Professional Documents
Culture Documents
The Trial of The Kaiser Schabas Full Chapter PDF
The Trial of The Kaiser Schabas Full Chapter PDF
The Trial of The Kaiser Schabas Full Chapter PDF
https://ebookmass.com/product/the-international-legal-orders-
colour-line-racism-racial-discrimination-and-the-making-of-
international-law-william-a-schabas/
https://ebookmass.com/product/the-trial-of-john-nobody-other-
stories-a-h-z-carr/
https://ebookmass.com/product/kafkas-the-trial-philosophical-
perspectives-espen-hammer-ed/
https://ebookmass.com/product/interfaces-and-us-zachary-kaiser/
Haret Chronicles Vampire: Trial of the Thunder Moon: A
Fantasy Romance Laurel Chase
https://ebookmass.com/product/haret-chronicles-vampire-trial-of-
the-thunder-moon-a-fantasy-romance-laurel-chase/
https://ebookmass.com/product/african-voices-from-the-
inquisition-vol-1-the-trial-of-crispina-peres-of-cacheu-guinea-
bissau-1646-1668-toby-green/
https://ebookmass.com/product/the-tokyo-university-trial-and-the-
struggle-against-order-in-postwar-japan-christopher-perkins/
https://ebookmass.com/product/judgement-at-tokyo-world-war-ii-on-
trial-and-the-making-of-modern-asia-gary-j-bass/
The Tokyo Trial and War Crimes in Asia 2nd Edition Mei
Ju-Ao
https://ebookmass.com/product/the-tokyo-trial-and-war-crimes-in-
asia-2nd-edition-mei-ju-ao/
i
THE TRIAL
OF THE KAISER
WILLIAM A. SCHABAS
1
iv
1
Great Clarendon Street, Oxford, ox2 6dp
United Kingdom
Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford.
It furthers the University’s objective of excellence in research, scholarship,
and education by publishing worldwide. Oxford is a registered trade mark of
Oxford University Press in the UK and in certain other countries
© William A. Schabas 2018
The moral rights of the author have been asserted
First Edition published in 2018
Impression: 1
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in
a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the
prior permission in writing of Oxford University Press, or as expressly permitted
by law, by licence or under terms agreed with the appropriate reprographics
rights organization. Enquiries concerning reproduction outside the scope of the
above should be sent to the Rights Department, Oxford University Press, at the
address above
You must not circulate this work in any other form
and you must impose this same condition on any acquirer
Crown copyright material is reproduced under Class Licence
Number C01P0000148 with the permission of OPSI
and the Queen’s Printer for Scotland
Published in the United States of America by Oxford University Press
198 Madison Avenue, New York, ny 10016, United States of America
British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data
Data available
Library of Congress Control Number: 2018950871
ISBN 978–0–19–883385–7
Printed and bound by
CPI Group (UK) Ltd, Croydon, cr0 4yy
Links to third party websites are provided by Oxford in good faith and
for information only. Oxford disclaims any responsibility for the materials
contained in any third party website referenced in this work.
v
To Cherif
vi
vi
Preface
I think it was from Cherif Bassiouni that I initially learned about the failed ef-
forts to prosecute international crimes following the First World War. Cherif,
who passed away in September 2017, was the gentle patriarch of international
criminal law for more than a generation.When I attended law school in the
early 1980s, the rather modest collection of writings on international crim-
inal law in the university library consisted almost exclusively of his work.
Cherif was always extremely conscious of the historical dimension. He often
began his lectures with references to the trial of the Kaiser that was imposed
by Article 227 of the Treaty of Versailles. It represented the first call, at least in
the modern era, for an international criminal court.
My work to try to deepen our knowledge of these early efforts at inter-
national justice began before Cherif took ill. He inquired frequently about
the progress of my research. It was a great pleasure to inform him of discov-
eries in the various archives that might affect and even alter conventional as-
sessments of the plans for a trial of Kaiser Wilhelm II. One day, some months
after Cherif was diagnosed with his final illness, a courier arrived at my office
in London with a thick file of research materials. Cherif had sent me the col-
lection of documents that he had used to write an article on the subject that
was published in 2002 in the Denver Journal of International Law and Policy.1
Only days before he passed away, Cherif gave me some precious books from
his own library dealing with the atrocities perpetrated in the First World War.
I had already planned to dedicate this book to him. I wanted it to be a surprise.
Now I regret that I never told him.
Besides Cherif, many other individuals provided me with assistance during
the course of this project. Several Leiden University law students helped
me to find and review published and unpublished materials in the Dutch
language: Wout Apeldoorn, Lena Ellen Becker, Vasco van den Berg, Joey
Bos, Cindy Buys, Misha Jans, David Koeller, Barbara van der Kroon, Ruben
Libgott, Miloe van Nieuwmegen, and Lisanne Willemsen. Professor Michael
A. Newton ofVanderbilt University pointed the way to the Tennessee archival
vi
viii Preface
materials on the Luke Lea caper to kidnap Wilhelm II. Jeremy Akin, a law stu-
dent at the University of Georgia, visited archives and libraries in the United
States and England on my behalf. Dr Aurora Rasi did the same in Italy. Dr
Joe Powderly accompanied me on a field visit to Doorn, and he read a draft
of the manuscript. Dr Harry Rhea shared research materials with me that he
had assembled from archives in the United States for his own doctoral thesis,
which is now published.2 I am especially grateful to Professor André Klip,
who is himself an expert on this subject and who most helpfully reviewed the
entire manuscript.
John Louth and Matthew Cotton of Oxford University Press offered in-
valuable advice about the form the manuscript would take. John’s guidance in
finishing the project was quite decisive and I am immensely grateful to him.
Merel Alstein saw the project through to completion. Penelope Soteriou
carefully studied the manuscript, proposed countless corrections and im-
provements, and focused my attention whenever I was distracted by matters
of less importance.
I thank you all.
William A. Schabas
London and Paris, 8 May 2018
1
Amerongen
Nijmegen Kleve
Krefeld
Brussels Maastricht
Liege
Map of Belgium, Luxembourg, and the Netherlands with routes taken by Luke Lea and his accomplices.
2
Col. Luke Lea, the former Senator Bust of the Kaiser with his final home,
who organised the attempt to Huis Doorn, in the background.
kidnap Kaiser Wilhelm II. Photo by William A. Schabas
Courtesy of the Tennessee State Library & Archives
The Kaiser’s office at Huis Doorn, showing the Portrait of Kaiser Wilhelm at his summer home,
saddle chair on which he liked to work. the Achilleon, in Corfu.
Photo by William A. Schabas Photo by William A. Schabas
3
A carriage from the Imperial train that took the Kaiser to the Netherlands,
now in the Deutsche Technikmuseum in Berlin.
Photo by William A. Schabas
The Kaiser pacing the platform at Eijsden train station on 10 November 1918.
L’album de la guerre 1914–1919, 1926 (L’Illustration)
4
Contents
Preface vii
x Contents
Notes 317
Bibliography 385
Index 397
1
Amerongen
Nijmegen Kleve
Krefeld
Brussels Maastricht
Liege
Photo 1
Map of Belgium, Luxembourg, and the Netherlands with routes taken by Luke Lea and his accomplices.
2
Photo 2 Photo 3
Col. Luke Lea, the former Senator Bust of the Kaiser with his final home,
who organised the attempt to Huis Doorn, in the background.
kidnap Kaiser Wilhelm II. Photo by William A. Schabas
Courtesy of the Tennessee State Library & Archives
Photo 4 Photo 5
The Kaiser’s office at Huis Doorn, showing the Portrait of Kaiser Wilhelm at his summer home,
saddle chair on which he liked to work. the Achilleon, in Corfu.
