.

The first battle of the Marne was wholly a French operation. The
British were close at hand, but had no share in the victory. Generals
Gallieni and Manoury, acting under instructions from Marshal Joffre,
were driven by automobile to the headquarters of the British
commander, Sir John French, in the village of Melun. They explained in
detail General Joffre’s plan of attack upon the advancing German army.
An urgent request was made that the British army halt its retreat, face
about, and attack the two corps of von Kluck’s army then confronting
the British. Simultaneously with this attack General Manoury’s forces
were to fall upon the flank and the rear guard of von Kluck along the
River Ourcq. This operation was planned for the next day, September
5th. Sir John French replied that he could not get his tired army in
readiness for battle within forty-eight hours. This would delay the
British attack in all probability until September 7th.

Joffre’s plan of battle, however, would admit of no delay. The case
was urgent; there was grave danger of a union between the great forces
headed by the Crown Prince and those under von Kluck. He resolved to go
ahead without the British, and ordered Manoury to strike as had been
planned.

He fixed as an extreme limit for the movement of retreat, which
was still going on, the line of Bray-sur-Seine, Nogent-sur-Seine,
Arcis-sur-Aube, Vitry-le-François, and the region to the north of
Bar-le-Duc. This line might be reached if the troops were compelled
to go back so far. They would attack before reaching it, as soon as
there was a possibility of bringing about an offensive disposition,
permitting the co-operation of the whole of the French forces.

On September 5 it appeared that this desired situation existed.

The First German army, carrying audacity to temerity, had continued its
endeavor to envelop the French left, had crossed the Grand Morin, and
reached the region of Chauffry, to the south of Rebais and of Esternay.
It aimed then at cutting Joffre off from Paris, in order to begin the
investment of the capital.

The Second army had its head on the line Champaubert, Etoges, Bergères,
and Vertus.

The Third and Fourth armies reached to Châlons-sur-Marne and
Bussy-le-Répos. The Fifth army was advancing on one side and the other
from the Argonne as far as Triaucourt-les-Islettes and Juivecourt. The
Sixth and Seventh armies were attacking more to the east.

  [Illustration: THE FIRST GERMAN DASH FOR PARIS]

The French left army had been able to occupy the line Sezanne,
Villers-St. Georges and Courchamps. This was precisely the disposition
which the General-in-Chief had wished to see achieved. On the 4th he
decided to take advantage of it, and ordered all the armies to hold
themselves ready. He had taken from his right two new army corps,
two divisions of infantry, and two divisions of cavalry, which were
distributed between his left and his center.

  [Illustration: © _Underwood and Underwood, N. Y._

  GENERAL PERSHING AND MARSHAL JOFFRE

  The Commander-in-Chief of the American Expeditionary Forces chatting
  with the veteran Marshal of France, the hero of the first battle of
  the Marne.]

On the evening of the 5th he addressed to all the commanders of armies
a message ordering them to attack.

“The hour has come,” he wrote, “to advance at all costs, and to die
where you stand rather than give way.”

If one examines the map, it will be seen that by his inflection toward
Meaux and Coulommiers General von Kluck was exposing his right to the
offensive action of the French left. This is the starting point of the
victory of the Marne.

On the evening of September 5th the French left army had reached the
front Penchard-Saint-Souflet-Ver. On the 6th and 7th it continued
its attacks vigorously with the Ourcq as objective. On the evening
of the 7th it was some kilometers from the Ourcq, on the front
Chambry-Marcilly-Lisieux-Acy-en-Multien. On the 8th, the Germans, who
had in great haste reinforced their right by bringing their Second
and Fourth army corps back to the north, obtained some successes by
attacks of extreme violence. But in spite of this pressure the French
held their ground. In a brilliant action they took three standards, and
being reinforced prepared a new attack for the 10th. At the moment that
this attack was about to begin the enemy was already in retreat toward
the north. The attack became a pursuit, and on the 12th the French
established themselves on the Aisne.

Why did the German forces which were confronting the French, and on
the evening before attacking so furiously, retreat on the morning of
the 10th? Because in bringing back on the 6th several army corps from
the south to the north to face the French left, the enemy had exposed
his left to the attacks of the now rested British, who had immediately
faced around toward the north, and to those of the French armies which
were prolonging the English lines to the right. This is what the
French command had sought to bring about. This is what happened on
September 8th and allowed the development and rehabilitation which it
was to effect.

On the 6th the British army set out from the line Rozcy-Langny and that
evening reached the southward bank of the Grand Morin. On the 7th and
8th it continued its march, and on the 9th had debouched to the north
of the Marne below Château-Thierry--the town that was to become famous
for the American stand in 1918--taking in flank the German forces which
on that day were opposing, on the Ourcq, the French left army. Then it
was that these forces began to retreat, while the British army, going
in pursuit and capturing seven guns and many prisoners, reached the
Aisne between Soissons and Longueval.

The rôle of the French army, which was operating to the right of the
British army, was threefold. It had to support the British attacking
on its left. It had on its right to support the center, which, from
September 7th, had been subjected to a German attack of great
violence. Finally, its mission was to throw back the three active army
corps and the reserve corps which faced it.

On the 7th, it made a leap forward, and on the following days reached
and crossed the Marne, seizing, after desperate fighting, guns,
howitzers, mitrailleuses, and a million cartridges. On the 12th it
established itself on the north edge of the Montagne-de-Reime in
contact with the French center, which for its part had just forced the
enemy to retreat in haste.

The French center consisted of a new army created on August 29th and of
one of those which at the beginning of the campaign had been engaged in
Belgian Luxemburg. The first had retreated, on August 29th to September
5th, from the Aisne to the north of the Marne and occupied the general
front Sezanne-Mailly.

The second, more to the east, had drawn back to the south of the line
Humbauville-Château-Beauchamp-Bignicourt-Blesmes-Maurupt-le-Montoy.

The enemy, in view of his right being arrested and the defeat of
his enveloping movement, made a desperate effort from the 7th to
the 19th to pierce the French center to the west and to the east of
Fere-Champenoise. On the 8th he succeeded in forcing back the right of
the new French army, which retired as far as Gouragançon. On the 9th,
at 6 o’clock in the morning, there was a further retreat to the south
of that village, while on the left the other army corps also had to go
back to the line Allemant-Connantre.

Despite this retreat General Foch, commanding the army of the center,
ordered a general offensive for the same day. With the Morocco
division, whose behavior was heroic, he met a furious assault of the
Germans on his left toward the marshes of Saint Gond. Then with the
divisions which had just victoriously overcome the attacks of the enemy
to the north of Sezanne, and with the whole of his left army corps,
he made a flanking attack in the evening of the 9th upon the German
forces, and notably the guard, which had thrown back his right army
corps. The enemy, taken by surprise by this bold maneuver, did not
resist, and beat a hasty retreat. This marked Foch as the most daring
and brilliant strategist of the war.

On the 11th the French crossed the Marne between Tours-sur-Marne and
Sarry, driving the Germans in front of them in disorder. On the 12th
they were in contact with the enemy to the north of the Champ de
Châlons. The reserve army of the center, acting on the right of the
one just referred to, had been intrusted with the mission during the
7th, 8th, and 9th of disengaging its neighbor, and it was only on the
10th that being reinforced by an army corps from the east, it was able
to make its action effectively felt. On the 11th the Germans retired.
But, perceiving their danger, they fought desperately, with enormous
expenditure of projectiles, behind strong intrenchments. On the 12th
the result had none the less been attained, and two French center
armies were solidly established on the ground gained.

  [Illustration: MARSHAL FERDINAND FOCH, COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF OF THE
  ALLIED ARMIES

  The crushing defeat of the armies of the Central Powers is due in
  large measure to the remarkable strategy and superb leadership of this
  great French soldier.]

To the right of these two armies were three others. They had orders to
cover themselves to the north and to debouch toward the west on the
flank of the enemy, which was operating to the west of the Argonne.
But a wide interval in which the Germans were in force separated them
from the French center. The attack took place, nevertheless, with very
brilliant success for the French artillery, which destroyed eleven
batteries of the Sixteenth German army corps.

On the 10th inst., the Eighth and Fifteenth German army corps
counter-attacked, but were repulsed. On the 11th French progress
continued with new successes, and on the 12th the French were able to
face round toward the north in expectation of the near and inevitable
retreat of the enemy, which, in fact, took place from the 13th.

