Edith Cavell
Page 26
Foreign Office
August 26th 1915
The American Ambassador in London, Mr. Page, duly sent a telegram on August 27 to Brand Whitlock, minister at the American Legation in Brussels. Whitlock wrote memoirs and novels in flowery prose and took his time to respond to letters. “One day in August,” he wrote in his memoir, “it was learned at the Legation that an English nurse named Edith Cavell had been arrested by the Germans. I wrote a letter to the Baron von der Lancken to ask if it was true that Miss Cavell had been arrested.”
Edith Cavell at the time of her trial, 1915
The “one day in August” was the 27th when he received the telegram from London. Four days later, on August 31, he wrote to Baron von der Lancken-Wakenitz, head of the Politische Abteilung, the office which dealt with requests from foreign diplomats. It was not, in itself, a military department, though it was under the rule of the notorious General von Bissing to whom von der Lancken was a trusted adviser.
“Your Excellency,” Whitlock wrote:
My Legation has just been informed that Miss Edith Cavell, a British subject residing in rue de la Culture, is said to have been arrested. I should be greatly obliged if Your Excellency would be good enough to let me know whether this report is true, and, if so, the reasons for her arrest. I should also be grateful in that case if Your Excellency would furnish this Legation with the necessary authorization from the German judicial authorities so that M. de Leval may consult with Miss Cavell, and eventually entrust some one with her defence.
I avail etc.
Brand Whitlock
Gaston de Leval was the Belgian legal adviser to the American Legation.
Ten days passed without a reply from Baron von der Lancken. Whitlock knew him well, viewed him as “one of the ablest of the young men in German diplomacy,” had negotiated many times with him on diplomatic matters, and toured the front line battlefields with him. He could have called on him within half an hour. Von der Lancken, tall, well-groomed, about fifty, with black hair, a short-cropped mustache and blue eyes, spoke many languages fluently, owned landed estates in Silesia, and before the war had for ten years worked for the German Embassy in Paris.
Brand Whitlock (1869–1934) Minister at the American Legation in Brussels
Whitlock had not heard of this English nurse, Miss Edith Cavell. He did not see anything more significant in her case than in any of the numerous others brought to his notice. He heard that her offense was aiding young men to cross the Dutch frontier. Such charges were common and the sentences meted out not severe according to the standard of the occupation. Deportation to some German prison and internment for two or ten or twenty years—it all amounted to the same thing, because prisoners would be freed when peace came, if ever the war ended.
He did not hurry or dwell on her case. He was far more agitated at the news of the arrest of the Princess de Croÿ and the Countess de Belleville. These were Belgium’s nobility, close to the monarchy, personal friends of Queen Elisabeth, “old” families, owners of châteaux and vast tracts of land, to whom deference and service were de rigueur.
After further prompting from London, on September 10 Whitlock again wrote to von der Lancken:
The American Minister presents his compliments to the Baron von der Lancken and has the honour to draw His Excellency’s attention to his letter of August 31 respecting the arrest of Miss Cavell, to which no reply has yet been received. As the Minister has been requested by telegraph to take charge of Miss Cavell’s defence without delay, he would be greatly obliged if Baron von der Lancken would enable him to take forthwith such steps as may be necessary for this defence, and to answer by telegraph the dispatch he has received.
Brussels, September 10, 1915
Baron von der Lancken consulted with Bergan and Pinkhoff then two days later sent a speedy if acerbic reply to Whitlock:
Sir,
In reply to Your Excellency’s note of the 31st ultimo, I have the honour to inform you that Miss Edith Cavell was arrested on August 5 and that she is at present in the military prison at St. Gilles. She has herself admitted that she concealed in her house French and English soldiers, as well as Belgians of military age, all desirous of proceeding to the front. She has also admitted having furnished these soldiers with the money necessary for their journey to France, and having facilitated their departure from Belgium by providing them with guides who enabled them secretly to cross the Dutch frontier. Miss Cavell’s defence is in the hands of the advocate Braun, who, I may add, is already in touch with the competent German authorities. In view of the fact that the General Government as a matter of principle does not allow accused persons to have any interviews whatever, I much regret my inability to procure for M. de Leval permission to visit Miss Cavell as long as she is in solitary confinement.
