248 Art and Warfare. This was effected by the field artillery, with shrapnel. The heavy artillery was not permitted to fire even now, and the firing was stopped as soon as the post had been dislodged. "We were able to observe that the towers and exterior of the Cathedral remained undamaged. The framework of the roof was set on fire. The attacking forces, therefore, took no further measures than were absolutely necessary. The responsibility rests with the enemy who sought to make an unlawful use of a venerable -piece of architecture under the protection of the white flag." The following day this communication was sent to the German Military authorities by the General in command of the troops fighting near Rheims: "It was subsequently established that a shot from a mortar had been fired at Rheims Cathedral. According to a report of the.... Army Corps, this was necessary, as it was not possible, by the fire of the field artillery alone, to dislodge the post of observation which was known to be established upon the Cathedral." So here we have a misuse of the white flag and the direct employment of the cathedral as a hostile post of observation. There is, accordingly, no basis for a charge against Germany, but the best of reasons for a drastic charge against France, which, in violation of an international agreement misused this splendid masterpiece of art for military purposes in order to prefer a false charge against Germany. This contemptible trickery by which the cathedral was degraded to the purposes of a shield for bullets by the French army leaders, had scarcely taken place, when the German General Headquarters communicated under date of October 14th, the following facts to an astonished world. "Close by the Cathedral of Rheims two heavy French batteries were located. Light signals from a tower of the Cathedral were also observed. It goes without saying that all enemy measures and methods of war which are disadvantageous to our troops, will be contested, without regard to the preservation of the Cathedral. The French, therefore, now as formerly, must themselves assume the blame, if the venerable and noble building again becomes a sacrifice to the war."
Art and Warfare. 249 On the 28th of October the vile game is once more enacted. The German Army Command thereupon communicated the fact that French batteries—including an artillery observation post upon the tower,—were stationed in front of the cathedral and that it was impossible to spare it any longer. II. Ought we to reply to these hypocritical yells by pointing to the Chinese atrocities of Palikao's? Did not France in 1849 bombard Rome and destroy "masterpieces of art which can never be replaced"—as the official communiqué has it ? Should we recall to the memory of mankind all the ghastly deeds of English warfare in South Africa—or bid the world remember the bombardment of Alexandria ? Surely we have not forgotten the words of that excellent French patriot and famous historian of art, Viollet le Duc, who complained in 1870 that : "The most furious enemy could not have made more havoc than our Garde Nationale." It is not our intention in this place to enter more fully into the destruction of Louvain. The German official investigation has been made in the most honest manner and without regard to anything save the truth. The data that have been established lie before me in a printed record of some 115 pages. This confirms in the fullest degree that the people of Louvain had been equipped with arms with the knowledge and the approval of the Belgian Government, and that the murderous and cowardly attack upon wounded German troops was made under circumstances of the greatest cruelty. As already stated a map of the city with the burned portion marked annihilates the foul Me circulated through the world to the effect that "only* the Town Hall and the railroad station were left." Is it necessary to repeat once more what all men may see for themselves—namely, that only one-sixth of the city went up in flames? And yet the lie of Rheims is repeated incessantly in the lie of Louvain. We are able to establish upon the testimony of reliable eye-witnesses that these ruins in the neighborhood of the cathedral which the Belgians would represent as the results of German lust for destruction, are for the greater part due to explosions made in order to keep the flames from reaching the valuable old Town Hall. This, as is now known, was saved only