The withdrawal of the mass of the German force involved also that of
the left. From the 12th onward the forces of the enemy operating
between Nancy and the Vosges retreated in a hurry before the two French
armies of the East, which immediately occupied the positions that
the enemy had evacuated. The offensive of the French right had thus
prepared and consolidated in the most useful way the result secured by
the left and center.

Such was this seven days’ battle, in which more than two millions of
men were engaged. Each army gained ground step by step, opening the
road to its neighbor, supported at once by it, taking in flank the
adversary which the day before it had attacked in front, the efforts of
one articulating closely with those of the other, a perfect unity of
intention and method animating the supreme command.

To give this victory all its meaning it is necessary to add that it was
gained by troops which for two weeks had been retreating, and which,
when the order for the offensive was given, were found to be as ardent
as on the first day. It has also to be said that these troops had to
meet the whole German army. Under their pressure the German retreat at
certain times had the appearance of a rout.

In spite of the fatigue of the poilus, in spite of the power of the
German heavy artillery, the French took colors, guns, mitrailleuses,
shells, and thousands of prisoners. One German corps lost almost the
whole of its artillery.

In that great battle the spectacular rush of General Gallieni’s army
defending Paris, was one of the dramatic surprises that decided the
issue. In that stroke Gallieni sent his entire force forty miles to
attack the right wing of the German army. In this gigantic maneuver
every motor car in Paris was utilized, and the flying force of Gallieni
became the “Army in Taxicabs,” a name that will live as long as France
exists.

General Clergerie, Chief of Staff of Gallieni, told the story for
posterity. He said:

“From August 26, 1914, the German armies had been descending upon Paris
by forced marches. On September 1st they were only three days’ march
from the advanced line of the intrenched camp, which the garrison
were laboring desperately to put into condition for defense. It was
necessary to cover with trenches a circuit of 110 miles, install
siege guns, assure the coming of supplies for them over narrow-gauge
railways, assemble the food and provisions of all kinds necessary for a
city of 4,000,000 inhabitants.

“But on September 3rd, the intelligence service, which was working
perfectly, stated about the middle of the day, that the German columns,
after heading straight for Paris, were swerving toward the southeast
and seemed to wish to avoid the fortified camp.

“General Gallieni and I then had one of those long conferences which
denoted grave events; they usually lasted from two to five minutes at
most. The fact is that the military government of Paris did little
talking--it acted. The conference reached this conclusion: ‘If they do
not come to us, we will go to them with all the force we can muster.’
Nothing remained but to make the necessary preparations. The first
thing to do was not to give the alarm to the enemy. General Manoury’s
army immediately received orders to lie low and avoid any engagement
that was not absolutely necessary.” Then care was taken to reinforce it
by every means. All was ready at the designated time.

In the night of September 3rd, knowing that the enemy would have to
leave only a rear guard on one bank of the Ourcq, General Gallieni and
General Clergerie decided to march against that rear guard, to drive
it back with all the weight of the Manoury army, to cut the enemy’s
communications, and take full advantage of his hazardous situation.
Immediately the following order was addressed to General Manoury:

  Because of the movement of the German armies, which seem to be
  slipping in before our front to the southeast, I intend to send your
  army to attack them in the flank, that is to say, in an easterly
  direction. I will indicate your line of march as soon as I learn that
  of the British army. But make your arrangements now so that your
  troops shall be ready to march this afternoon and to begin a general
  movement east of the intrenched camp tomorrow.

At ten in the morning a consultation was held by Generals Gallieni,
Clergerie, and Manoury, and the details of the plan of operations were
immediately decided. General Joffre gave permission to attack and
announced that he would himself take the offensive on the 6th. On the
5th, at noon, the army from Paris fired the first shot; the battle of
the Ourcq, a preface to the Marne, had begun.

General Clergerie then told what a precious purveyor of information he
had found in General von der Marwitz, cavalry commander of the German
first army, who made intemperate use of the wireless telegraph and
did not even take the trouble to put into cipher his dispatches, of
which the Eiffel Tower made a careful collection. “In the evening of
September 9th,” he said, “an officer of the intelligence corps brought
me a dispatch from this same Marwitz couched in something like these
terms: ‘Tell me exactly where you are and what you are doing. Hurry
up, because XXX.’ The officer was greatly embarrassed to interpret
those three X’s. Adopting the language of the poilu, I said to him,
‘Translate it, “I am going to bolt.”’ True enough, next day we found
on the site of the German batteries, which had been precipitately
evacuated, stacks of munitions; while by the roadside we came upon
motors abandoned for the slightest breakdown, and near Betz almost the
entire outfit of a field bakery, with a great store of flour and dough
half-kneaded. Paris and France were saved.

“Von Kluck could not get over his astonishment. He has tried to explain
it by saying he was unlucky, for out of a hundred Governors not one
would have acted as Gallieni did, throwing his whole available force
nearly forty miles from his stronghold. It was downright imprudence.”




CHAPTER VIII

JAPAN IN THE WAR


On August 15, 1914, the Empire of Japan issued an ultimatum to Germany.
She demanded the evacuation of Tsing-tau, the disarming of the warships
there and the handing over of the territory to Japan for ultimate
reversion to China. The time limit for her reply was set at 12 o’clock,
August 24th. To this ultimatum Germany made no reply, and at 2:30
P. M., August 23d, the German Ambassador was handed his passports
and war was declared.

The reason for the action of Japan was simple. She was bound by treaty
to Great Britain to come to her aid in any war in which Great Britain
might be involved. On August 4th a note was received from Great Britain
requesting Japan to safeguard British shipping in the Far East. Japan
replied that she could not guarantee the safety of British shipping so
long as Germany was in occupation of the Chinese province of Tsing-tau.
She suggested in turn that England agree to allow her to remove this
German menace. The British Government agreed, on the condition that
Tsing-tau be subsequently returned to China.

The Japanese Government in taking this stand was acting with courage
and with loyalty. Toward individual Germans she entertained no
animosity. She had the highest respect for German scholarship and
German military science. She had been sending her young men to German
seats of learning, and had based the reorganization of her army upon
the German military system. But she did not believe that a treaty was a
mere “scrap of paper,” and was determined to fulfil her obligations in
the treaty with England.

It seems to have been the opinion of the highest Japanese military
authorities that Germany would win the war. Japan’s statesmen, however,
believed that Germany was a menace to both China and Japan and had
lively recollections of her unfriendly attitude in connection with the
Chino-Japanese war and in the period that followed. Germany had been
playing the same game in China that she had played in the Mediterranean
and which had ultimately brought about the war.

The Chino-Japanese war had been a great Japanese triumph. One of
Japan’s greatest victories had been the capture of Port Arthur, but the
joy caused in Japan had not ended before it was into mourning because
of German interference. Germany had then compelled Japan to quit Port
Arthur, and to hand over that great fort to Russia so that she herself
might take Kiao-chau without Russia’s objection.

Japan had never forgotten or forgiven. The German seizure of Kiao-chau
had led to the Russian occupation of Port Arthur, the British
occupation of Wei-hai-wei and French occupation of Kwan-chow Bay. The
vultures were swooping down on defenseless China. This had led to the
Boxer disturbance of 1910, where again the Kaiser had interfered.

Japan, who recognized that her interests and safety were closely allied
with the preservation of the territorial integrity of China, had
proposed to the powers that she be permitted to send her troops to the
rescue of the beleaguered foreigners, but this proposition was refused
on account of German suspicion of Japan’s motives. Later on, during
the Russo-Japanese war, Russia was assisted in many ways by the German
Government.

Furthermore, the popular sympathy with the Japanese was strongly with
the Allies. It was the Kaiser who started the cry of the “yellow
peril,” which had deeply hurt Japanese pride. Yet, even with this
strong feeling, it was remarkable that Japan was willing to ally
herself with Russia. She knew very well that after all the greatest
danger to her liberties lay across the Japan Sea. Russian autocracy,
with its militarism, its religious intolerance, its discriminating
policy against foreign interests in commerce and trade, was the natural
opponent of liberal Japan.

The immediate object of Japan in joining hands with England was to
destroy the German menace in the Pacific. Before she delivered her
ultimatum the Germans had been active; ignoring the rights of Japan
while she was still neutral they had captured a Russian steamer within
Japanese jurisdiction, as well as a number of British merchant vessels,
and even a few Japanese ships had been intercepted by German cruisers.
This was the disturbance to general peace in the Far East, which had
prompted England to request Japan’s assistance.

