No. 182.
The undersigned, envoy extraordinary and minister plenipotentiary of the
North German Union, has the honor most respectfully herewith to transmit
to the Hon. Hamilton Fish, Secretary of State of the United States, a
copy of a dispatch from his most high government, of the 27th ultimo, in
which the two circulars read by the late minister of foreign affairs,
the Prince de la Tour d’Auvergne, in the session of the 1st of September
last, of the Corps Législatif, wherein the German troops are accused of
various violations of the law of nations at large, as well as of
treaties, are categorically contradicted, and in which also the manner
is shown in which the Geneva convention has been observed by the French
government.
The undersigned gladly avails himself of this occasion to reiterate to
the Hon. Hamilton Fish the expression of his most distinguished
consideration.
Hon. Hamilton Fish,
Secretary of State of the United States,
Washington, D. C.
[Translation.]
Chancellor Thiele to Baron Gerolt.
Berlin,
September 27, 1870.
In the session of the Corps Législatif of September 1, the then
minister of foreign affairs, the Prince de la Tour d’Auvergne, read
two circulars in which the German troops were accused of various
violations of the law of nations in general as well as of that
portion of it which is regulated by treaty. German troops are
therein stated to have committed acts of hostility against French
ambulances to have taken Baron de Bussiére prisoner in the midst of
an ambulance corps organized by him, to have used explosive bullets,
to have compelled peasants living in the vicinity of Strasburg to
work in the trenches were they were exposed to the fire of the
fortress, to have sought to cover trains conveying provisions and
munitions of war, and also wagons containing money, with the
distinctive sign provided for in the Geneva convention; finally, it
is asserted that a French surgeon was killed by a Prussian soldier,
while dressing the latter’s wounds. Although I was perfectly well
convinced a pilori of the incorrectness of
all these statements, I was not willing, in consideration of the
name whose sanction they bore, to confine myself to assurances that
such occurrences were impossible, but caused inquiry to be made
whether anything had happened which could have been distorted by
unreliable or malicious reporters to monstrous deeds of the kind
mentioned. These inquiries were, it is true, attended with all the
more difficulty
[Page 228]
in view of
the fact that the statements of the French minister are made in an
unusually vague manner, for official declarations of so serious a
nature, both in regard to particulars and to the mention of the
authority on which they are made. Satisfactory statements of names,
time, and manner are everywhere wanting. Notoriety is in most eases
appealed to as proof, which is equivalent to a reference of the
French journals, whose veracity I certainly do not need to
characterize. In both cases, where reference is made to witnesses or
testimony, with regard to explosive bullets or the compulsory
employment of Alsatian peasants in the trenches, neither the purport
of the testimony nor the names of the witnesses or informants are
given. The inquiries which I have caused to be made have only shown
a foundation for one of the accusations made against the German
troops, and in this accusation the facts are shown to have been
greatly distorted. It is true that the Baron de Bussiére was
arrested, and that he had something to do with the care of the
wounded; the arrest, however, did not take place in the midst of an
ambulance corps; it was caused by the suspicion that said baron was
in secret communication with the garrison of Strasburg, and it took
place with all the respect due to his position and his honorable
reputation, as did likewise his removal to his place of detention,
which soon after followed. With regard to the duration of the
detention, military considerations alone could decide. All the other
statements of the two circulars I must characterize as entirely
fictitious, and it remains to be seen whether the French government
will endeavor to fulfill the obligation which rests upon it of
proving the assertions in question, in a manner, which after the
numerous evidences which we have had of the credibility of French
official assurances, can have any claim to respect. Out of regard to
the other powers who were parties to the Geneva convention, and the
Petersburg declaration of November 24, (December 11,) 1868, I add
the positive assurance that that convention has been observed in the
most careful manner by the German troops, and that explosive balls
for portable arms, or of less than 400 grams weight, are not to be
found in the entire German army.
On the other hand, abundantly authenticated facts of the most
astonishing character exist to show how the French government has
fulfilled, or rather not fulfilled the Geneva agreement, for the
conclusion of which it exerted itself, as the Prince de la Tour
d’Auvergne correctly says, with extraordinary zeal: The German
surgeons who had to attend to wounded French soldiers after the
battle of Wissembourg, in the hospitals under the charge of Surgeons
General Bägor and Wilms, became convinced that said soldiers, with
few exceptions, were entirely unaware of the meaning of the white
band with the red cross. The French military surgeons in high
position, who soon after visited the same hospitals for the purpose
of looking after their countrymen, were forced to make the
protective badge as best they could from the first material that
they could find, and positively assured Prince Putbus, delegate of
the Knights of St. John, that the French ministry of war had neither
furnished the Geneva band to the surgeons nor directed them to wear
it. Captured French officers have since unanimously asserted that
the Geneva convention and the precepts of the same, with regard to
the treatment of ambulances, surgeons, and wounded men, are entirely
unknown in the French army. And how desirable would peculiarly
careful instructions be for this very army, since the French
government has found it compatible with the humanity which the
circular of the 30th of August mentions, as the reason of its zeal
for the observance of the Geneva convention, to bring the Turcos
unto the field against us, men enlisted from the offscourings of the
population of the cities of North Africa.
I intend to show by official documents what have been the
consequences of the failure to issue such instructions.
In the two circulars of August 30, nothing can therefore be seen,
save an attempt momentarily to blunt, by counter-accusations taken
from the newspapers, the edge of our protest of August 26, made on
account of flagrant violation of the privileges of the flag of
truce, and of the further protest which there was good reason to
expect.
I most respectfully request your excellency to be pleased to furnish
the minister of foreign affairs with a copy or translation of this
dispatch.
The Chancellor of the North German Union, by his representative,
