File No. 855.48/175
[Enclosure—Translation]
The Chief Administrator for the German Governor
General in Belgium (Von Sandt) to the
American Minister (Whitlock)
Brussels,
January 4, 1915.
Excellency: I have the honor to reply as
follows to the note which your excellency addressed to me on
December 23, 1914.
The order of the Governor General issued upon the request of your
excellency and of the Spanish Minister on behalf of the Comité
National de Secours et d’Alimentation relative to the suspension of
military requisitions of flour and wheat until the stock of
alimentary products in Belgium should have been determined, and in
fixing the 9th of December as the limit of time for this suspension,
did not, it is true, specifically except the stocks at Antwerp from
this exemption from requisition. However, as a consequence of the
conditions of the case the stocks at Antwerp should not share this
benefit. The suspension of military requisitions desired by your
excellency was designed to enable the Belgian population to gain
sufficient time until the Comité National could actively intervene.
Your excellency had in mind the suspension of requisitions until an
inventory of existing foodstuffs had been made. It was found
expedient to fix December 9 as the time limit because that would not
be prejudicial to a general investigation and because it was
possible that on account of the number of materials, etc., a
determination of the actual existence of foodstuffs would have been
seriously delayed. The stocks of foodstuffs at Antwerp was not
affected by these measures. Their character differed essentially
from that of provisions existing in the rest of the country. As a
matter of fact, Antwerp is a world port where merchandise of all
kinds is not destined to the feeding or the use of Belgium alone,
but for distribution throughout different countries from this
important economic center. It must be added that the merchandise in
Antwerp belongs only in part to Belgians or to dependencies of
belligerent nations, being for the rest the property of German
citizens or their allies or of neutral subjects.
These facts alone prove that the measure concerning the feeding of
the civil population should not comprise the foodstuffs on the
Antwerp docks and that a doubled charge for food has not been made
in the city of Antwerp.
Further, the stocks at Antwerp were from October 18, subjected to a
general attachment which prevented their being transported outside
of Antwerp. Unlike foodstuffs, the circulation of which was free in
Belgium, these stocks of Antwerp were already subject to a measure
which affected owners of all merchandise.
The protests of President Franck against the measure taken November
30 relative to transport to Germany, and the special seizure of
cereals which seemed to belong to the city of Antwerp, appear,
therefore, to be unfounded.
I have [etc.]