Japan, when she entered the war, was at least twice as strong as when
she began the war with Russia. She had an army of one million men, and
a navy double the size of that which she had possessed when the Treaty
of Portsmouth was signed. As soon as war was declared she proceeded to
act. A portion of her fleet was directed against the German forces in
the Pacific, one squadron occupying Jaluit, the seat of government of
the Marshall Islands, on October 3d, but her main forces were directed
against the fortress of Tsing-tau.

The Germans had taken great pride in Tsing-tau, and had made every
effort to make it a model colony as well as an impregnable fortress.
They had built costly water works, fine streets and fine public
buildings. They had been making great preparations for a state of
siege, although it was not expected that they would be able to hold out
for a long time. There were hardly more than five thousand soldiers in
the fortress, and in the harbor but four small gunboats and an Austrian
cruiser, the Kaiserin Elizabeth. As Austria was not at war with Japan
the authorization of Japan was asked for the removal of the Kaiserin
Elizabeth to Shanghai, where she could be interned. The Japanese were
favorable to this proposition, but at the last moment instructions
arrived from Vienna directing the Austro-Hungarian Ambassador to ask
for his passports at Tokio and the commander of the Kaiserin Elizabeth
to assist the Germans in the defense of Tsing-tau. The Germans also
received orders to defend their fortress to the very last. A portion of
the German squadron, under Admiral von Spee, had sailed away before
the Japanese attack, one of these being the famous commerce raider, the
Emden.

On the 27th of August the Japanese made their first move by taking
possession of some of the small islands at the mouth of the harbor
of Kiao-chau. From these points as bases they swept the surrounding
waters for mines, with such success that during the whole siege but one
vessel of their fleet was injured by a mine. On the 2d of September
they landed troops at the northern base of the peninsula upon which
Tsing-tau was situated, with the object of cutting off the fortress
from the mainland.

The heavy rains which were customary at that season prevented much
action, but airplanes were sent which dropped bombs upon the wireless
station, electric power station and railway station of Kiao-chau, and
upon the ships in the harbor. On September 13th General Kamio captured
the railway station of Kiao-chau which stands at the head of the bay.
This placed him twenty-two miles from Tsing-tau itself. On September
27th he captured Prince Heinrich Hill, giving him a gun position from
which he could attack the inner forts. On the 23d a small British force
arrived from Wei-hai-wei to co-operate with the Japanese.

  [Illustration: THE GERMAN GIBRALTAR IN THE FAR EAST WHICH FELL TO THE
  JAPANESE]

The combined forces then advanced until they were only five miles from
Tsing-tau. The German warships were bombarding the Japanese troops
fiercely, and were being replied to by the Japanese squadron in the
mouth of the harbor. The great waste of German ammunition led General
Kamio to the opinion that the Germans did not contemplate a long siege.
He then determined on a vigorous assault.

Before the attack was made he gave the non-combatants an opportunity
of leaving, and on the 15th of October a number of women and children
and Chinese were allowed to pass through the Japanese lines. On October
31st the bombardment began, and the German forts were gradually
silenced. On November 2d the Kaiserin Elizabeth was sunk in the harbor.

The Allied armies were pushing their way steadily down, until, on
November 6th, their trenches were along the edge of the last German
redoubts. At 6 o’clock on that day white flags were floating over the
central forts and by 7.30 Admiral Waldeck, the German Governor, had
signed the terms of capitulation.

Germany’s prize colony on the continent of Asia had disappeared.
The survivors, numbering about three thousand, were sent to Japan as
prisoners of war. Japanese losses were but two hundred and thirty-six
men killed. They had, however, lost one third-class cruiser, the
Takachiho, and several smaller crafts. The whole expedition was a
notable success. It had occupied much less time than either Japan or
Germany had expected, and the news was received in Germany with a
universal feeling of bitterness and chagrin.

After the Japanese capture of Kiao-chau Japan’s assistance to the
Allies, while not spectacular, was extremely important, and its
importance increased during the last two years of the war. Her cruiser
squadrons did continuous patrol duty in the Pacific and in the China
Sea and even in the Indian Ocean. She occupied three groups of German
Islands in the South Sea, assisted in driving German raiders from
the Pacific, and by her efficiency permitted a withdrawal of British
warships to points where they could be useful nearer home. She
patrolled the Pacific coast of North and South America, landed marines
to quell riots at Singapore, and finally entered into active service in
European waters by sending a destroyer squadron to the assistance of
the Allies in the Mediterranean.

The Japanese fleet was one of the strongest in the world. It had
twenty-one first- and second-class cruisers, ten superb new destroyers,
with a reserve of twenty others, as well as twenty battle-ships and
battle cruisers.

One of Japan’s most important contributions to the cause of the Allies
was her assistance in convoying to Europe the Anzac troops, and it was
because of the approach of her fleet that the German raiding squadron
in the South Pacific was driven to the point near the Falkland Islands
where it was destroyed by Admiral Cradock’s British cruisers.

But while the aid of Japan’s navy was important to the Allies, her
greatest assistance to the Allied cause was what she did in supplying
Russia with military supplies. The tremendous struggle carried on
by Russia’s forces during the first years prevented an easy German
victory, and was only made possible through the assistance of Japan.
Enormous quantities of guns, ammunition, military stores, hospital and
Red Cross supplies, were sent into Russia, with skilled officers and
experts to accompany them. Before the Russian revolution disorganized
Russia the total value of those supplies had reached $250,000,000.
This tremendous exportation, of course, enormously benefited Japan,
but it was essential to Russia. Japan also shipped to both England and
France vast quantities of flour, beans, peas and canned goods, and
other supplies in proportion. Japan’s financial aid was also of great
value. She made great loans, to Russia $60,000,000; to Great Britain
$50,000,000. She has become today a great workshop, and her merchant
shipping has grown in proportion to the growth of her manufactures.
Immense cargoes were moved, not only from Japan to Allied countries,
but from the American seaboard to Vladivostok. More than one hundred
thousand Chinese laborers were put at the service of the Allies in
France and England, and a great part of her magnificent merchant fleet
was sent as a reinforcement to the merchant fleets of the Atlantic
powers when they had been depleted by the attacks of the German
submarines.

In the last year of the war Japan once more came prominently in the
public eye in connection with the effort made by the Allies to protect
from the Russian Bolsheviki vast stores of ammunition which had been
landed in ports of Eastern Siberia. She was compelled to land troops to
do this and to preserve order in localities where her citizens were in
danger. Upon the development of the Czecho-Slovak movement in Eastern
Siberia a Japanese force, in association with troops from the United
States and Great Britain, was landed to protect the Czecho-Slovaks
from Bolsheviki treachery. These troops succeeded in their object, and
throughout the latter period of the war kept Eastern Siberia friendly
to the Allied cause. In this campaign there was but little blood
shed. The expedition was followed by the strong sympathy of the allied
world which was full of admiration for the loyalty and courage of the
Czecho-Slovaks and their heroic leaders.




CHAPTER IX

CAMPAIGN IN THE EAST


Long before the declaration of war the German military experts had
made their plans. They recognized that in case of war with Russia,
France would come to the rescue of its ally. They hoped that Italy,
and felt sure that England, would remain neutral, but, no doubt, had
provided for the possibility that these two nations would join the
ranks of their foes. They recognized that they would be compelled to
fight against greatly superior numbers, but they had this advantage,
that they were prepared to move at once, while England was unprepared,
and Russia, with enormous numbers, was so unprovided with railroad
facilities that it would take weeks before her armies would be
dangerous.

Their plan of campaign, then, was obvious. Leaving in the East only
such forces as were necessary for a strong defense, they would throw
the bulk of their strength against the French. They anticipated an
easy march to Paris, and then with France at their mercy they would
gather together all their powers and deal with Russia. But they had
underestimated both the French power of resistance, and the Russian
weakness, and in particular they had not counted upon the check that
they were to meet with in gallant Belgium.

The Russian mobilization was quicker by far than had been anticipated.
Her armies were soon engaged with the comparatively small German
forces, and met with great success.

To understand the Russian campaign one must have some knowledge of
the geography of western Russia. Russian Poland projects as a great
quadrilateral into eastern Germany. It is bounded on the north by
East Prussia, on the south by Galicia, and the western part reaches
deep into Germany itself. The land is a broad, level plain, through
which from south to north runs the River Vistula. In the center lies
the capital, Warsaw, protected by a group of fortresses. The Russian
army, therefore, could not make a direct western advance until it had
protected its flanks by the conquest of East Prussia on the north, and
Galicia on the south.