Photo by William A. Schabas Photo by William A. Schabas
3
Photo 6
A carriage from the Imperial train that took the Kaiser to the Netherlands,
now in the Deutsche Technikmuseum in Berlin.
Photo by William A. Schabas
Photo 7
The Kaiser pacing the platform at Eijsden train station on 10 November 1918.
L’album de la guerre 1914–1919, 1926 (L’Illustration)
4
Photo 8
Cartoon from Punch.
Punch, 21 January 1920. The Internet Archive
Photo 9
Wilhelm II and Count Bentinck crossing the moat at Amerongen Castle.
U.S. National Archives and Records Administration
1
1
The Power of the Beaten Path
I t is often said that international criminal justice began with the great
Nuremberg trial of 1945 and 1946. In his opening address, American
Prosecutor Robert H. Jackson spoke of how four great nations, flushed with
victory, had stayed the hand of vengeance. International justice prospered
for several more years. There was another international tribunal in Tokyo.
Several thematic trials, of doctors, lawyers, generals, businessmen, and bur-
eaucrats, were held in the Nuremberg courtroom where the great trial of
the twenty-odd Nazi leaders had taken place. However, attempts within the
United Nations to establish a permanent international criminal court soon
stalled. They did not revive until the modern period in the final decade of
the last century. But this familiar narrative of the beginnings of international
justice is incomplete.The first chapter is missing.
In his post-trial report to President Harry Truman, Robert Jackson in-
voked the words of Benjamin N. Cardozo: ‘The power of the precedent is
the power of the beaten path.’1 Jackson told the President that ‘[o]ne of the
chief obstacles to this trial was the lack of a beaten path’.2 Robert Jackson’s
role in beating the path cannot be gainsaid. But he did not set out on en-
tirely unexplored land.Two and a half decades earlier, others had scouted the
terrain, identifying welcoming contours and sometimes making prescient
choices at forks in the road. They had also mapped some of the unfordable
streams, the precipices, and the culs-de-sac, leaving blazes and waymarks to
show the trails to be avoided as well as the way forward. Jackson’s celebrated
and richly deserved contribution to justice at Nuremberg owes a debt to the
early pioneers and explorers of his figurative path.
Although there are a few examples of medieval trials with international
dimensions, international criminal justice as we know it really originated
during the final years of what Eric Hobsbawm called ‘the long nineteenth
The Trial of the Kaiser.William A. Schabas. © William A. Schabas, 2018. Published 2018 by Oxford
University Press.
2
defeated.4 In a sense, this was an innovation, as such rules had not figured in
earlier peace treaties. But there was nothing new or controversial in the prin-
ciple by which prisoners in the custody of a party to a conflict could be pun-
ished for war crimes perpetrated during the conflict.The main purpose of the
treaty provisions was to compel the defeated countries to surrender suspects
for trial, and to cooperate in providing documents and conducting investi-
gations. Trials were to take place before military tribunals of the victorious
powers or, exceptionally, before joint tribunals of two or more countries.The
treaty with Germany contained a special clause that was unique and unprece-
dented. Article 227 of the Treaty of Versailles stated that the former Emperor
of Germany,Wilhelm II of Hohenzollern, was to be tried by an international
criminal tribunal for a ‘supreme crime against international morality and the
sanctity of treaties’. The trial was to be held before a ‘special tribunal’ com-
posed of judges from what were labelled the ‘Principal Allied and Associated
Powers’: Britain, France, the United States, Italy, and Japan.
The international tribunal described in Article 227 is the atavistic fore-
runner of the International Criminal Court and of the various modern-
day temporary or ad hoc tribunals, as well as of the Nuremberg and Tokyo
international military tribunals. The vaguely framed charges in Article 227
nevertheless form the embryo of the ‘core crimes’—genocide, crimes against
humanity, war crimes, and the crime of aggression—that are prosecuted by
today’s international courts and tribunals, as well as those set up during the
post-Second World War phase. Moreover, the notion that Heads of State may
be threatened with criminal prosecution before an international tribunal for
atrocities perpetrated while they were in office is today well accepted. Several
have been charged, some have stood trial, and at least a few have gone to
jail for lengthy terms: Rwanda’s Prime Minister Jean Kambanda, Liberia’s
President Charles Taylor, Slobodan Milošević of Serbia and Radovan Karadžić
of the Bosnian Serbs, Côte d’Ivoire’s Laurent Gbagbo, Muammar Ghaddafi of
Libya, Omar Al Bashir of Sudan, Chad’s Hissène Habré, and Augusto Pinochet
of Chile.
When it was suggested that the German Emperor be brought to trial for
starting the First World War, there were no precedents, no examples of others
who had met such a fate. British lawmakers looked to the case of Napoleon,
a century earlier. Then their forerunners had called for a trial, but only be-
fore a French court. In 1815, it was unimaginable that the courts of another
country might try France’s former Emperor, and even more unthinkable that
an international tribunal could be established for the task. And with what
4
crime might Napoleon have been charged? In 1815, the only one the British
lawyers could think of was treason against his own country. But the French
had no taste for such a trial. Ultimately, exile to St Helena, by decree and
without trial, was the best that British justice could propose.
Several factors explain the failure to implement Article 227 of the treaty
and to hold the trial of the Kaiser. Although agreed to by the many Allied
and Associated Powers that were parties to the treaty, only France and Britain
showed any real enthusiasm for the idea, and even their leaders were divided
on the subject. The charge itself remained a mystery. The words had been
crafted rather casually by the US Secretary of State Robert Lansing, who was
himself opposed to any trial. Lansing never thought he was drafting a legal
instrument or treaty provision.Woodrow Wilson borrowed some of Lansing’s
words and fashioned the enigmatic text one evening.The following morning,
the American President insisted that the other leaders sign the draft article.
They complied without debate or real discussion.The Peace Conference was
at a decisive point and it looked as if the talks might collapse.Wilson, who was
in frail health, both physical and mental, had been threatening to return to the
United States.Wilson’s clauses on criminal penalties and the trial of the Kaiser
were among the last to be accepted by the German negotiators.
Once the Treaty of Versailles had been signed on 28 June 1919, the British
proceeded to organise the trial as if ‘supreme crime against international
morality and the sanctity of treaties’ meant responsibility for initiating the
First World War, breaching the neutrality of Belgium and Luxembourg, and
violating the laws of armed conflict while it was underway by such acts as
unrestricted submarine warfare. Royal families and monarchists throughout
Europe closed ranks to protect the deposed Emperor. There was even some
low-key resistance from the King of England, who shared a grandmother with
the German Emperor. In the final days of the war, the Kaiser had obtained
sanctuary in the Netherlands, possibly after being invited by the Dutch
Queen.The country’s governing elite was thick with pro-German elements,
including the all-important Foreign Minister. Holland had remained neu-
tral during the war. The Dutch bristled at bullying from the British and the
French and refused to surrender the accused. At one point, rogue American
soldiers led by a former Senator undertook a bizarre attempt to kidnap the
German Emperor in the Dutch castle where he had been billeted, hoping to
bring their prize to Paris as a gift to President Wilson.
The trial of the Kaiser is more than a good story. It marks the first inter-
national debates about perplexing issues of international law that retain their
5
salience. For two months, in February and March 1919, the Commission on
the Responsibility of the Authors of the War and on Enforcement of Penalties
(set up by the plenary Peace Conference) debated the shape of prosecu-
tions, including the special problems posed by the trial of Kaiser Wilhelm II.
