GERMAN LEGISLATION IN BELGIUM 65 Decrees were issued from time to time requiring detailed declarations of stocks of raw materials, food stuffs, farm produce, crops, and even trees. These were followed in many cases by orders to seize such stocks by way of requisition. Other decrees forbade the exportation (except to Germany) of Belgian produce or permitted exportation only upon payment of duties. In no case could merchandise be exported without the authorization of the German authorities.2 Commerce, trade, agriculture, and the conduct of business generally were subjected to a régime of strict control and supervision, and the operation of various industries (e.g., the brewing of beer) was taken over directly by the German administration. By a decree of February 17, 1917, the exploitation of all industrial enterprises of whatsoever character, and notably manufacturing, was forbidden without the consent of the German authorities, this subject to a penalty of not more than two year's imprisonment or a fine of not more than 100,000 marks. Farmers were forbidden to sell their crops before harvesting, under heavy penalties. The selling of meat without a permit from the German authorities was punishable by a year's imprisonment and a fine of 10,000 marks.5 The transportation of merchandise from one place to another within the occupied territory was punishable by three years' imprisonment and a fine of 30,000 marks. Importing goods from abroad was punishable by a year's imprisonment or a fine not exceeding 10,000 marks." The feeding of potatoes to animals was punishable by a year's imprisonment and a fine not exceeding 10,000 marks. The maximum prices of many commodities were fixed by the German authorities, and heavy penalties were prescribed for violations thereof. Thus by a decree of September 18, 1915, whoever was found guilty of violating the price regulations or who offered or demanded a price in excess of that fixed by the German by the crowds who daily gathered around the bulletin boards on which they were posted. Cf. his address in the New York Times of January 6, 1918. 1 Cf., for example, a decree of October 17, 1916, requiring a declaration of the trunks of poplar trees, under a penalty of three years imprisonment and a fine of 10,000 marks in addition to the confiscation of the trees. Text in Huberich and Speyer, IX, p. 144. 2 Decree of February 25, 1915, ibid., I, p. 109. Text, ibid., X, pp. 135-137. • Ibid., V, pp. 122, 145; VII, p. 403. Ibid., VII, p. 160. Ibid., VII, p. 392. 7 Ibid., V, p. 39. 8 Ibid., IX, p. 215. VOL. II-5 administration was liable to a year's imprisonment and a fine of 10,000 marks, in addition to the confiscation of the merchandise.1 The same penalty was prescribed for violation of the regulations regarding the economical use of fuel and light.2 Violation of the decree of December 13, 1916, regulating the production of brandy was punishable by imprisonment for three years or a fine not exceeding 100,000 marks, or both. By a decree of January 5, 1917, a fine not exceeding 10,000 marks or imprisonment for a year, or both, was prescribed for violation of the regulations relating to the breeding of mares and the castration of stallions. A penalty of imprisonment for one year and a fine not exceeding 10,000 marks were prescribed for violation of the regulations concerning the consumption of cream. The display of fireworks was punishable by one year's imprisonment, or more, or a fine not exceeding 5000 marks, or both. These are a few typical examples of German legislation. The number might be multiplied almost indefinitely. In accordance with article 48 of the Hague convention of October 18, 1907, the occupying authorities continued to collect all State taxes, imposts, and tolls in the territory occupied, to meet the expenses of administration. The assessment and collection were made in conformity with the Belgian laws in force and through the agency of Belgian officials who were competent to exercise their functions. A measure which evoked vigorous protest and complaint was the ordinance of January 16, 1915, levying an additional tax equal to ten times the regular tax on all Belgians who had voluntarily left their domicile and had sojourned more than two months outside Belgium, unless they should return before March 1, 1915. Absence from home was to be considered as conclusive proof of absence from Belgium. All banks were placed under the control and supervision of a commissioner-general of banking, this as a retaliatory measure against a similar measure of Great Britain and France. Commissioners of surveillance were appointed with power to prohibit certain transactions, examine books, take inventories of funds and other property, and require reports concerning 3 Ibid., IX, p. 361. • Ibid., X, p. 207. Proclamations, p. 39. 1 Ibid., IX, p. 319. 2 Ibid., IX, p. 324. GERMAN LEGISLATION IN BELGIUM 67 all matters of interest to the occupying authorities. The commissioner-general was empowered to fill vacancies in the boards of directors and the administrative personnel caused by the refusal or legal incapacity of directors, officers, or employés to perform their duties. 4 Naturally, there was much legislation designed to stimulate crop production and the conservation of food stuffs and raw materials. By an ordinance of December 31, 1914, military governors were given power to fix the maximum price of food stuffs within the territory under their command,1 and this power was frequently exercised. Other ordinances were issued regulating the planting of potatoes;3 forbidding the serving of potatoes with the skin removed, at hotels and restaurants; prohibiting the use of animal and vegetable oils and greases for other than human consumption; regulating the slaughter of animals; prohibiting the feeding of potatoes to other animals than hogs and regulating the amount that might be so fed; forbidding tanneries to purchase hides, skins, or other tanning material; forbidding the baking of cakes except on Wednesdays and Saturdays, etc.8 7 5 Labor and industry were subjected to an elaborate régime of regulation and supervision. By an ordinance of December 15, 1914, a somewhat elaborate code regulating the labor of women and children was put into effect; in some industries the hours of labor were regulated; various ordinances were promulgated for the purpose of coercing the Belgians to perform labor which they regarded as having a military character, and which they refused to perform; other ordinances were issued for the deportation of unemployed laborers to Germany, etc. 1 Ibid., II, p. 12. 