By the beginning of the third week in August the first Russian armies
were ready. Her forces were arranged as follows: Facing East Prussia
was the Army of the Niemen, four corps strong; the Army of Poland,
consisting of fifteen army corps, occupied a wide front from Narev
on the north to the Bug Valley; a third army, the Army of Galicia,
directed its line of advance southward into the country between
Lemberg and the River Sareth. The fortresses protecting Warsaw, still
further to the east, were well garrisoned, and in front of them to
the west were troops intended to delay any German advance from Posen.
The Russian commander-in-chief was the Grand Duke Nicholas, uncle of
the late Czar, and one of the most admirable representatives of the
Russian at his best; a splendid soldier, honest, straightforward, and
patriotic, he was the idol of his men. He had with him a brilliant
staff, but the strength of his army lay in its experience. They had
learned war in the bitter school of the Manchurian campaign.

The German force on the frontier was not less than five hundred
thousand men, and they were arranged for defense. Austria, in Galicia,
had gathered nearly one million men under the auspices of Frederick.
The first movement of these armies took place in East Prussia. The Army
of the Niemen had completed its mobilization early in August, and was
under the command of General Rennenkampf, one of the Russian leaders in
Manchuria. In command of the German forces was General von François, an
officer of Huguenot descent.

The first clash of these armies took place on the German frontier near
Libau, on August 3d. Two days later, the Russians crossed the frontier,
drove in the German advance posts, and seized the railway which runs
south and east of the Masurian Lakes. The German force fell back,
burning villages and destroying roads, according to their usual plan.
On the 7th of August the main army of Rennenkampf crossed the border
at Suwalki, advancing in two main bodies: the Army of the Niemen moving
north from Suwalki, the Army of the Narev marching through the region
of the Masurian lakes. In the lake district they advanced toward Boyen,
and then directed their march toward Insterburg, the most important
town in the neighborhood.

To protect Insterburg, General von François made his first stand at
Gumbinnen, where, on the 16th of August, the first important battle of
this campaign took place. The result was the defeat and retirement of
the Germans, and von François was forced to fall back on Koenigsberg.

Meantime, the Army of the Narev, under General Samsonov, was advancing
through the country west of the Masurian Lakes. On the 20th his
vanguard came upon a German army corps, strongly entrenched at the
northwest end of the lakes. The Germans were defeated, and fled in
great disorder toward Koenigsberg, abandoning their guns and wagons.
Many prisoners were taken, and the Russians found themselves masters
of all of East Prussia except that inside the Koenigsberg line. They
then marched on Koenigsberg, and East Prussia was for a moment at the
mercy of the conqueror.

  [Illustration: COSSACKS OF THE DON ATTACKING PRUSSIAN CAVALRY

  In a fierce encounter near the Dneister River the Russian horsemen put
  to flight the Kaiser’s best soldiers.]

Troops were left to invest Koenigsberg, and East Prussia was overrun
with the enemy. The report as to the behavior of these troops met with
great indignation in Germany; but better information insists that they
behaved with decorum and discretion. The peasantry of East Prussia,
remembering wild tales of the Cossacks of a hundred years before, fled
in confusion with stories of burning and slaughter and outrage.

Germany became aroused. To thoroughly understand the effect of the
Russian invasion of east Prussia, one must know something of the
relations of that district with the German Empire. Historically, this
was the cradle of the Prussian aristocracy, whose dangerous policies
had alarmed Europe for so many decades. The Prussian aristocracy
originated in a mixture of certain west German and Christian knights,
with a pagan population of the eastern Baltic plain. The district was
separate from Poland and never fell under the Polish influence. It
was held by the Teutonic knights who conquered it in a sort of savage
independence. The Christian faith, which the Teutonic knights professed
to inculcate, took little root, but such civilization as Germany itself
had absorbed did filter in. The chief noble of Borussia, the governing
Duke, acquired in time the title of King, and it was here, not in
Berlin, nor in Brandenburg, that the Hohenzollern power originated.

East Prussia, therefore, had a sentimental importance in the eyes of
the Prussian nobility. The Prussian Royal House, in particular, had
toward this country an especial regard. Moreover, it was regarded by
the Germans as a whole as their rampart against the Slav, a proof of
the German power to withstand the dreaded Russian. That this sacred
soil should now be in the hands of a Cossack army was not to be borne.
The Kaiser acted at once.

  [Illustration: THE EASTERN FIGHTING ZONE]

Large forces were detached from the west and sent to the aid of the
eastern army. A new commander was appointed. He was General von
Hindenburg, a veteran of the Franco-Prussian War who had been for some
years retired. After his retirement he devoted his time to the study
of East Prussia, especially the ground around the Masurian Lakes. He
became more familiar with its roads, its fields, its marshes, its bogs
than any of the peasants who spent their lives in the neighborhood of
the lakes. Before his retirement, in the annual maneuvers, he had often
rehearsed his defense against Russian invaders. Indeed report, perhaps
unfounded, described his retirement to the displeasure of the Emperor
William at being badly worsted in one of these mimic combats. He had
prevented the country from being cleared and the swamps from being
drained, arguing that they were worth more to Germany than a dozen
fortresses. A man of rugged strength, his face suggesting power and
tenacity, he was to become the idol of the German people.

His chance had come. His army consisted of remnants of the forces
of von François and large reinforcements sent him from the west. In
all, perhaps, he had with him 150,000 men, and he had behind him an
admirable system of strategic railways.

The Russian High Command was full of confidence. Rennenkampf had
advanced with the army of the Niemen toward Koenigsberg, whose fall
was reported from time to time, without foundation. Koenigsberg was in
fact impregnable to armies no stronger than those under Rennenkampf’s
command. Samsonov with the Army of the Narev, had pushed on to the
northeastern point of the lakes, and defeated the German army corps
at Frankenau. Misled by his success, he decided to continue his
advance through the lake region toward Allenstein. He marched first
toward Osterode, in the wilderness of forest, lake and marsh, between
Allenstein and the Lower Vistula. His force numbered 200,000 men, but
the swamps made it impossible to proceed in mass. His column had to be
temporarily divided, nor was he well informed as to the strength of
his enemy. On Wednesday, the 26th of August, his advance guards were
everywhere driven in. As he pushed on he discovered the enemy in great
numbers, and late in the day realized that he was facing a great army.

Von Hindenburg had taken a position astride the railway from Allenstein
to Soldau, and all access to his front was barred by lakes and swamps.
He was safe from frontal attack, and could reinforce each wing at
pleasure. From his right ran the only two good roads in the region, and
at his left was the Osterode railway. On the first day he stood on the
defensive, while the Russians, confident of victory, attacked again and
again. Some ground was won and prisoners captured, and the news of a
second victory was sent to western Europe.

The battle continued, however, until the last day of August and is
known as the battle of Tannenberg, from a village of that name near the
marshes. Having worn down his enemy, von Hindenburg counter-attacked.
His first movement was on his right. This not only deceived Samsonov
and led him to reinforce his left, but also enabled von Hindenburg to
seize the only good road that would give the Russian army a chance of
retreat. Meanwhile the German general was hurrying masses of troops
northeastward to outflank the Russian right. While the Russians were
reinforcing one flank, he was concentrating every man he could upon the
other. Then his left swept southward, driving in and enveloping the
Russian right, and Samsonov was driven into a country full of swamps
and almost without roads.

To thoroughly understand the plight of the Russian army one must have
some idea of the character of the Masurian Lake district. It was
probably molded by the work of ice in the past. Great glaciers, in
their progress toward the sea, have ground out hundreds of hollows,
where are found small pools and considerable lakes. From these glaciers
have been dropped patches of clay which hold the waters in wide extents
of marsh and bog. The country presents a monotonous picture of low,
rounded swells and flats, interspersed with stunted pine and birch
woods. The marshes and the lakes form a labyrinth, difficult to pass
even to those familiar with the country. The Masurian region is a great
trap for any commander who has not had unlimited acquaintance with
the place. Causeways, filled with great care, and railroads permit an
orderly advance, but in a confused retreat disaster at once threatens.

This was the ground that von Hindenburg knew so well. The Russians
resisted desperately, but their position could not be held. Disaster
awaited them. They found their guns sinking to the axle-trees in mire.
Whole regiments were driven into the lakes and drowned. On the last
day of battle, August 31st, Samsonov himself was killed, and his army
completely destroyed. Fifty thousand prisoners were taken with hundreds
of guns and quantities of supplies. Von Hindenburg had attained the
triumph of which he had so long dreamed.