They could not agree, ultimately producing a majority Report accompanied
by dissenting opinions from the American and Japanese delegations. The
Report, together with the minutes of the debates within the Commission
and its three Sub-Commissions, provides precious insights into the inter-
national law-making process, manifesting both recognition of the law as it
stood at the time and visions of how it ought to be, and the direction in which
it should be reformed and developed. Several of the world’s leading inter-
national lawyers contributed to this process. A number of riddles stand out.
Some of them, a century later, remain unsolved.
The first riddle concerns the immunity of a Head of State from pros-
ecution. The issue was much debated during the Paris Peace Conference.
Although the Americans and the Japanese went along with their European
allies in agreeing to hold the trial, they never really accepted the claim that the
victors were entitled to put the Emperor on trial without Germany’s consent.
That helps to explain why Article 227 is in the Treaty of Versailles. German
acceptance of the trial of their former Emperor was a sine qua non for pros-
ecution by the Allies.That Germany agreed to a trial of its former Emperor by
signing and ratifying the Treaty of Versailles considerably weakens the claim
that Article 227 represents a watershed in international law as far as the im-
munity of the Head of State is concerned.
The issue of Head of State immunity remains a live one to the modern
day. In 1998, British judges ruled that the former President of Chile, Augusto
Pinochet, could not claim immunity before their courts when charged with
the international crime of torture.5 For a few years, Pinochet was a radical
precedent. According to the judgment, nobody was above the law as far as
liability for international crimes was concerned, even a Head of State. But
the influential ruling of the British courts was implicitly overruled four years
later by an even more prestigious tribunal, the International Court of Justice.
It held that a sitting or former Head of State could not be brought to trial
before the courts of any country but his or her own. In effect, said the judges,
one country cannot stand in judgment of another. However, the International
Court of Justice acknowledged that a Head of State might also be tried by
‘certain international criminal tribunals’.6 In 2017, a special rapporteur of the
International Law Commission proposed that the rule be revised, and that
6
debate about the illegality of aggressive war. Regardless of the legal issue, there
was, of course, an important factual matter. Did the Germans start the war?
But assuming that was the case—the French and the British had few doubts
about the matter—whether this amounted to a breach of international law,
not to mention one that was punishable as a crime, remained an open ques-
tion. Prominent experts in London and Paris told their governments that the
legal prohibition of aggressive war had crystallised. The Americans and the
Dutch were not convinced, although both said they would be happy to see
international law evolve in such a direction.
That international law prohibits the waging of aggressive war is no longer
in doubt. The Kellogg–Briand Pact of 1928 confirmed that this was the
direction taken by international law.13 The issue was firmly resolved after
the Second World War by the Charter of the United Nations. German and
Japanese leaders were convicted by the Nuremberg and Tokyo international
military tribunals for the waging of aggressive war under the heading ‘crimes
against peace’, as well as war crimes and crimes against humanity conducted
in the course of the war. Judges of the International Military Tribunal labelled
aggression ‘the supreme international crime differing only from other war
crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole’.14
Although there have been many trials since then for war crimes and crimes
against humanity, the crime of waging aggressive war has had a more un-
certain career, putting its ‘supreme’ status in doubt. The first of the modern
international courts, the International Criminal Tribunal for the former
Yugoslavia and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, set up by
the United Nations Security Council in the early 1990s, were not even given
jurisdiction over the crime of aggression.
When the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court was adopted,
in 1998, delegates to the Diplomatic Conference could not agree on how to
formulate the crime of aggression. Some were even indifferent about its in-
clusion in the Rome Statute at all. Eventually, rather feeble amendments to
the Rome Statute incorporating the crime of aggression were adopted at the
Kampala Review Conference in 2010.15 They were further weakened when
the hesitant final step in activating the Court’s jurisdiction over aggression
was taken, in December 2017.16 The restrictive jurisdictional formula for the
crime of aggression contrasts dramatically with that for the other core crimes
of genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes. Whereas in principle
the Statute applies to crimes committed on the territory of a State Party re-
gardless of the nationality of the offender, an exception is made for the crime
8
left alive. Yet the characterisation of the acts using the language of inter-
national criminal law remains an important issue at the political level.
In other words, even if there is no possibility of a criminal trial, is it ap-
propriate to condemn atrocities perpetrated in the early decades of the
twentieth century using the labels genocide, crimes against humanity, war
crimes, and aggression?
The debates in 1919 also make useful contributions to other issues of
international criminal law. Although no international criminal court was es-
tablished, there was considerable discussion not only about the desirability
of setting one up, but also about its composition and procedure. The issue
of extradition, or surrender, of the Kaiser also posed important problems.
Ultimately, of course, when the Dutch refused to give him up, the Allies
quite quickly abandoned their efforts.They might well have explored other
options, such as trial in absentia. Perhaps they would have succeeded in per-
suading the Netherlands to host the trial, thereby dodging the extradition
issue entirely. As the months wore on, they were increasingly ambivalent. For
many, Dutch refusal brought not only humiliation, but also relief.
Finally, and outside the strictly judicial sphere, the political factors cannot
be overlooked.The thirst for justice seemed to vary from one country to an-
other, and it also waned as time went by. Without greater unanimity, it was
unreasonable to expect the trial to go ahead.The Dutch seemed to sense this.
Their determination to refuse surrender of the Kaiser became firmer with
each signal from London, Paris, Washington, and Rome that a ‘Napoleonic
solution’, that is, exile in a remote place, would be a satisfactory substitute for
trial and judgment.This left a stain on the image as a home for international
justice now cultivated by the Netherlands.
After initially resisting the British and French demands for justice,
President Woodrow Wilson agreed to compromise. Article 227 of the Treaty
of Versailles, calling for the establishment of a ‘special tribunal’ with judges
from five different countries, was the result. As things turned out, the call
was premature. The plan to try the Kaiser and to establish an international
tribunal may have been an inauspicious beginning, but it was hardly the end
of a failed idea.
10
2
‘Hang the Kaiser’
H ostilities on the Western Front began in the first days of August 1914.
A speedy victory over France required German forces to avoid for-
tifications on the border between the two countries and instead to pass
through neutral Belgium and Luxembourg on their way to Paris. When he
addressed the Reichstag on 4 August, Chancellor Bethmann-Hollweg con-
ceded that Germany had violated international law, promising to repair the
wrong once victory was assured.2 Speaking to the British Ambassador that
evening, Bethmann-Hollweg notoriously described the 1839 treaty pro-
tecting Belgian neutrality as ‘a scrap of paper’ for which ‘Great Britain was
going to make war on a kindred nation who desired nothing better than to
be friends with her’.3 When Foreign Minister Edward Grey addressed the
House of Commons on 3 August, he stressed the profound British strategic
interest in a neutral Belgium rather than the sanctity of an international treaty.
Grey cited Gladstone who, at the time of the Franco-Prussian War of 1870,
said Britain had ‘an interest in the independence of Belgium which is wider
than that which we may have in the literal operation of the guarantee’.4
Within days of the German attack, great brutality by the invaders, de-
scribed as ‘violations of the laws and customs of war’, was being reported. On
The Trial of the Kaiser.William A. Schabas. © William A. Schabas, 2018. Published 2018 by Oxford
University Press.