2 Cf., e.g., an ordinance fixing the price of potatoes, ibid., VII, p. 365. Violation of the ordinance was punishable by imprisonment up to one year and a fine not exceeding 10,000 marks. 3 Ibid., VI, p. 80. ▲ Ibid., VI, p. 151. The penalty for violation of this decree was not more than six months' imprisonment and a fine not exceeding 5000 marks. ↳ Ibid., VI, p. 90. Penalty for violation, three months' imprisonment and a fine of 5000 marks. Ibid., VI, p. 80. Giving potatoes to other animals than swine or giving swine more potatoes than the amount specified in the ordinance was punishable by a fine up to 10,000 marks. 7 Ibid., V, p. 163. The penalty for violation of this decree was imprisonment for one year and a fine equal to fifty times the value of the materials purchased. Ibid., II, p. 39. • Ibid., I, pp. 75-82. § 366. Restrictions in Respect to Personal Liberty. Not only were the industrial and economic activities of the Belgian population subjected to an almost infinite variety of regulations, but their personal liberty was restricted to an even greater degree. By an ordinance of January 16, 1915, all open air assemblies and all political meetings behind closed doors were forbidden. For every other meeting, public or private, a permit was required, for which application had to be made five days in advance to the military commander in the locality. Purely religious, social, scientific, and professional assemblies were excepted from this requirement. All clubs and societies "having a political tendency" or whose object was the discussion of political matters were declared to be dissolved, and the organization of new clubs of this character was forbidden. Violation of this decree was punishable by imprisonment for one year or a fine of 5000 francs. As in the case of most other ordinances issued by the German authorities, the military courts were given jurisdiction of offences arising thereunder.1 A variety of petty police regulations was issued from time to time in every town or city occupied by the Germans. Many of these related to the movement of the inhabitants by foot, by carriage, and by automobile. Generally, the inhabitants were required to be in their homes after a certain early hour in the evening, sometimes as early as 7 o'clock.2 At Brussels civilians were required to show their deference to German officers by taking off their hats or by saluting with the hand. In case of doubt as to whether the soldier were an officer, he should be saluted. Those who failed to do so "must expect the German soldiers to make themselves respected by any and all means." By a decree of November 6, 1914, all clocks in Belgium were required to be set forward fifty-six minutes (Ger 314. 1 Ibid., II, pp. 44-45. Cf. also Massart, Belgians under the German Eagle, p. 2 Cf. text of a proclamation issued at Brussels. Gomery, p. 173. In some cases the inhabitants were forbidden to leave their houses except when absolutely necessary, this under penalty of being shot. Text, Gomery, p. 174. At Noyon on May 15, 1916, the commandant issued a proclamation reminding all male inhabitants over twelve years of age that they must "salute politely" all German officers by uncovering their heads. Facsimile reproduction of the proclamation in New York Times, July 22, 1917. Text of this proclamation and a similar one issued at Nesle, July 2, 1915, in Saint-Aymour, Autour de Noyon, pp. 287-288. RESTRICTIONS ON PERSONAL LIBERTY 69 man time).1 Another species of petty tyranny of the kind was the removal of French and Flemish names from the railway stations and the substitution of German names. Many towns in both Belgium and France were rechristened and given German names.2 By an ordinance of October 13, 1914, all printed matter issued in Belgium, including musical compositions, and all theatrical representations, moving pictures, recitals, and the like were declared to be subject to the censorship of the German authorities; and by an ordinance of February 5, 1916, printers who failed to submit their publications to the censor for his examination were subjected to a penalty of imprisonment for three years or more or a fine not exceeding 5000 marks, or both, and confiscation of the printing press. The sale or distribution of newspapers, except with the express permission of the military authorities, was forbidden. The German authorities had some difficulty in enforcing this ordinance on account of the surreptitious printing of newspapers that had been suppressed and the smuggling in of papers from Holland, and on November 4, 1914, Governor-general von der Goltz issued a proclamation 1 Arrêtés et Procs., p. 39. 3 2 In Belgium and French Flanders, Flemish designations, which before the war had been used alternately with the French, were made official, while in France German names were substituted. Thus Louvain became Löwen, Malines became Mechlin, Ypres, Ypern; Namur, Namen, etc. 3 Huberich and Speyer, VI, p. 90. Rather than submit to German censorship most of the Brussels papers ceased publication. The sale of foreign newspapers in Belgium was rigorously prohibited, but some were smuggled in. Many of the offenders were detected and heavily fined. The Germans themselves published two journals at Brussels, the Deutsche Soldaten Post and the Réveil. In spite of the most vigorous efforts and the offer of large rewards, the German authorities were unable to prevent the printing and distribution of forbidden newspapers. Journals like the Echo de Belge, La Libre Belgique, and the Courière de la Meuse appeared at irregular intervals. The last-mentioned journal was published by Belgian refugees in Holland and smuggled into Belgium in spite of the vigilance of the German authorities. La Libre Belgique was issued from a portable press which the Germans never succeeded in locating, although a reward of 50,000 francs was offered for information leading to the discovery of the plant and the publishers. New York Times, January 28, 1917. The story of La Libre Belgique is told in the New York Times Magazine of March 10, 1918. Hugh Gibson, secretary of the American legation at Brussels, states that the governor-general regularly received a copy through one channel or another (New York Times, January 6, 1918). 4 Arrêtés et Procs., p. 13. It was in consequence of an altercation between a German officer and a Brussels policeman regarding the sale of forbidden newspapers that the city of Brussels was fined 5,000,000 francs. |