It was an immensely successful example of that enveloping movement
characteristic of German warfare, a victory recalling the battle of
Sedan, and upon a scale not inferior to that battle. The news of this
great triumph reached Berlin upon the anniversary of the battle of
Sedan, and on the same day that the news came from the west that von
Kluck had reached the gates of Paris and it had a profound effect upon
the German mind. They had grown to believe that the Germans were a sort
of superman; these wonderful successes confirmed them in this belief.

No longer did they talk of a mere defense in the east; an advance on
Warsaw was demanded and von Hindenburg was acclaimed the greatest
soldier of his day. The Emperor made him Field Marshal, and placed him
in command of the Teutonic armies in the east.

But von Hindenburg was not satisfied. The remnant of the defeated army
had fled toward Narev, and without losing a moment von Hindenburg set
off in pursuit. Rennenkampf, all this time, strange to say, had made no
move, and at the news of Samsonov’s disaster he abandoned the siege
of Koenigsberg and retreated toward the Niemen. At Gumbinnen he fought
a rear-guard action with the German left, but had made up his mind
that the Niemen must be the Russian line of defense. Von Hindenburg,
following, crossed the Russian frontier and in the wide forests near
Augustovo there was much fighting.

This action, described as the first battle of Augustovo, was only a
rear-guard action, the Russians desiring merely to delay the enemy
for a day or two. German reports, however, described it as a victory
only second in importance to Tannenberg. Von Hindenburg then occupied
Suwalki. He apparently had become over confident, and hardly realized
that Rennenkampf was continually being reinforced by the Russian
mobilization.

The Russian High Command understood the situation very well. Their aim
was to keep von Hindenburg busy on the Niemen, while their armies in
the south were overwhelming the fleeing Austrians. Von Hindenburg was
deceived, and continued his advance until he got into serious trouble.
His movement had begun on September 7th; his army consisted of the
four corps with which he had won Tannenberg, and large reinforcements
from Germany, including at least one guards battalion, and a number
of Saxons and Bavarians. The country is one vast mixture of marsh and
lake and bog. The roads are few, and advance must therefore be slow and
difficult. Rennenkampf made no attempt to delay him beyond a little
rear-guard fighting. The German army reached the Niemen on September
21st, and found behind it the Russian army in prepared positions, with
large reinforcements from Vilna.

The river at this point was wide and deep, and hard to cross. The
battle of the Niemen Crossings was an artillery duel. The Russians
quietly waited in their trenches to watch the Germans build their
pontoon bridges. Then their guns blew the bridges to pieces. Thereupon
von Hindenburg bombarded the Russian lines hoping to destroy the
Russian guns. On Friday, the 26th, his guns boomed all day; the
Russians made no reply. So on the morning of the 27th he built bridges
again, and again the Russians blew them to pieces. Moreover the marshy
ground made maneuvering almost impossible. On the 28th he gave the
order for retreat.

He realized that the game wasn’t worth the candle; he might easily be
kept fighting on the Niemen for months, while the main armies of the
Russians were crossing Austria. Von Hindenburg conducted the retreat
with a skill which came to him naturally from his knowledge of the
marshes.

Rennenkampf followed him closely, keeping up persistent attacks through
the woods and marshes. The path of the retreating army lay through
the forest of Augustovo, a country much like that around the Masurian
Lakes, and there the Germans suffered heavy losses. Von Hindenburg
managed, however, to get the bulk of his forces back across the
frontier and continued his retreat to the intrenchments on the Masurian
Lakes.

The Germans lost 60,000 men in killed, wounded and prisoners, and von
Hindenburg handed over the command of the German armies in East Prussia
to General von Schubert, and hastened southward to direct the movement
to relieve the Austrians at Cracow.

But quite as important as the campaign in East Prussia was the struggle
in Galicia. When the war began the Germans contemplated merely defense
in their own domain; such offense as was planned was left to the
Austrians farther south.

Galicia is a long, level country lying north of the Carpathian
Mountains, and in this country Austria-Hungary had gathered together a
force of hardly less than one million men. A quarter of these lay in
reserve near the mountains; the remaining three-quarters was divided
into two armies; the first, the northern army, being under the command
of General Dankl, the second was that of von Offenberg. The base of the
first army was Przemysl; that of the second was Lemberg.

The first army, it was planned, was to advance into Russian territory
in the direction of Lublin. The second army, stationed southeast of
the first army, was to protect it from any Russians who might strike
in upon the south. The first army, therefore, contained more picked
material than the second, which included many troops from the southern
parts of the empire, including certain disaffected contingents. The
first army made its advance as soon as possible, and entered Russian
territory on the 11th of August. It went forward with very little loss
and against very little resistance. The Russian forces which were
against it were inferior in number, and fell back towards the Bug.
The Austrians followed, turning somewhat toward the East, when their
advance was checked by news of catastrophe in their rear. On the 14th
of August the Russian army under General Ruzsky crossed the frontier,
and advanced toward the Austrian second army.

The Russian army was in far greater strength than had been expected,
and when its advance was followed by the appearance, upon the right
flank of von Offenberg’s command, of yet another Russian army, under
Brussilov, the Austrian second army found itself in great danger.
Ruzsky advanced steadily from August 14th until, on the 21st, it was
not more than one day’s advance from the outer works of Lemberg, and
the third Russian army under Brussilov was threatening von Offenberg’s
right flank.

Von Offenberg, understanding the strength of the enemy, undertook
to give battle. The first outpost actions were successful for the
Austrians, and helped them in their blunder. On the 24th of August the
two Russian armies effected a junction, and their Austrian opponents
found themselves threatened with disaster. An endeavor was made to
retreat, but the retreat turned into a rout. On the 28th Tarnopol was
captured by the Russians, and the Austrian army found itself compelled
to fall back upon defense positions to the south and east of Lemberg
itself.

The attack of the Russian armies was completely successful. The
Austrian army was driven from its positions, and on September 4th the
Austrians evacuated Lemberg and the Russian forces took possession of
the town. The Austrians fled. The population welcomed the conquerors
with the greatest enthusiasm. An immense quantity of stores of every
kind were captured by the Russians together with at least 100,000
prisoners. There was no looting, nor any kind of outrage. The Russian
policy was to make friends of the inhabitants of Galicia.

But there was no halt after Lemberg. Brussilov divided his army, and
sent his left wing into the Carpathian passes; his center and right
moved west toward Przemysl; while Ruzsky moved northwest to reinforce
the Russian army on the Bug. Meanwhile the position of Dankl’s army was
perilous in the extreme. There were two possible courses, one to fall
back and join the remnants of von Offenberg’s army, the other to attack
at once, before the first Russian army could be reinforced, and if
victorious to turn on Ruzsky.

Dankl’s army was now very strong. He had received reinforcements,
not only from Austria but from Germany. On the 4th of September he
attacked the Russian center; his attack was a failure, although he
outnumbered the Russians. The battle continued until the tenth.

Everywhere the Austrians were beaten, and driven off in ignominious
retreat. The whole Austrian force fled southward in great disorder; a
part directed its flight toward Przemysl, others still farther west
toward Cracow. Austria had been completely defeated; except for a few
German detachments near the border, Poland was clear of the enemy. The
Russian flag flew over Lemberg, while the Russian army was marching
toward Cracow. The Russian star was in the ascendant.

But the Austrian armies had not been annihilated. An army of nearly
a million men cannot be destroyed in so short a time. The Austrian
failure was due in part to the disaffection of some of the elements
of the army, and in part to the poor Austrian generalship. They had
underestimated their foe, and ventured on a most perilous plan of
campaign.

Russian generalship had been most admirable, and the Russian generals
were men of ability and experience. Brussilov had seen service in the
Turkish War of 1877. Ruzsky was a professor in the Russian War Academy.
In the Japanese war he had been chief of staff to General Kaulbars,
the commander of the Second Manchurian army. Associated with him was
General Radko Dmitrieff, an able officer with a most interesting
career. General Dmitrieff was born in Bulgaria, when it was a Turkish
province. He graduated at the Military School at Sofia, and afterwards
at the War Academy at Petrograd. On his return to Bulgaria he commanded
a regiment in the Serbian-Bulgarian war. Later he became mixed up
in the conspiracy against Prince Alexander, and was forced to leave
Bulgaria. For ten years he served in the Russian army, returning to
Bulgaria on the accession of Prince Ferdinand. Later on he became Chief
of the General Staff, and when the Balkan war broke out he commanded
one of the Bulgarian armies, won several important victories, and
became a popular hero of the war. Disgusted with the political
squabbles which followed the war, he returned to Russia as a general in
the Russian army. With men like these in command, the Russian Empire
was well served.