1
think that prosecuting the Kaiser was feasible either.‘To indict a Government
is as futile as to indict a nation, and even a Hague Tribunal would hesitate to
create another St. Charles the Martyr in the person of William the Second.’24
Early in November, several days before the armistice, but at a time when the
outcome of the conflict was no longer in any doubt, acting under the au-
thority of the War Cabinet,Attorney General Smith appointed a Committee
of Enquiry into Breaches of the Law of War. The Committee was chaired
by Sir John Macdonnell, who was then King’s Remembrancer, a senior ju-
dicial post of ancient origin. The Vice-Chairman was J. H. Morgan, a mili-
tary lawyer. A number of distinguished jurists were named to sit on the
Committee, including Frederick Pollock, a prominent barrister who would
later be instructed to prepare the case against the Kaiser for trial. Hugh Bellot
and J. E. G. de Montmorency served as secretaries of the Committee. The
Committee was assigned to inquire into and report upon the facts with re-
spect to ‘breaches of the laws and customs of war, affecting members of the
British armed forces or other British subjects, committed by the forces of the
German Empire and their allies on land, on sea, and in the air during the pre-
sent war’.This was to include assessing the degree of responsibility of German
military officials,‘including the German General Staff, or other highly placed
individuals’.There was no explicit reference to the German Emperor himself.
The Committee was also to consider issues concerning the creation of an ap-
propriate tribunal for such offences.33 Sub-Committees were established to
deal with offences on land, at sea, and in the air.A fourth Sub-Committee was
to address legal matters. It was chaired by Professor J. H. Morgan and included
Sir Frederick Pollock, who had earlier served on the Bryce Committee.
The Attorney General addressed the Committee at its first meeting, on 6
November 1919.‘It is certain that in the events that have taken place in the last
four and a half years many great crimes against International Law have been
committed’, said Smith.‘This conclusion is not very vigorously disputed even
in Germany today. The very origin of the War, the violation of Belgium,
will for all time, I think, be remembered in the pages of history as one of the
greatest crimes against civilisation.’34 The task of the Committee, he said, was
‘fixing and assigning responsibility for specific breaches of International Law
in its many branches and departments of the War’. He gave as an example
abuses of prisoners of war.35 Kaiser Wilhelm II was not mentioned.
Prime Minister Lloyd George was questioned at a meeting of the Imperial
War Cabinet about Allied plans for prosecution. The Imperial War Cabinet
consisted not only of senior British ministers, but also representatives
16
sufferings, the roughness of their treatment, the “tortures” (this was the word
used) they had been subjected to’. Orlando said that the rising popular anger
within Britain fuelled the election campaign, whose flames were fanned by
Lloyd George and others. ‘It looked politically astute to take advantage of
that state of mind, but it was an error to be paid for bitterly’, wrote Orlando.39
Lloyd George and Smith ensured there were political initiatives to corres-
pond with their electoral programme. By the time of the electoral triumph,
on 14 December 1918, important decisions about whether to try the Kaiser,
the charges he would face, and the tribunal before which he would appear
had already been made. The plan had been endorsed by the Imperial War
Cabinet, by the country’s leading lawyers, and by the leaders of the two main
European allies, France and Italy.
idea.The two men were not particularly close on a personal level, but they
were often allied politically. In early 1919, with Foreign Secretary Balfour
busy in Paris at the Peace Conference, Curzon was made Deputy Foreign
Secretary and, later that same year, Foreign Secretary. He held the position
until 1924, but was then passed over for Prime Minister. Lloyd George
was not the only one to have doubts about Curzon’s abilities. Churchill
wrote of Curzon’s career: ‘The morning had been golden; the noontide
was bronze; and the evening lead.’47 Referring to Curzon as the first to
propose trial of Kaiser Wilhelm at the official level, Churchill invoked
the ‘piquant conjunction’ of Oscar Wilde, referring to an English country
gentleman galloping after a fox: ‘The inexpressible in pursuit of the uneat-
able.’48 Curzon’s personal traits have been described as ‘coldness, arrogance,
and pomposity’.49
The Imperial War Cabinet took up the matter of trial of the Kaiser at
its meeting of 20 November 1918. Curzon reported on his encounter with
Clemenceau the previous week. According to Curzon, Clemenceau had
explained that the French experts ‘had not studied this question from the
international law point of view, but, undoubtedly public opinion in France
was strongly in favour of the trial of the ex-Kaiser’.50 This may have been
Clemenceau’s misunderstanding, or Curzon’s, or possibly both, because
in their opinion Larnaude and de Lapradelle relied most heavily on inter-
national law to make the case. ‘A way must be found to permit all the acts of
which [Wilhelm II] has been guilty, because he ordered them as an Emperor
and King and War Lord, to be adduced’, it said. ‘International law can supply
this way; the facts charged against William II are international crimes; he must
be tried before an international tribunal.’51
‘We know the war was started by the Kaiser, and we have reason to believe
that all the cruelty, the iniquities, and the horrors that have been perpetrated,
if not directly inspired by him, have been countenanced and in no way dis-
couraged by him’, Curzon told the Imperial War Cabinet. ‘In my view the
Kaiser is the arch-Criminal of the world, and just as in any other sphere of
life when you get hold of a criminal you bring him to justice, so I do not
see, because he is an Emperor and living in exile in another country, why he
should be saved from the punishment which is his due.’ Curzon insisted that
any action to get hold of the Kaiser would best be taken immediately, before
the Peace Conference, when the German Emperor could still be considered a
prisoner of war.‘If you postponed it till after the Peace Conference you might
not get him at all’, he warned.52
20
Minister, took a different view, saying the Kaiser could only be tried, if at all,
for ‘his crime against humanity in willing and preparing a war’. Borden said
that the only appropriate place would be an international tribunal. He also
described as futile an attempt to conduct a trial while the Kaiser was in the
sanctuary of a neutral country. ‘It is important to consider whether we can
ensure his delivery by the Dutch Government to the Allies’, said Borden.‘It is
worthwhile thinking what we should have done with him if he had surren-
dered to the British, as Napoleon did. Reference to the Attorney General’s
Committee of Enquiry should be as broad as possible.The exact phrasing can
be left to the Prime Minister and to Lord Reading.They should consider the
constitutional powers of the Kaiser as to declaring war.’55
Churchill was also hesitant. He seemed to have a soft spot for the Kaiser.
Writing more than a decade later in Colliers magazine, when he was himself
in the political wilderness, Churchill accused Lloyd George of pushing for
trial ‘to gratify the passions of victorious crowds. He would have redraped
this poor bedraggled fugitive in the sombre robes of more than mortal guilt
and of superhuman responsibility and led him forth to a scaffold of vic-
arious expiation.’56 Churchill was less inclined to such hyperbole in Cabinet
meetings. ‘It will be difficult to say that the ex-Kaiser’s guilt is greater than
that of many of his advisers, or greater than that of the Parliament of the
nation which supported him in making war’, he cautioned the Cabinet at
the 20 November 1918 meeting. ‘It might be that after an indictment has
been laid against the ex-Kaiser it would be found that it could not be sus-
tained. A serious impasse would be created. The question should be looked
at very carefully before the Government commits itself to any decision.’57
Churchill cited these words in The World Crisis, where he expressed concern
that hanging the Kaiser ‘was the best way to restore at once his dignity and
his dynasty’.58
Lord Reading, Ambassador to the United States at the time, had mixed
views. ‘The Government should know exactly what it proposes to do, and
whether it is feasible to prosecute the ex-Kaiser at all’, he told theWar Cabinet.