I avail etc.
Von der Lancken
The damaging phrase was “all desirous of proceeding to the front.” Edith Cavell had not admitted any such thing. Nor had the advocate Braun seen her or had permission to defend her confirmed.
Whitlock moved in an all-male world of exchanged memoranda, meetings in ornate buildings, deference to status and procedure. He was a diplomat who valued peace and justice, but he kept to the bureaucratic procedures of civilized society, even when these procedures were to no avail. Edith Cavell needed high-level intervention of a vigorous sort, not the passing of letters from one bureau to another.
Though Whitlock had not met her, he described her as “a frail and delicate little woman about forty years of age … with the naïveté of the pure in heart she assumed that the Germans were charging her with the deeds she had committed … a tortured little woman.” But she was not that little, naive, or tortured. Naivety was a long time gone. She knew only too well what the German military were up to. She hoped, by taking focus on herself, to divert interest away from others. She had nursed through a typhoid epidemic and in workhouse hospitals among the slum-dwellers of Victorian London, assisted at operations where blood dripped into a bowl under the table, sat at the bedside of the dying, broken unwanted news to relatives, founded an innovative nursing school in a foreign land in a foreign language. Hers was not the work of a frail and delicate little woman. She was tougher than most, sustained not by the belief that she was right, but that doing good was right and that the opposite was the opposite.
So Brand Whitlock penned news to the American Embassy in England of the admission of culpability of this frail little woman, to whom justice of an unjust sort would be meted out, by a corrupt court, at a faster pace and with more guile than he would show. A month had passed from when Longworth Wainwright asked the British Foreign Secretary to intervene over his sister-in-law’s arrest:
American Legation, Brussels
September 21, 1915
Sir,
Referring to your telegram of August 27 in regard to the case of Miss Edith Cavell, who was arrested on August 5 and is now in the military prison at St.-Gilles, I beg to enclose herewith for your information a copy of a communication which I have just received from Baron von der Lancken in regard to the matter. The legal adviser appointed to defend Miss Cavell has informed the Legation that she has indeed admitted having hidden in her house English and French soldiers and has facilitated the departure of Belgian subjects to the front, furnishing them money and guides to enable them to cross the Dutch frontier. The Legation will of course keep this case in view and endeavour to see that a fair trial is given to Miss Cavell and will not fail to let you know of any developments.
I have etc.,
Brand Whitlock
Even allowing for diplomatic courtesies, it was not a letter of urgent intervention and concern: “for your information … endeavour to see … will not fail to let you know.” Edith Cavell had no legal adviser. No one was allowed to see her. The words purporting to come from this notional legal adviser were Pinkhoff’s. What was her defence? How was a fair trial to be achieved?
Six weeks had passed since her arrest.
Pinkhoff and Bergan had stored up evidence, real and contrived. And she was in solitary confinement, not knowing if anything was being done on her behalf, dwelling on her primary concern: the fate of the Nursing School.
Brand Whitlock’s endeavors at intervention went no further than a promise to the American Ambassador in London to “keep closely in touch with the matter.” In-house governmental memos at the Foreign Office made clear their policy was to do nothing. “I am afraid it is likely to go hard with Miss Cavell. I am afraid we are powerless,” the British Undersecretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Sir Horace Rowland, wrote on October 1. Lord Robert Cecil concurred: “Any representation by us will do her more harm than good.”
Then came a defining blow. The Military Governor, General von Kraewel, was replaced by General von Sauberzweig. Von Bissing, the Governor General, had not found von Kraewel severe enough. German soldiers were deserting. “Brussels was nearer black despair than it had ever been,” Brand Whitlock wrote. Sauberzweig belonged to the Cavalry Corps and was an apostle of Kriegsbrauch—“Requirements of War” which postulated that violent and extreme procedures were more humane because then resistance would be over quickly. His brief reign in Brussels was one where all and any tactics were used to defeat opposition. Each day affiches posted on walls reported the activities of the firing squad. He compelled unemployed Belgians to work for the Germans, requisitioned cattle and the country’s centuries-old walnut trees to make stocks for rifles—not one was spared, took tram rails, metal from houses, rubber, wool, and the machinery from factories and shipped it all to Germany. He wanted foreign diplomats to leave the country and, ominously, he replaced the military prosecutor with a German lawyer, Dr. Stoeber, who was as vicious and highhanded as himself.