After the decisive defeat of the Austrian army under General Dankl,
certain changes were made in the Russian High Command. General Ruzsky
was made commander of the center, which was largely reinforced. General
Ivanov was put in command of the armies operating in Galicia with
Dmitrieff and Brussilov as his chief lieutenants. Brussilov’s business
was to seize the deep passes in the Carpathians and to threaten
Hungary. Dmitrieff’s duty was to press the Austrian retreat, and
capture the main fortresses of central Galicia.

There are two great fortresses on the River San, Jaroslav and Przemysl,
both of them controlling important railroad routes. Jaroslav on the
main line from Lemberg to Cracow, Przemysl with a line which skirts
the Carpathians, and connects with lines going south to Hungary.
Jaroslav was fortified by a strong circle of intrenchments and
was looked to by Austria for stout resistance. The Austrians were
disappointed, for Ivanov captured it in three days, on the 23d of
September. Dmitrieff found Przemysl a harder nut to crack. It held out
for many months, while operations of greater importance were being
carried on by the Russian armies. The plans of the Russian generals in
some respects were not unlike the plan previously suggested as that
of the German High Command. At the beginning of the war they had no
desire to carry on a powerful offensive against Germany. The expedition
into East Prussia was conducted more for political than for military
purposes. The real offensive at the start was to be against Austria.
The Russian movements were cautious at first, but the easy capture of
Lemberg, the fall of Jaroslav, and the demoralization of the Austrian
armies, encouraged more daring strategy. With the Germans stopped on
the north, little aid to the Austrians could come from that source.
The Grand Duke Nicholas was eager to strike a great blow before the
winter struck in, so his armies swept to the great Polish city of
Cracow. The campaign against Austria also had a political side.

Russia had determined upon a new attitude toward Poland. On August
15th the Grand Duke Nicholas, on behalf of the Czar, had issued a
proclamation offering self-government to Russian Poland. Home rule for
Poland had long been a favorite plan with the Czar. Now he promised,
not only to give Russian Poland home rule, but to add to it the Polish
peoples in Austria and Germany. This meant that Austria and Germany
would have to give up Galicia on the one hand, and Prussian Poland on
the other, if they should lose the war. In the old days Poland had
been one of the greatest kingdoms in Europe, with a proud nobility and
high civilization. She was one of the first of the great Slav peoples
to penetrate the west. Later she had protected Europe against Tartar
invasion, but internal differences had weakened her, and, surrounded
by enemies, she had first been plundered, and later on divided between
Austria, Russia and Prussia. Never had the Poles consented to this
destruction of their independence. Galicia had constantly struggled
against Austria; Prussian Poland was equally disturbing to the Prussian
peace, and Russia was only able to maintain the control of her Polish
province by the sword. Of the three the Pole was probably more inclined
to keep on friendly terms with Russia, also a Slav people. The policy
of the Czar encouraged this inclination and produced disaffection
among the Poles in Galicia and in Posen. Moreover, it gave Russia
the sympathy of the world which had long regarded the partition of
Poland as a political crime. It encouraged the Czecho-Slavs and other
dissatisfied portions of the Austrian Empire.

The results were seen immediately in the demoralization of the Austrian
armies where considerable numbers of Czecho-Slovak troops deserted to
the Russian army, and later in the loyalty to Russia of the Poles, and
their refusal, even under the greatest German pressure, to give the
German Empire aid.




CHAPTER X

NEW METHODS AND HORRORS OF WARFARE


When Germany embarked upon its policy of frightfulness, it held in
reserve murderous inventions that had been contributed to the German
General Staff by chemists and other scientists working in conjunction
with the war. Never since the dawn of time had there been such a
perversion of knowledge to criminal purposes; never had science
contributed such a deadly toll to the fanatic and criminal intentions
of a war-crazed class.

As the war uncoiled its weary length, and month after month of embargo
and privation saw the morale of the German nation growing steadily
lower, these murderous inventions were successively called into play
against the Allies, but as each horror was put into play on the
battlefield, its principles were solved by the scientists of the
Allied nations, and the deadly engine of destruction was turned with
trebled force against the Huns.

This happened with the various varieties of poison gas, with liquid
fire, with trench knives, with nail-studded clubs, with armor used by
shock troops, with airplane bombs, with cannon throwing projectiles
weighing thousands of pounds great distances behind the battle lines.
Not only did America and the Allies improve upon Germany’s pattern in
these respects, but they added a few inventions that went far toward
turning the scale against Germany. An example of these is the “tank.”
Originally this was a caterpillar tractor invented in America and
adopted in England. At first these were of two varieties, the male,
carrying heavy guns only, and the females, equipped with machine guns.
To these was later added the whippet tank, named after the racing dog
developed in England. These whippet tanks averaged eighteen miles an
hour, carrying death and terror into the ranks of the enemy. All the
tanks were heavily armored and had as their motto the significant
words “Treat ’Em Rough.” The Germans designed a heavy anti-tank rifle
about three feet longer than the ordinary rifle and carrying a charge
calculated to pierce tank armor. These were issued to the German first
line trenches at the rate of three to a company. That they were not
particularly effective was proved by the ease with which the tanks of
all varieties tore through the barbed-wire entanglements and passed
over the Hindenburg and Kriemhild lines, supposed by the Germans to be
impregnable.

The tanks in effect were mobile artillery and were used as such by
all the Allied troops. Germany frantically endeavored to manufacture
tanks to meet the Allied monsters, but their efforts were feeble when
compared with the great output opposed to them.

Before considering other inventions used for the first time in this
war, it is well to understand the tremendous changes in methods and
tactics made necessary by these discoveries.

Put into a sentence, the changed warfare amounts to this: it is a
mobilization of material, of railroads, great guns, machine guns, food,
airplanes and other engines of destruction quite as much as it is a
mobilization of men.

The Germans won battle after battle at the beginning of the war
because of their system of strategic railways that made it possible
to transport huge armies to selected points in the shortest possible
time both on the eastern and the western fronts. Lacking a system
of transportation to match this, Russia lost the great battles that
decided her fate, Belgium was overrun, and France, once the border was
passed, became a battlefield upon which the Germans might extend their
trench systems over the face of the land.

Lacking strategic railways to match those of Germany, France evolved an
effective substitute in the modern system of automobile transportation.
When von Kluck swung aside from Paris in his first great rush, Gallieni
sent out from Paris an army in taxicabs that struck the exposed flank
and went far toward winning the first battle of the Marne. It was the
truck transportation system of the French along the famous “Sacred
Road” back of the battle line at Verdun that kept inviolate the motto
of the heroic town, “They Shall Not Pass.” Motor trucks that brought
American reserves in a khaki flood won the second battle of the Marne.
It was the automobile transportation that enabled Haig to send the
British, Canadians and Australians in full cry after the retreating
Germans when the backbone of the German resistance was broken before
Lens, Cambrai, and Ostend.

America’s railway transportation system in France was one of the
marvels of the war. Stretching from the sector of seacoast set apart
for America by the French Government, it radiated far into the
interior, delivering men, munitions and food in a steady stream.
American engineers worked with their brothers-in-arms with the Allies
to construct an inter-weaving system of wide-gauge and narrow-gauge
roads that served to victual and munition the entire front and further
serve to deliver at top speed whole army corps. It was this network of
strategic railways that enabled the French to send an avalanche clad
in horizon blue to the relief of Amiens when Hindenburg made his final
tremendous effort of 1918.

In its essentials, military effort in the great conflict may be roughly
divided into

Open warfare,

Trench warfare,

Crater warfare.

The first battle of the Marne was almost wholly open warfare; so also
were the battles of the Masurian Lakes, Allenstein, and Dunajec in the
eastern theater of war, and most of the warfare on the Italian front
between the Piave River and Gorizia.

In this variety of battle, airplanes and observation balloons play
a prominent part. Once the enemy is driven out of its trenches, the
message is flashed by wireless to the artillery and slaughter at long
range begins. If there have been no intrenchments, as was the case in
the first battle of the Marne, massed artillery send a plunging fire
into the columns moving in open order and prepare the way for machine
gunners and infantry to finish the rout.