‘Legal opinion should be taken as to the charges on which he could be in-
dicted, the procedure that should be followed, and the possibility of his being
handed over by the Government of Holland for trial.’ Arthur Balfour, the
Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, thought the Crown Prince should also
be tried. ‘It will be difficult to prove that the son is anything but subordinate
to the father’, he said.‘And there are other cases of men who have committed
the greatest cruelties. I have in mind the Turkish leaders,Talat Pasha and Enver
2
Pasha. It is my hope that the Imperial War Cabinet can take up these cases at
a future date.’59
‘I truly regret any hesitation here with regard to trying the ex-Kaiser for
high treason against humanity’, said Lloyd George as the discussion con-
cluded. ‘This case is entirely different from that of Napoleon, who not only
showed great talent and power, but himself fought with his own troops.The
ex-Kaiser is a man of no strength of character, who has shown himself to be
a coward who ran away at the first hint of trouble.’60 The Cabinet agreed to
ask the Law Officers of the Crown to examine the question of charging the
former Emperor, as well as the former Crown Prince, ‘for the crime against
humanity of having caused the war’ and ‘for offences, by one or both, against
international law during the war’, with the purpose of ‘bringing home to one
or both the responsibility for the acts charged’. They were also ‘to consider
the constitution of a tribunal to try the charges framed’ and, together with
the Foreign Office, ‘the practicability of inducing the Dutch Government
to hand over the ex-Emperor and the Crown Prince to such a tribunal for
trial’.61
23
3
Kaiserdämmerung
The Trial of the Kaiser.William A. Schabas. © William A. Schabas, 2018. Published 2018 by Oxford
University Press.
24
24 3. Kaiserdämmerung
the Germans finally understood that the end was near. They approached
United States President Woodrow Wilson in the hope of arranging an armis-
tice. Later in the month, the German military contemplated a last, desperate
battle. But when the admirals tried to provoke a final assault on the British
fleet, the sailors refused, extinguishing fires in the boilers of their ships so that
they would be unable to sail. Councils of workers, sailors, and soldiers started
to form, as they had in Russia a year earlier.1
Kaiser Wilhelm II left his palace in the suburbs of the German capital in
late October 1918, travelling in the elegance of his royal train to the Belgian
resort town of Spa, close to the border between the two countries. There,
the German military had located its Supreme Headquarters on the Western
Front.Wilhelm established his royal household at the Château de la Fraineuse
in Spa, working there during the day. But he took his meals and spent the
night on the train, where he was more comfortable.
The German Emperor was being urged to abdicate, something President
Wilson had already implied was a condition for any armistice. When the
Minister of the Interior travelled to Spa to propose this in person, Wilhelm
replied that he wouldn’t dream of abdicating. ‘I too have sworn my oath and
will keep it’, he said. ‘I won’t dream of quitting my throne on account of a
few hundred Jews or 1,000 workers—you go and tell that to your masters in
Berlin.’2 Wilhelm insisted that Bolshevism was sweeping Germany. A strong
hand was required to protect the country from chaos, a challenge that only
the Hohenzollern dynasty could meet.
Revolution spread in Germany.The states that made up the country were
ruled by hereditary monarchs. By the night of 7–8 November, beginning
with the House of Wittelsbach in Bavaria, most of these royal houses were
overthrown. A general strike and mass demonstrations were planned in
Berlin. The Social Democrats, then the majority in Parliament, called upon
the Kaiser to abdicate immediately. Early on 9 November, the Supreme Army
Command held a conclave of commanders in order to assess the loyalty of the
troops, and their willingness to march on Berlin and restore the regime. Most
were not in a revolutionary mood.Tired and exhausted, they hoped the war
would end and they could return home.There would be little appetite for any
action directed against other Germans.
Wilhelm refused to recognise that the old order was doomed, that he
had been abandoned by his myrmidons. He also had a grossly unrealistic
assessment of Germany’s military position.Years later, he continued to in-
sist that in November 1918 the Germans were only months from victory.
25
3. Kaiserdämmerung 25
26 3. Kaiserdämmerung
The train headed northwest in the direction of Liège, a major rail hub
where it could join the main line towards Maastricht in the southern tip of
the Netherlands. But out of concern that his own mutinous troops might
attack the train, when he had travelled only a few kilometres from Spa,
at La Reid, the Kaiser decided to disembark and continue the journey
to the Dutch border by car. Two vehicles were commandeered, their im-
perial insignia removed. Wilhelm then made his way with a small group,
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
“Yes; two seasons ago. I can get a new one for three dollars.”
“Not like that.”
“Well, maybe not, but good enough.”
“I’ll let you have it for a dollar and a half,” went on Jack. “That’s
cheap enough.”
“Give you a dollar,” replied Tom quickly, who knew how to bargain.
“All right,” and Jack sighed a little. He had hoped to get enough to
put aside some cash for future emergencies.
Tom passed over the dollar. Then he tried on the glove. It certainly
was a good one.
“Come on in and I’ll treat you to a soda,” he proposed generously, for
he decided that he had obtained a bargain, and could afford to treat.
“Going to the show?” asked Tom, as the two came out of the drug
store.
“Sure. That’s what I sold the glove for.”
“What’s the matter? Don’t your dad send you any money?”
“Yes, he left some for me, but it’s like pulling teeth to get it from old
Klopper. He wouldn’t give me even fifty cents to-night, and he sent
me to my room. But I sneaked out, and I’m going to have some fun.”
“That’s the way to talk! He’s a regular hard-shell, ain’t he?”
“I should say yes! But come on, or maybe we won’t get a good seat.”
“Oh, I got my ticket,” replied Tom. “Besides, I want to take this glove
home. I’ll see you there.”
Jack hastened to the town auditorium, where, occasionally, traveling
theatrical shows played a one-night stand. There was quite a throng
in front of the box office, and Jack was afraid he would not get a
seat, but he managed to secure one well down in front.
The auditorium began to fill up rapidly. Jack saw many of his chums,
and nodded to them. Then he began to study the program. An
announcement on it caught his eye. It was to the effect that during
the entertainment a chance would be given to any amateur
performers in the audience to come upon the stage, and show what
they could do in the way of singing, dancing or in other lines of public
entertaining. Prizes would be given for the best act, it was stated;
five dollars for the first, three for the second, and one for the third.
“Say,” Jack whispered to Tom, who came in just then, “going to try
for any of those prizes?”
“Naw,” replied Tom, vigorously chewing gum. “I can’t do nothin’.
Some of the fellows are, though. Arthur Little is going to recite, and
Sam Parsons is going to do some contortions. Why, do you want to
try?”
“I’d like to.”
“What can you do?”
“My clown act,” replied Tom. “I’ve got some new dancing steps, and
maybe I could win a prize.”
“Sure you could,” replied Tom generously. “Go ahead. I’ll clap real
loud for you.”
“Guess I will,” said Jack, breathing a little faster under the exciting
thought of appearing on a real stage. He had often taken the part of
a clown in shows the boys arranged among themselves, but this
would be different.
“Ah, there goes the curtain!” exclaimed Tom, as the orchestra
finished playing the introduction, and there was a murmur all over
the auditorium, as the first number of the vaudeville performance
started.
CHAPTER III
JACK IS PUNISHED
The show was a fairly good one, and Jack and the other boys, as
well as older persons in the audience, enjoyed the various numbers,
from the singing and dancing, to a one-act sketch.
More than one was anxious, however, for the time to come when the
amateurs would be given a chance. At length the manager came
before the curtain, and announced that those who wished might try
their talents on the audience.
Several of the boys began to call for this or that chum, whom they
knew could do some specialty.
“Give us that whistling stunt, Jimmy!” was one cry.
“Hey, Sim; here’s a chance to show how far you can jump!” cried
another.
“Speak about the boy on the burning deck!” suggested a third.
“Now we must have quietness,” declared the manager. “Those who
wish to perform may come up here, give me their names, and I will
announce them in turn.”
Several lads started for the stage, Jack included. His chums called
good-naturedly after him as he walked up the aisle.
“I might as well have all the fun I can to-night,” thought our hero.
“When Professor Klopper finds out what I’ve done, if he hasn’t
already, he’ll be as mad as two hornets.”