The trial was fixed for Thursday October 7. A few days before it Thomas Braun was told by the German prosecutors that he could not attend on behalf of Edith Cavell. They had been angered by his criticism in court, in a different case, of a Belgian witness who gave evidence against his own countrymen. Any whim could sway the decision-making of this court. The committee for the Nursing School hastily engaged Sadi Kirschen, a Belgian lawyer, to defend her. He would not be allowed to see her in advance of her court appearance or receive prior details of the charges against her. His German was not fluent.
On October 5, Gaston de Leval wrote to Sadi Kirschen and asked him to keep the American Legation informed of the progress of the trial and, as it proceeded, to send details of the charges against Edith Cavell. Kirschen did not respond to this letter.
Seventeen nurses from the School delivered an appeal, signed by them, to the Governor General’s office. It was written in German on their behalf by Nurse Aerschodt’s Swiss father. It was worse than ponderous in style:
To his Excellency Baron von Bissing, Governor-General in
Belgium
Excellency,
We the undersigned nurses of the Clinic situated at 32 rue de Bruxelles, Uccle, Brussels (formerly at 149 rue de la Culture), take the liberty of approaching your Excellency, in consideration of your benevolent intentions towards the whole population, in the hope of shortening the term of imprisonment of our former matron, Miss Cavell, who was arrested on 5.8.15 and, if it were in any way practicable, of procuring the suspension thereof.
We should like your Excellency to know that Miss Cavell has been the Superintendent of our Clinic for eight years and, by her self-sacrificing work in the service of charity, has won lasting recognition from all her patients as well as her staff.
Confident of the benevolent reception which your Excellency will accord to our petition, we have complete faith that your Excellency will recognise our sad position and graciously set our minds at rest concerning the fate of our esteemed Matron. In this hope we beg to assure your Excellency of our lasting gratitude.
Marguerite Genonceaux
A. Court
Margarehte Oppliger
E. Hacks
P. Van Bockstael
E. Wolf
N. Andry
G. van Aerschodt
E. Balty
A. Steckmann
C. Aulrebs
J. Brenez
R. Schurmann
E. Docht
M. Bonnie
E. Wegels
M. Waschausky
Nurses of the Belgian School for Trained Nurses
32 rue de Bruxelles-Uccle
Brussels
3.10.15
His Excellency did not recognize their sad position, set their minds at rest, or have any particular concern about the fate of their esteemed matron. He was in Germany on sick leave and would not be in Brussels at the time of Edith Cavell’s trial.
39
THE TRIAL: THURSDAY OCTOBER 7
On the morning of October 7 a prison bell rang at 5:30. Edith Cavell put on her dark-blue skirt and coat, white muslin blouse, gray fur stole and straw hat with a feather. The Princess de Croÿ and Louise Thuliez both later said they wished she had worn her nurse’s uniform, to impress the military tribunal as an “emblem of charity and mercy.” But Edith Cavell was not representing her profession at this court. She stood accused as herself. She did not wear her uniform outside of work and would not seek to impress the tribunal or risk incriminating other nurses from the School.
At 7:00 she was led by armed German soldiers along the prison corridors to a police van in the yard. The Belgian warders saluted as she passed. In the van were the chemist Louis Séverin, the student Constant Cayron, the barrister Albert Libiez, the Countess Jeanne de Belleville, the engineers Herman Capiau and Georges Hostelet, and two armed soldiers. The prisoners tried to talk to each other but were ordered to be silent. The rest of the accused followed in the prison bus.