In previous wars, cavalry played a heroic rôle in open warfare; only
rarely has it been possible to use cavalry in the Great War. The
Germans sent a screen of Uhlans before its advancing hordes into
Belgium and Northern France in 1914. The Uhlans also were in the van in
the Russian invasion, but with these exceptions, German cavalry was a
negligible factor.

British and French cavalry were active in pursuit of the fleeing
Teutons when the Hindenburg line was smashed in September of 1918.
Outside of that brief episode, the cavalry did comparatively nothing
so far as the Allies were concerned. It was the practice on both sides
to dismount cavalry and convert it into some form of trench service.
Trench mortar companies, bombing squads, and other specialty groups
were organized from among the cavalrymen. Of course the fighting in the
open stretches of Mesopotamia, South Africa and Russia involved the use
of great bodies of cavalry. The trend of modern warfare, however, is
to equip the cavalryman with grenades and bayonets, in addition to his
ordinary gear, and to make of him practically a mounted infantryman.

Trench warfare occupied most of the time and made nine-tenths of the
discomforts of the soldiers of both armies. If proof of the adaptive
capacity of the human animal were needed, it is afforded by the
manner in which the men burrowed in vermin-infested earth and lived
there under conditions of Arctic cold, frequently enduring long
deprivations of food, fuel, and suitable clothing. During the early
stages of the war, before men became accustomed to the rigors of the
trenches, many thousands died as a direct result of the exposure. Many
thousand of others were incapacitated for life by “trench feet,” a
group of maladies covering the consequences of exposure to cold and
water which in those early days flowed in rivulets through most of
the trenches. The trenches at Gallipoli had their own special brand
of maladies. Heatstroke and a malarial infection were among these
disabling agencies. Trench fever, a malady beginning with a headache
and sometimes ending in partial paralysis and death, was another common
factor in the mortality records.

But in spite of all these and other discomforts, in spite of the
disgusting vermin that crawled upon the men both in winter and in
summer, both sides mastered the trenches and in the end learned to live
in them with some degree of comfort.

  [Illustration: FORTS, FLYING AND NAVAL BASES ON THE NORTH SEA]

At first the trenches were comparatively straight, shallow affairs;
then as the artillery searched them out, as the machine gunners learned
the art of looping their fire so that the bullets would drop into the
hiding places of the enemy, the trench systems gradually became more
scientifically involved. After the Germans had been beaten at the Marne
and had retired to their prepared positions along the Aisne, there
commenced a series of flanking attempts by one side and the other which
speedily resolved itself into the famous “race to the sea.” This was
a competition between the opposing armies in rapid trench digging.
The effort on either side was made to prevent the enemy from executing
a flank movement. In an amazingly short time the opposing trenches
extended from the Belgian coast to the Swiss border, making further
outflanking attempts impossible of achievement.

This was not the first time in history that intrenched armies opposed
each other. The Civil War in this country set the fashion in that
respect. The contending sides in the Great War, however, improved
vastly upon the American example. Communicating trenches were
constructed, leading back to the company kitchens, and finally to the
open road leading back to the rest billets of the armies.

When night raiding commenced, it was speedily seen that straight
trenches exposed whole companies of men to enfilading fire. Thereupon
bastions were made and new defenses presented by zig-zagging the
front-line trenches and the communicating ditches as well.

To the formidable obstacles presented by the trenches, equipped
as they were with sandbag parapets and firing steps, were added
barbed-wire entanglements and pitfalls of various sorts. The greatest
improvement was made by the Germans, and they added “pill boxes.” These
were really miniature fortresses of concrete and armor plate with a
dome-shaped roof and loopholes for machine gunners. Only a direct hit
by a projectile from a big gun served to demolish a “pill box.” The
Allies learned after many costly experiments that the best method to
overcome these obstacles was to pass over and beyond them, leaving them
isolated in Allied territory, where they were captured at the leisure
of the attackers.

Trench warfare brings with it new instruments. There are the flame
projectors, which throw fire to a distance of approximately a hundred
feet. The Germans were the first to use these, but they were excelled
in this respect by the inventive genius of the nations opposing them.

The use of poison gas, the word being used in its broad sense, is
now general. It was first used by the Germans, but as in the case of
flame-throwers, the Allies soon gained the ascendency.

The first use of asphyxiating gas was by the Germans during the first
battle of Ypres. There the deadly compound was mixed in huge reservoirs
back of the German lines. From these extended a system of pipes with
vents pointed toward the British and Canadian lines. Waiting until
air currents were moving steadily westward, the Germans opened the
stop-cocks shortly after midnight and the poisonous fumes swept slowly,
relentlessly forward in a greenish cloud that moved close to the earth.
The result of that fiendish and cowardly act was that thousands of men
died in horrible agony without a chance for their lives.

Besides that first asphyxiating gas, there soon developed others
even more deadly. The base of most of these was chlorine. Then came
the lachrymatory or “tear-compelling” gases, calculated to produce
temporary or permanent blindness. Another German “triumph” was mustard
gas. This is spread in gas shells, as are all the modern gasses. The
Germans abandoned the cumbersome gas-distributing system after the
invention of the gas shell. These make a peculiar gobbling sound as
they rush overhead. They explode with a very slight noise and scatter
their contents broadcast. The liquids carried by them are usually of
the sort that decompose rapidly when exposed to the air and give off
the acrid gases dreaded by the soldiers. They are directed against
the artillery as well as against intrenched troops. Every command, no
matter how small, has its warning signal in the shape of a gong or a
siren warning of approaching gas.

Gas masks were speedily discovered to offset the dangers of poison
gases of all kinds. These were worn not only by troops in the field,
but by artillery horses, pack mules, liaison dogs, and by the civilian
inhabitants in back of the battle lines. Where used quickly and in
accordance with instructions, these masks were a complete protection
against attacks by gas.

The perfected gas masks used by both sides contained a chamber filled
with a specially prepared charcoal. Peach pits were collected by the
millions in all the belligerent countries to make this charcoal, and
other vegetable substances of similar density were also used. Anti-gas
chemicals were mixed with the charcoal. The wearer of the mask breathed
entirely through the mouth, gripping a rubber mouthpiece while his nose
was pinched shut by a clamp attached to the mask.

In training, soldiers were required to hold their breath for six
seconds while the mask was being adjusted. It was explained to them
that four breaths of the deadly chlorine gas was sufficient to kill;
the first breath produced a spasm of the glottis; the second brought
mental confusion and delirium; the third produced unconsciousness; and
the fourth death. The bag containing the gas mask and respirator was
carried always by the soldier.

The soldier during the winter season in the front-line trenches was a
grotesque figure. His head was crowned with a helmet covered with khaki
because the glint of steel would advertise his whereabouts. Beneath the
helmet he wore a close fitting woolen cap pulled down tightly around
his ears and sometimes tied or buttoned beneath his chin. Suspended
upon his chest was the khaki bag containing gas mask and respirator.
Over his outer garments were his belt, brace straps, bayonet and
ammunition pouches. His rifle was slung upon his shoulder with the
foot of a woolen sock covering the muzzle and the leg of the same sock
wrapped around the breech. A large jerkin made of leather, without
sleeves, was worn over the short coat. Long rubber boots reaching to
the hips and strapped at ankle and hip completely covered his legs.
When anticipating trench raids, or on a raiding party, a handy trench
knife and carefully slung grenades were added to his equipment.

Airplane bombing ultimately changed the whole character of the war. It
extended the fighting lines miles behind the battle front. It brought
the horrors of night attacks upon troops resting in billets. It visited
destruction and death upon the civilian population of cities scores of
miles back of the actual front.

Germany transgressed repeatedly the laws of humanity by bombing
hospitals far behind the battle front. Describing one of these
atrocious attacks, which took place May 29, 1918, Colonel G. H.
Andrews, Chaplain of a Canadian regiment, said:

“The building bombed was one of three large Red Cross hospitals at
Boulenes and was filled with Allied wounded. A hospital in which were a
number of wounded German prisoners stood not very far away.

“The Germans could not possibly have mistaken the building they
bombed for anything else but a hospital. There were flags with red
cross flying, and lights were turned on them so that they would show
prominently. And the windows were brilliantly lighted. Those inside
heard the buzz of the advancing airplanes, but did not give them a
thought.