The boys, and one or two girls, who had stage aspirations, crowded
around the manager, eager to give in their names.
“Now, one at a time, please,” advised the theatrical man. “You’ll each
be given a chance. I may add,” he went on, turning to the audience,
“that the prizes will be awarded by a popular vote, as manifested by
applause. The performer getting the most applause will be
considered to have won the five dollars, and so with the other two
prizes.”
The amateurs began. Some of them did very well, while others only
made laughing stocks of themselves. One of the girls did remarkably
well in reciting a scene from Shakespeare.
At last it came Jack’s turn. He was a little nervous as he faced the
footlights, and saw such a large crowd before him. A thousand eyes
seemed focused on him. But he calmed himself with the thought that
it was no worse than doing as he had often done when taking part in
shows that he and his chums arranged.
While waiting for his turn Jack had made an appeal to the property
man of the auditorium, whom he knew quite well. The man, on
Jack’s request, had provided the lad with some white and red face
paint, and Jack had hurriedly made up as much like a clown as
possible, using one of the dressing-rooms back of the stage for this
purpose. So, when it came his turn to go out, his appearance was
greeted with a burst of applause. He was the first amateur to “make-
up.”
Jack was, naturally, a rather droll lad, and he was quite nimble on his
feet. He had once been much impressed by what a clown did in a
small circus, and he had practiced on variations of that entertainer’s
act, until he had a rather queer mixture of songs, jokes, nimble
dancing and acrobatic steps.
This he now essayed, with such good effect that he soon had the
audience laughing, and, once that is accomplished, the rest is
comparatively easy for this class of work on the stage.
Jack did his best. He went through a lot of queer evolutions, leaped
and danced as if his feet were on springs, and ended with an odd
little verse and a backward summersault, which brought him
considerable applause.
“Jack’ll get first prize,” remarked Tom Berwick to his chums, when
they had done applauding their friend.
But he did not. The performer after him, a young lady, who had
undoubted talent, by her manner of singing comic songs, to the
accompaniment of the orchestra, was adjudged to have won first
prize. Jack got second, and he was almost as well pleased, for the
young lady, Miss Mab Fordworth, was quite a friend of his.
“Well,” thought Jack, as the manager handed him the three dollars,
“here is where I have spending money for a week, anyhow. I won’t
have to see the boys turning up their noses because I don’t treat.”
The amateur efforts closed the performance, and, after Jack had
washed off the white and red paint, he joined his chums.
“Say, Jack,” remarked Tom, “I didn’t know you could do as well as
that.”
“I didn’t, either,” replied Jack. “It was easy after I got my wind. But I
was a bit frightened at first.”
“I’d like to be on the stage,” observed Tom, with something of a sigh.
“But I can’t do anything except catch balls. I don’t s’pose that would
take; would it?”
“It might,” replied Jack good-naturedly.
“Well, come on, let’s get some sodas,” proposed Tom. “It was hot in
there. I’ll stand treat.”
“Seems to me you’re always standing treat,” spoke Jack, quickly. “I
guess it’s my turn, fellows.”
“Jack’s spending some of his prize money,” remarked Charlie
Andrews.
“It’s the first I have had to spend in quite a while,” was his answer.
“Old Klopper holds me down as close as if he was a miser. I’ll be
glad when my dad comes back.”
“Where is he now?” asked Tom.
“Somewhere in China. We can’t find out exactly. I’m getting a bit
worried.”
“Oh, I guess he’s all right,” observed Charlie. “But if you’re going to
stand treat, come on; I’m dry.”
The boys were soon enjoying the sodas, and Jack was glad that he
had the chance to play host, for it galled him to have to accept the
hospitality of his chums, and not do his share. Now, thanks to his
abilities as a clown, he was able to repay the favors.
“Well, I suppose I might as well go in the front door as to crawl in the
window,” thought Jack, as he neared the professor’s house. “He
knows I’m out, for that old maid told him, and he’ll be waiting for me.
I’m in for a lecture, and the sooner it’s over the better. Oh, dear, but I
wish dad and mom were home!”
“Well, young man, give an account of yourself,” said the professor
sharply, when Jack came in. Mr. Klopper could never forget that he
had been a teacher, and a severe one at that. His manner always
savored of the classroom, especially when about to administer a
rebuke.
“I went to the show,” said Jack shortly. “I told you I was going.”
“In other words you defied and disobeyed me.”
“I felt that I had a right to go. I’m not a baby.”
“That is no excuse. I shall report your conduct to your parents. Now
another matter. Where did you get the money to go with?”
“I—I got it.”
“Evidently; but I asked you where. The idea of wasting fifty cents for
a silly show! Did you stop to realize that fifty cents would pay the
interest on ten dollars for a year, at five per cent?”
“I didn’t stop to figure it out, professor.”
“Of course not. Nor did you stop to think that for fifty cents you might
have bought some useful book. And you did not stop to consider that
you were disobeying me. I shall attend to your case. Do you still
refuse to tell me where you got that money?”
“I—I’d rather not.”
“Very well, I shall make some inquiries. You may retire now. I never
make up my mind when I am the least bit angry, and I find myself
somewhat displeased with you at this moment.”
“Displeased” was a mild way of putting it, Jack thought.
“I shall see you in the morning,” went on the professor. “It is
Saturday, and there is no school. Remain in your room until I come
up. I wish to have a serious talk with you.”
Jack had no relish for this. It would not be the first time the professor
had had a “serious talk” with him, for, of late, the old teacher was
getting more and more strict in his treatment of the boy. Jack was
sure his father would not approve of the professor’s method. But Mr.
Allen was far away, and his son was not likely to see him for some
time.
But, in spite of what he knew was in store for him the next morning,
Jack slept well, for he was a healthy youth.
“I suppose he’ll punish me in some way,” he said, as he arose, “but
he won’t dare do very much, though he’s been pretty stiff of late.”
The professor was “pretty stiff” when he came to Jack’s room to
remonstrate with his ward on what he had done. Jack never
remembered such a lecture as he got that day. Then the former
college instructor ended up with:
“And, as a punishment, you will keep to your room to-day and to-
morrow. I forbid you to stir from it, and if I find you trying to sneak
out, as you did last night, I shall take stringent measures to prevent
you.”
The professor was a powerful man, and there was more than one
story of the corporal punishment he had inflicted on rebellious
students.
“But, professor,” said Jack. “I was going to have a practice game of
baseball with the boys to-day. The season opens next week, and I’m
playing in a new position. I’ll have to practice!”
“You will remain in your room all of to-day and to-morrow,” was all
the reply the professor made, as he strode from Jack’s apartment.
CHAPTER IV
DISQUIETING NEWS
“Well, if this ain’t the meanest thing he’s done to me yet!” exclaimed
Jack, as the door closed on the retreating form of his crusty
guardian. “This is the limit! The boys expect me to the ball game,
and I can’t get there. That means they’ll put somebody else in my
place, and maybe I’ll have to be a substitute for the rest of the
season. I’ve a good notion——”
But so many daring thoughts came into Jack’s mind that he did not
know which one to give utterance to first.
“I’ll not stand it,” he declared. “He hasn’t any right to punish me like
this, for what I did. He had no right to keep me in. I’ll get out the
same way I did before.”
Jack looked from the window of his room. Below it, seated on a
bench, in the shade of a tree, was the professor, reading a large
book.
“That way’s blocked,” remarked the boy. “He’ll stay there all day,
working out problems about how much a dollar will amount to if put
out at interest for a thousand years, or else figuring how long it will
take a man to get to Mars if he traveled at the rate of a thousand
miles a minute, though what in the world good such knowledge is I
can’t see.
