File No. 763.72115/2496
The Chargé in Germany (Grew) to the Secretary of State
[Received October 31, 8.15 a. m.]
4535. Referring to my 4452 and my 4511, October 23. I sought another interview with the Undersecretary of State for Foreign Affairs to-day and told him informally and orally that I understood that the military government in Belgium had definitely determined on the policy of enforcing labor on Belgian civilians, many of whom would be brought to Germany to work in various industries, thus releasing German workmen to go to the front. In reply the Undersecretary of State for Foreign Affairs handed me a memorandum containing the following:
Against the unemployed in Belgium who are a burden to public charity, in order to avoid friction arising therefrom, compulsory measures are to be adopted to make them work so far as they are not voluntarily inclined to work, in accordance with the order issued by the Governor General on May 15, 1916.
I pointed out the fact that this decision would undoubtedly make a very bad impression abroad, as it involved a definite breach of international law, that it would probably adversely affect any peace sentiment in England and might result in England’s refusing to let further supplies through to Belgium, and that it would tend toward a prolongation of the war; also that the measure was in principle contrary to the assurances given to the Ambassador by the Chancellor at Headquarters last spring. I said I understood that the measure had been promulgated solely by the military government in Belgium and that I thought it ought at least to be brought to the Chancellor’s personal attention in the light of the consequences it would entail.
The Undersecretary of State for Foreign Affairs intimated in reply that he approved of any measure which would help Germany to win the war; that he was not aware of any peace sentiment in England although Germany had repeatedly shown her readiness to consider peace terms; that if any hope of peace were held out, the measures taken in Belgium might be revoked, but that they were military measures, and stated that Foreign Office had very little [Page 863] influence with the military authorities. He asked me not to state that the decision of the military authorities was irrevocable as “accidents might still happen.” I took this as meaning that if peace propositions were forthcoming from the Allies, the measures in Belgium might be revoked. I then asked him if he would approve of my seeing the Chancellor, if so authorized by my Government, to which he replied in the affirmative.
If the Department regards the matter as of sufficient importance and feels that owing to the possible seriousness of the consequences which may result from the new policy in Belgium, further representations could be made with propriety, the only step left would be to consider the advisability of authorizing me to seek such an interview with the Chancellor in order to place the whole matter before him with reference to the principles involved in the assurances given the Ambassador last spring, and in the light of international law, foreign opinion, and humanity. I have, however, no reason to believe that such an interview would have any effect, and am doubtful as to what extent it is desirable to carry our informal representations, but wish the Department to know the circumstances.