Between the devil and the deep blue sea - University of Canterbury

- 232 -
obtain valuable aid from the local population. 3 Very soon, the government imposed the
"state of war" in other areas, followed in quick succession by the far more comprehensive
"state of siege". In fact, by 1 October 1918, the government had declared 814 communities
(out of a total of 1,110) to be in a "state of war" or "siege". 4 This figure included almost the
entire southern provinces of Limburg, North Brabant and Zeeland and every settlement
within five kilometres of the border. In other words, nearly 7 5 per cent of towns, villages
and cities came under military jurisdiction dming the Great War. One commentator at the
time asserted that these declarations created "profoundly radical changes" in the running of
municipalities and in the general administration of domestic affairs. 5 Taking into account
that more than 80 per cent of the 814 affected communities endured the harsher "state of
siege", 6 the armed forces exercised a substantial degree of control over local government
and the daily life of civilians.
Not surprisingly, the application of the "state of war" and "siege" and the manner
in which the military exercised their authority became obj ects of much public criticism.
While the use of the War Law seemed appropriate in the first crisis-ridden months of war,
once the Western Front stabilised and Dutch security seemed less at risk (from late 1914
onwards), many could not understand why the aImed forces should continue exercising
extraordinary control, or why the government placed yet more municipalities in the "state of
siege". Smuggling did not seem an appropriate enough justification for such drastic action.
Yet the government used the "state of siege" for exactly that reason - to curb smuggling and
prevent other violations of internal neutrality _7 a clear indication, in fact, of how
detrimental it believed smuggling to be for national welfare.
3 Staatsblad. 5 August 1914, no. 385.
4 J. A. Eigeman, "De pracktijk del' 'Oorlogswet' en de Gemeenten" [The practice of the 'War Law' and the
municipalities] Militair-Rechtelijk Tijdschrift. 15, 1919, p. 362. There were 1,121 recognised municipalities in 1909,
this number was reduced to 1,110 in 1920, probably through the amalgamation of townships (Petrus Wilhelmus
Marie Hasselton, "De wisseling van het opperbevel in februari 1940 getoetst aan de praktijk van de Oorlogswet in de
periode 1887 - 1940" [The change of Commander-in-Chief in February 1940 tested against the War Law in the
period 1887 - 1940] Proefschrift Doctoraat, Rijksuniversiteit Groningen, 1995, p. 34).
5 "[D]iep-ingrijpende veranderingen" (Eigeman, "De pracktijk del' 'Oorlogswet'" p. 362).
6 Out of 814 municipalities, 659 had a "state of siege" imposed at some stage during the war (Ibid. p. 362).
7 For details of what the military did to police internal neutrality in the "state of war" and "siege", especially antismuggling
measures, see: Chapter 8, pp. 258 - 297.