“But I can’t get out while he’s on guard, for he wouldn’t hesitate to
wallop me. And when he comes in to breakfast his sister will relieve
him. I am certainly up against it!
“Hold on, though! Maybe he forgot to bolt the door!”
It was a vain hope. Though Jack had not heard him do it, the
professor had softly slid the bolt across as he went out of the boy’s
room, and our hero was practically a prisoner in his own apartment.
And this on a beautiful Saturday, when there was no school and
when the first practice baseball game of the season was to be
played. Is it any wonder that Jack was indignant?
“It’s about time they brought me something to eat,” he thought, as he
heard a clock somewhere in the house strike nine. “I’m getting
hungry.”
He had little fear on the score that the professor would starve him,
for the old college instructor was not quite as mean as that, and, in a
short time, Miss Klopper appeared with a tray containing Jack’s
breakfast.
“I should think you would be ashamed of yourself,” she said. “The
idea of repaying my brother’s kindness by such acts! You are a
wicked boy!”
Jack wondered where any special kindness on the part of the
professor came in, but he did not say anything to the old maid whose
temper was even more sour than her brother’s. Since his parents
had left him with the professor, Jack had never been treated with real
kindness. Perhaps Mr. Klopper did not intend to be mean, but he
was such a deep student that all who did not devote most of their
time to study and research earned his profound contempt. While
Jack was a good boy, and a fairly good student, he liked sports and
fun, and these the professor detested. So, when he found that his
ward did not intend to apply himself closely to his books, Professor
Klopper began “putting the screws on,” as Jack termed it.
Matters had gone from bad to worse, until the boy was now in a
really desperate state. His naturally good temper had been spoiled
by a series of petty fault-findings, and he had been so hedged about
by the professor and his sister that he was ripe for almost anything.
All that day he remained in his room, becoming more and more
angry at his imprisonment as the hours passed.
“The boys are on the diamond now,” he said, as he heard a clock
strike three. “They’re practicing, and soon the game will start. Gee,
but I wish I was there! But it’s no use.”
Another try at the door, and a look out of his window convinced him
of this. The professor was still on guard, reading his big book.
Toward dusk the professor went in, as he could see no longer. But,
by that time Jack had lost all desire to escape. He resolved to go to
bed, to make the time pass more quickly, though he knew he had
another day of imprisonment before him. Sunday was the occasion
for long rambles in the woods and fields with his chums, but he knew
he would have to forego that pleasure now. He almost hoped it
would rain.
As he was undressing there came a hurried knock on his door.
“What is it?” he asked.
“My brother wants to see you at once, in his study,” said Miss
Klopper.
“Oh, dear,” thought Jack. “Here’s for another lecture.”
There was no choice but to obey, however, for Mr. Allen in his last
injunction to his son, had urged him to give every heed to his
guardian’s requests.
He found the professor in his study, with open books piled all about
on a table before which he sat. In his hand Mr. Klopper held a white
slip of paper.
“Jack,” he said, more kindly than he had spoken since the trouble
between them, “I have here a telegram concerning your father and
mother.”
“Is it—is it bad news?” asked the boy quickly, for something in the
professor’s tone and manner indicated it.
“Well, I—er—I’m sorry to say it is not good news. It is rather
disquieting. You remember I told you I cabled to the United States
Consul in Hong Kong concerning your parents, when several days
went by without either of us hearing from them.”
“What does he say?”
“His cablegram states that your parents went on an excursion
outside of Hong Kong about two weeks ago, and no word has been
received from them since.”
“Are they—are they killed?”
“No; I do not think so. The consul adds that as there have been
disturbances in China, it is very likely that Mr. and Mrs. Allen,
together with some other Americans, have been detained in a
friendly province, until the trouble is over. I thought you had better
know this.”
“Do you suppose there is any danger?”
“I do not think so. There is no use worrying, though I was a little
anxious when I had no word from them. We will hope for the best. I
will cable the consul to send me word as soon as he has any
additional news.”
“Poor mother!” said Jack. “She’s nervous, and if she gets frightened
it may have a bad effect on her heart.”
“Um,” remarked the professor. He had little sympathy for ailing
women. “In view of this news I have decided to mitigate your
punishment,” he added to Jack. “You may consider yourself at liberty
to-morrow, though I shall expect you to spend at least three hours in
reading some good and helpful book. I will pick one out for you. It is
well to train our minds to deep reading, for there is so much of the
frivolous in life now-a-days, that the young are very likely to form
improper thinking habits. I would recommend that you spend an hour
before you retire to-night, in improving yourself in Latin. Your
conjugation of verbs was very weak the last time I examined you.”
“I—I don’t think I could study to-night,” said Jack, who felt quite
miserable with his enforced detention in the house, and the
unpleasant news concerning his parents. “I’d be thinking so much
about my father and mother that I couldn’t keep my attention on the
verbs,” he said.
“That indicates a weak intellect,” returned the professor. “You should
labor to overcome it. However, perhaps it would be useless to have
you do any Latin to-night. But I must insist on you improving in your
studies. Your last report from the academy was very poor.”
Jack did not answer. With a heavy heart he went to his room, where
he sat for some time in the dark, thinking of his parents in far-off
China.
“I wish I could go and find them,” he said. “Maybe they need help. I
wonder if the professor’d let me go?”
But, even as that idea came to him, he knew it would be useless to
propose it to Mr. Klopper.
“He’s got enough of money that dad left for my keep, to pay my
passage,” the boy mused on. “But if I asked for some for a
steamship ticket he’d begin to figure what the interest on it for a
hundred years would be, and then he’d lecture me about being a
spendthrift. No, I’ll have to let it go, though I do wish I could make a
trip abroad. If I could only earn money enough, some way, I’d go to
China and find dad and mom.”
But even disquieting and sad thoughts can not long keep awake a
healthy lad, and soon Jack was slumbering. He was up early the
next morning, and, as usual, accompanied the professor to church.
The best part of the afternoon he was forced to spend in reading a
book on what boys ought to do, written by an old man who, if ever he
was a healthy, sport-loving lad, must have been one so many years
ago that he forgot that he ever liked to have fun once in a while.
Jack was glad when night came, so he could go to bed again.
“To-morrow I’ll see the boys,” he thought to himself. “They’ll want to
know why I didn’t come to play ball, and I’ll have to tell them the real
reason. I’m getting so I hate Professor Klopper!”
If Jack had known what was to happen the next day, he probably
would not have slept so soundly.
CHAPTER V
A SERIOUS ACCUSATION
“Hey, Jack, where were you Saturday?” asked Tom Berwick, as our
hero came into the school yard Monday morning. “We had a dandy
game,” he went on. “Your catching glove is nifty!”
“Yes, Fred Walton played short,” added Sam Morton. “We waited as
long as we could for you. What was the matter?”
“The professor made me stay home because I skipped out the night
before to go to the show.”
“Say, he’s a mean old codger,” was Tom’s opinion, which was
echoed by several other lads.
“Is Fred going to play shortstop regularly?” asked Jack, of Tom
Berwick, who was captain of the Academy nine.
“I don’t know. He wants to, but I’d like to have you play there, Jack.
Still, if you can’t come Saturdays——”
“Oh, I’ll come next Saturday all right. Can’t we have a little practice
this afternoon?”
“Sure. You can play then, if you want to. Fred has to go away, he
said.”
The boys had a lively impromptu contest on the diamond when
school closed that afternoon, and Jack proved himself an efficient
player at shortstop. It was getting dusk when he reached the
professor’s house, and the doughty old college instructor was
waiting for him.
“Did I not tell you to come home early, in order that I might test you in
algebra?” he asked Jack.