“The machines came right on, ignoring the hospital with the German
wounded, indicating they had full knowledge of their objective, until
they were over a wing of the Red Cross hospital that contained the
operating room on the ground floor. In the operating room a man was on
the table for a most difficult surgical feat. Around him gathered the
staff of the hospital and its brilliant surgeons. Lieutenant Sage of
New York had just given him the anaesthetic when one of the airplanes
let the bomb drop. It was a big fellow. It must have been all of 250
pounds of high explosive.

“It hurtled downward, carrying the two floors before it. Through the
gap thus made wounded men, the beds in which they lay, convalescents,
and all on the floors came crashing down to the ground. The bomb’s
force extended itself to wreck the operating room, where the man on the
table, Lieutenant Sage, and all in the room were killed. In all there
were thirty-seven lives lost, including three Red Cross nurses.

“The building caught fire. The concussion had blown the stairs down,
so that escape from the upper floors seemed impossible. But the
convalescents and the soldiers, who had run to the scene of the
bombing, let the very ill ones out of the windows, and escape was made
in that way.

“And then to cap the climax, the German airplanes returned over the
spot of their ghastly triumph and fired on the rescuers with machine
guns. God will never forgive the Huns for that act alone. Nor will our
comrades ever forget it.”

The statement of Colonel Andrews was corroborated by a number of other
officers.

To protect artillery against counter-fire of all kinds, both sides
from the beginning used the art of camouflage. This was resorted to
particularly against scouting airplanes. At first the branches of
trees and similar natural cover were used to deceive the airmen. Later
the guns themselves were painted with protective colorations, and
screens of burlap were used instead of branches. The camoufleur, as
the camouflage artist was called, speedily extended his activities
to screens over highways, preventing airmen from seeing troops in
motion, to the protective coloration of lookout posts, and of other
necessary factors along the fighting front. Camouflage also found great
usefulness in the protective coloration of battle-ships and merchant
vessels. Scientific study went hand in hand with the art, the object
being to confuse the enemy and to offer targets as small as possible to
the enemy gunners.

  [Illustration: © _Underwood and Underwood, N. Y._

  THE MADE-TO-ORDER INFERNO OF THE FLAME-THROWER

  A “rain-of-fire” attack in the front-line trenches. This weapon
  was devised by the Germans and was apparently one of those pre-war
  inventions they had counted on to make their conquest easy. It was
  never as effective a weapon as gas, even when developed by the Allies,
  but its terrifying effect can be gauged by the illustration given.]

Crater warfare came as a development of intensified artillery attacks
upon trench systems. It was at Dunajec on the eastern front that for
the first time in modern war the wheels of artillery were placed hub
to hub in intensified hurricane fire upon enemy positions. The result
there under von Mackensen’s direction was the rout of the Russians.
When later the same tactics were employed on the western front, the
result was to destroy whole trench systems with the exception of deep
dugouts, and to send the occupants of the trenches into the craters,
made by shell explosions, for protection.

It was observed that these craters made excellent cover and when
linked by vigorous use of the intrenching tools carried by every
soldier, they made a fair substitute for the trenches. This observation
gave root to an idea which was followed by both armies; this was the
deliberate creation of crater systems by the artillery of the attacking
force. Into these lines of craters the attacking infantry threw itself
in wave after wave as it rushed toward the enemy trenches. The ground
is so riddled by this intensive artillery fire that there is created
what is known as “moon terrain,” fields resembling the surface of the
moon as seen through a powerful telescope. Troops on both sides were
trained to utilize these shell holes to the utmost, each little group
occupying a crater, keeping in touch with its nearest group and moving
steadily in unison toward the enemy.

One detail in which this war surpassed all others was in the use of
machine guns and grenades. The Germans were first to make extensive
use of the machine gun as a weapon with which to produce an effective
barrage. They established machine-gun nests at frequent intervals
commanding the zone over which infantry was to advance and by skillful
crossfire kept that terrain free from every living thing. The Germans
preferred a machine gun, water cooled and of the barrel-recoil type.
The English used a Vickers-Maxim and a Lewis gun, the latter the
invention of an officer in the American army. The French preferred
the Hotchkiss and the Saint-Etienne. The Americans standardized the
Browning light and heavy machine guns, and these did effective service.
It was asserted by American gunnery experts that the Browning excels
all other weapons of its type.

Two general types of grenades were used on both sides. One a defensive
bomb about the size of an orange, containing a bursting charge weighing
twenty-two ounces. Then there was a grenade used for offensive work
carrying about thirty-two ounces of high explosives. The defensive
grenades were of cast iron and so made that they burst into more than
a hundred jagged pieces when they exploded. These wounded or killed
within a radius of one hundred and fifty yards. In exceptional
instances, the range was higher.

The function of artillery in a modern battle is constantly extending.
Both the big guns and the howitzers were the deciding factors in most
of the military decisions reached during the war. Artillery is divided
first between the big guns having a comparatively flat trajectory and
the howitzers whose trajectory is curved. Then there is a further
division into these four classes:

Field artillery,

Heavy artillery,

Railroad artillery,

Trench artillery.

The type of field artillery is the famous 75 millimeter gun used
interchangeably by the French and Americans. It is a quick-firing
weapon and is used against attacking masses and for the various kind of
barrages, including an anti-aircraft barrage.

  [Illustration: _British light Tank, of 1918, with turret action and
  high speed._

  _British Tank of the earliest type, as used at Cambrai._

  _German land battleship captured in 1918 on the western front._

  _Improved French Tank first used in Champagne in 1918._

  TYPES OF LAND BATTLESHIPS DEVELOPED BY ALLIES AND GERMANS]

Included in the heavy artillery are guns and howitzers of larger
caliber than the 75 millimeter. Three distinct and terrifying noises
accompany explosions of these guns. First, there is the explosion when
the shell leaves the gun; then there is the peculiar rattling noise
like the passing of a railway train when the shells pass overhead;
then there is the explosion at point of contact, a terrific concussion
which produces the human condition called “shell shock,” a derangement
of body and brain, paralyzing nerve and muscle centers and frequently
producing insanity.

The railroad artillery comprises huge guns pulled on railways by
locomotives, each gun having a number of cars as part of its equipment.
These are slow-firing guns of great power and hurling the largest
projectiles known to warfare. The largest guns of this class were
produced by American inventive genius as a reply to the German gun of
St. Gobain Forest. This was a weapon which hurled a nine-inch shell
from a distance of 62 miles into the heart of Paris. The damage done by
it was comparatively slight and it had no appreciable effect upon the
morale of the Parisians.

Its greatest damage was when it struck the Roman Catholic Church of St.
Gervais on Good Friday, March 29, 1918, killing seventy-five persons
and wounding ninety. Fifty-four of those killed were women, five being
Americans. The total effect of the bombardment by this big gun was to
arouse France, England and America to a fiercer fighting pitch. The
late Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York, expressed this sentiment,
when he sent the following message to the Archbishop of Paris:

  Shocked by the brutal killing of innocent victims gathered at
  religious services to commemorate the passing of our blessed Saviour
  on Good Friday, the Catholics of New York join your noble protest
  against this outrage of the sanctuary on such a day and at such an
  hour and, expressing their sympathy to the bereaved relatives of the
  dead and injured, pledge their unfaltering allegiance in support of
  the common cause that unites our two great republics. May God bless
  the brave officers and men of the allied armies in their splendid
  defense of liberty and justice!

Trench artillery are Stokes guns and other mortars hurling aerial
torpedoes containing great quantities of high explosives. These have
curved trajectories and are effective not only against trenches but
also against deep dugouts, wire entanglements and listening posts.

One of the most important details of modern warfare is that of
communication or liaison on the battlefield. This is accomplished by
runners recruited from the trenches, by dogs, pigeons, telephone,
radio, signalling lamps, rockets, but above all by airplanes using
radio. These communications between air and earth are of course not as
exact nor as general by night as they are by day, but even at night the
airplane plays its important part in liaison.

As has been heretofore stated, the airplane considered in all its
developments, is the newest and most important of factors in modern
warfare. It photographs the enemy positions, it detects concentrations
and other movements of the enemy, it makes surprise impossible, it is
a deadly engine of destruction when used in spraying machine-gun fire
upon troops in the open. As a bombing device, it surpasses the best and
most accurate artillery.




TRANSCRIBER’S NOTES:


  Italicized text is surrounded by underscores: _italics_.

  Obvious typographical errors have been corrected.

  Inconsistencies in hyphenation have been standardized.

  Archaic or variant spelling has been retained.

  New original cover art included with this eBook is granted to the
    public domain.



*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK 74726 ***