They were driven to Parliament House, the Belgian National Palace, an ornate eighteenth-century monument to monarchic opulence and civic pride in the rule of law. They were herded up the Grand Staircase to the Senate. Edith Cavell came from two months of solitary confinement in a whitewashed cell to every emblem of grandeur in this place where justice was supposed to prevail: a high cupola worked with gold leaf; oak paneling inlaid with the crowns, wreaths and swords of monarchy, justice and nationhood; marble columns; life-size paintings of Belgian rulers “from Pipin von Heristal down to Charles of Lorraine”; murals painted in 1895 of Waterloo battles; coats of arms of the Belgian provinces; a wide raised—and empty—public gallery; crimson chairs embroidered with gold lions rampant; a raised rostrum with high chairs where the judges would sit.
The Princess de Croÿ was given special treatment because of her rank and aristocratic German relations—the Duke and Duchess de Croÿ-Dülmen. She had not been imprisoned at St. Gilles like the others, but had rooms at the Kommandantur, with views over the courtyard and was allowed a personal maid. Gottfried Benn, senior doctor to the Brussels military, gave special attention to her. Alexandre Braun was to defend her and Countess Jeanne de Belleville. He was the father of Thomas Braun who had been dismissed from defending Edith Cavell. While in custody the Princess had been allowed back to her château to visit her sick mother, accompanied by Braun and in his car. They discussed her defense. None of the others had been allowed any contact with their defense lawyers. Braun told her to say she was acting solely under the influence of her brother. They knew he was safe in England. Her maid and a soldier accompanied her to the tribunal. As she entered the Senate, Gottfried Benn bowed and asked her to call him if she felt unwell.
There were thirty-five accused: twenty-two men and thirteen women. They were variously charged with having conveyed soldiers to the enemy, or assisting with such conveyance, circulating seditious pamphlets, assisting in the illegal transmission of letters, concealing arms, or evading compulsory registration. The six main defendants: Edith Cavell, Marie de Croÿ, Jeanne de Belleville, Louise Thuliez, Herman Capiau and Philippe Baucq, were given senators’ seats, facing the judges. They could not see their counsel or the witnesses. Soldiers with fixed bayonets stood either side of each
seat. Other prisoners sat on benches with their backs to the rostrum.
The defense lawyers entered, four Belgians and one German: M. A. Dorff represented seven of the accused, Sadi Kirschen nine, Monsieur Braffort six, Alexandre Braun two, and Lieutenant Thiel-mann of the Battalion of Landsturm, Flensburg, represented eleven. The lawyers sat behind their clients and had no communication with them.
The court stood for the entrance of the judges. All were uniformed, bemedalled, from the Landsturm Battalion and adorned with the Iron Cross. There were five of them: Werthmann, von Cornberg, Eck, Stenger and Paul. Last, came the military prosecutor, Sauberzweig’s henchman, Dr. Eduard Stoeber. Sadi Kirschen said he looked dressed and coiffeured as if for a military ball. He was tall, thin, had a waxed mustache and a monocle and modulated his voice like an actor. He carried a fat dossier and a copy of the German military code. He put these and his helmet on the table in front of him. A German officer, Herr Brueck, was interpreter for the prosecutors and defendants. The key witnesses—the police officers Lieutenant Bergan and Sergeant Pinkhoff—were well known to all the accused. Madame Bodart’s young son had been tricked into testifying against Philippe Baucq.
Stoeber opened proceedings by reading the charges in German, then Bergan made a long deposition, also in German. The core of the prosecution was paragraph 90 of the German military penal code which defined as treason crimes against the Fatherland such as “conducting soldiers to the enemy”18.
The accused were then sent out and brought in singly to be tried. Edith Cavell was first. She was told to stand in front of Stoeber. He put his questions in German. Brueck translated these into French. She replied in French. Brueck translated her replies into German. No written statement of her charge had been given to her attorney Sadi Kirschen, whom she had never met, whose German was not good, who had had no communication with the American Legation and who at this same hearing, all of which was to be got through in one day, was also defending Ada Bodart, the chemists Louis Séverin and Georges Derveau, a Michel Cavenaile and his wife Celine who was a primary school teacher, a coffeehouse keeper Maurice Pansaers, and two barristers Adolphe Demonstier and Armand Heuze.