“Yes, sir. But I forgot about it,” which was the truth for, in the
excitement over the game, Jack had no mind for anything but
baseball.
“Where were you?” went on Mr. Klopper.
“Playing ball.”
“Playing ball! An idle, frivolous amusement. It tends to no good, and
does positive harm. I have no sympathy with that game. It gives no
time for reflection. I once watched a game at the college where I
used to teach. I saw several men standing at quite some distance
from the bare spot where one man was throwing a ball at another,
with a stick in his hand.”
“That was the diamond,” volunteered Jack, hoping the professor
might get interested in hearing about the game, and so forego the
lecture that was in prospect.
“Ah, a very inappropriate name. Such an utterly valueless game
should not be designated by any such expensive stone as a
diamond. But what I was going to say was that I saw some of the
players standing quite some distance from the bare spot——”
“They were in the outfield, professor. Right field, left field and centre.”
“One moment; I care nothing about the names of the contestants. I
was about to remark that those distant players seemed to have little
to do with the game. They might, most profitably have had a book
with them, to study while they were standing there, but they did not.
Instead they remained idle—wasting their time.”
“But they might have had to catch a ball any moment.”
“Nonsense!” exclaimed the professor. “It is an idle frivolous
amusement, and I regret very much that you wasted your valuable
time over it. After supper I want to hear you read some Virgil, and
also do some problems in geometry. I was instructed by your father
to see that your education was not neglected, and I must do my duty,
no matter how disagreeable it is.”
Jack sighed. He had studied hard in class that day, and now to be
made to put in the evening over his books he thought was very
unfair.
But there was no escape from the professor, and the boy had to put
in two hours at his Latin and mathematics, which studies, though
they undoubtedly did him good, were very distasteful to him.
“You are making scarcely any progress,” said the professor, when
Jack had failed to properly answer several of his questions. “I want
you to come home early from school to-morrow afternoon, and I will
give you my undivided attention until bedtime. I am determined that
you shall learn.”
Jack said nothing, but he did not think it would be wise to go off
playing ball the next afternoon, though the boys urged him strongly.
“Why don’t you write and tell your dad how mean old Klopper is
treating you?” suggested Tom, when Jack explained the reason for
going straight home from his classes.
“I would if I knew how to reach him. But I don’t know where he is,”
and Jack sighed, for he was becoming more and more alarmed at
the long delay in hearing from his father.
But Jack was destined to do no studying that afternoon under the
watchful eye of Professor Klopper. He had no sooner entered the
house than he was made aware that something unusual had
happened.
“My brother is waiting for you in the library,” said Miss Klopper, and
Jack noticed that she was excited over something.
“Maybe it’s bad news about the folks,” the boy thought, but when he
saw that the professor had no cablegram, he decided it could not be
that.
“Jack,” began the aged teacher, “I have a very serious matter to
speak about.”
“I wonder what’s coming now?” thought the boy.
“Do you recall the night you disobeyed me, and, sneaking out of your
window like a thief, you went to a—er—a theatrical performance
without my permission?” asked the professor.
“Yes, sir,” replied Jack, wondering if his guardian thought he was
likely to forget it so soon.
“Do you also recollect me asking you where you got the money
wherewith to go?”
“Yes, sir.”
“I now, once more, demand that you tell me where you obtained it,
and, let me warn you that it is serious. I insist that you answer me.
Where did you get that money?”
“I—I don’t want to tell you, Professor Klopper.”
“Are you afraid?”
“No, sir,” came the indignant answer, for there were few things of
which Jack Allen was afraid.
“Then why don’t you tell me?”
“Because I don’t think you have a right to know everything that I do. I
am not a baby. I assure you I got that money in a perfectly legitimate
way.”
“Oh, you did?” sneered the professor. “We shall see about that.
Come in,” he called, and, to Jack’s surprise the door opened and
Miss Klopper entered the library.
“I believe you have something to say on a subject that interests all
present,” went on the professor, in icy tones.
“She knows nothing of where I got the money,” said Jack.
“We shall see,” remarked Mr. Klopper. “You may tell what you know,”
he added to his sister.
“I saw Jack just as he got down out of his window,” Miss Klopper
stated, as if she was reciting a lesson. “He had a bundle with him. I
asked what it was and he would not tell me.”
“Is that correct?” inquired the former teacher.
“Yes, sir,” replied Jack, wondering how the professor could be
interested in his catching glove, which was what the bundle had
contained.
“What was in that package?” went on the professor.
“I—I don’t care to tell, sir.”
“I insist that you shall. Once again, I warn you that it is a very serious
matter.”
Jack could not quite understand why, so he kept silent.
“Well, are you going to tell me?”
“No, sir.”
Jack had no particular reason for not telling, but he had made up his
mind that the professor had no right to know, and he was not going
to give in to him.
“This is your last chance,” warned his guardian. “Are you going to tell
me?”
“No, sir.”
“Then I will tell you what was in that package. It was my gold loving
cup, that the teachers of Underhill College presented to me on the
occasion of my retirement from the faculty of that institution!”
“Your loving cup?” repeated Jack in amazement, for that cup was
one of the professor’s choicest possessions, and quite valuable.
“Yes, my loving cup. You had it in that bundle, and you took it out to
pawn it, in order to get money to go to that show.”
“That’s not true!” cried Jack indignantly. “All I had in that bundle was
my catching glove, which I sold to Tom Berwick.”
“I don’t believe you,” said the professor stiffly. “I say you stole my
loving cup and pawned it. The cup is gone from its accustomed
place on my dresser. I did not miss it until this afternoon, and, when I
asked my sister about it, she said she had not seen it. Then she
recalled your sneaking away from the house with a bundle, and I at
once knew what had become of it.”
“I say you took my cup!”
Page 41
“You couldn’t know, for there is absolutely no truth in this
accusation,” replied Jack hotly.
“Do you mean to say that I am telling an untruth?” asked the
professor sharply. “I say that you took my cup.”
“And I say that I didn’t! I never touched your cup! If it’s gone some
one else took it!”
Jack spoke in loud and excited tones.
“Don’t you dare contradict me, young man!” thundered the former
teacher. “I will not permit it. I say you took that cup! I know you did!”
“I didn’t!” cried Jack.
The professor was so angry that he took a step toward the lad. He
raised his hand, probably unconsciously, as though to deal Jack a
box on the ear, for this was the old teacher’s favorite method of
correcting a refractory student.
Jack, with the instinct of a lad who will assume a defensive attitude
on the first sign of an attack, doubled up his fists.
“What! You dare attempt to strike me?” cried the professor. “You
dare?”
“I’m not going to have you hit me,” murmured Jack. “You are making
an unjust charge. I never took that cup. I can prove what I had in that
package by Tom Berwick.”
“I do not believe you,” went on the professor. “I know you pawned
that cup to get spending money, because I refused to give you any to
waste. I will give you a chance to confess, and tell me where you
disposed of it, before I take harsh measures.”
Jack started. What did the professor mean by harsh measures?
“I can’t confess what I did not do,” he said, more quietly. “I never took
the loving cup.”
“And I say you did!” cried the old teacher, seeming to lose control of
himself. “I say you stole it, and I’ll have you arrested, you young
rascal! Go to your room at once, and remain there until I get an
officer. We’ll see then whether you’ll confess or not. I’ll call in a
policeman at once. See that he does not leave the house,” he added
to his sister, as he hurried from the room.
Jack started from the library.
“Where are you going?” asked Miss Klopper, placing herself in his
path. She was a large woman, and strong.
“I am going to my room,” replied Jack, sore at heart and very
miserable over the unjust accusation.