SPIES

Southland Times, Issue 17763, 23 September 1914, Page 2

SPIES

HONOURABLE OR TRAITOROUS ? SEVERITY OF PUNISHMENT. (From the Sydney Morning Herald). The extreme penalty for spying is death by hanging, not by shooting, the former being regarded as more honourable. When Louis XI. first adopted the practice of ambassadors he considered that he had a spy in the camp of every potential enemy. Nowadays a spy must act “clandestinely and under false pretences.’’ If soldiers wearing their uniforms penetrate into the lines of the enemy they cannot be regarded as spies, and if caught must merely he held as prisoners of war. The former may be hanged after trial by court-martial, the latter may be detained only till peace be re-stored. Eu£ it by no means follows that a spy caught in the act should be put to death. As M. Bluntschli points out, only in the most dangerous cases should the capital punishment be enforced, for in many cases the extreme penalty is out of all proportion to the crime. AN HONOURABLE CAREER? Rome writers consider that the vocation of the spy is necessarily a dishonourable one. This, however, is not so in all cases. It is generally acknowledged that a belligerent is quite within its rights in employing spies. If their •services are utilised in a more or less straightforward manner as where an officer penetrates Into the enemy’s lines under disguise, the task is an exceedingly difficult one, and is one fitted only for a brave man. He takes his life in his own hands for his country’s good in a way that no mere soldier does. The odds against him are frightful, the penalty swift and certain if he be detected. Of course, there are other kinds of spies, who are often traitors to their own country, and ’ who have sold themselves and the land of their birth for the enemy’s gold. Such may well be left to their fate. They are among the vilest wretches that cumber the earth, and their removal is a benefit conferred upon humanity. Napier in his account of the Peninsular War. clearly recognised the difference between the two classes. In describing how Wellington was served in this particular. He says: “He had a number of spies among the Spaniards, who were living within the French lines; a British officer in disguise constantly visited tho French armies in the field; a Spanish State Councillor, living at the headquarters of the first corps, gave intelligence from that side, and a guitar player of celebrity, named Fuentes, repeatedly making his way to Madrid, brought back advice, from thence. . . With the exception of the State spy at Victoria's Headquarters, who, being a double traitor, was infamous, all the persons thus employed were very meritorious. The greatest number, and the cleverst, also, were Spanish . . who, disdaining rewards and disregarding danger, acted from a pure spirit of patriotism, and are to be lauded alike for their boldness, their talent, and their virtue.” Of course, had these hern detected, military necessity would, in all probability, have demanded that they should pay tho full penalty for their hardihood, but that in no way alters the moral character of the work they had in hand.

CLASSIFICATION OF SPIES, Frederick the Great of Prussia was a past-master in spy lire. In 1860 lie published for the information of his generals, military instructions, in which ho classes spies as • ordinary spies." “double spies,” “spies of distinction," and “spies by compulsion." By "double spies” he meant spies who also pretended to lie in the service of the -side they betrayed, while “spies of distinction" were officers of Hussars whose services lie found useful in the Austrian campaign. The procedure was this: He used to obtain a suspension of arms, and while that lasted tile officers of Hussars wore indued to conduct an epistolary correspondence with the officers on the other side for his benefit. By “spies of compulsion" ho meant the forcing of a soldier who could be trusted to pass into toe enemy's camp and then, under cross-examination, to make the enemy believe what lie wanted them to believe. LOUD WOLSELEY'S VIEWS. In his "Soldier's Pocket Book." Lord Wolseley wrote: “The best -way to send out a spy is to send n peasant with a letter written on very thin paper, which may he rolled up so tightly as to be portable in a quill an inch and a half long, and this previous quill may be hidden iti the hair or beard, or in the hollow at the end of a walking stick. It is also a good plan to write secret correspondence in lemon juice across a newspaper or the lea\es of the New Testament It is then safe against discovery, and will become legible when held before a (ire or near a red-hot iron. As a. nation, we are brought up to feel it a disgrace even 'o succeed by falsehood. The word 'spy' conveys something as repulsive as slave.’ We keep hammering along with the conviction that T.onestv is the 1 cst. policy, and that truth must always win in the long run. These sentiments do well for a

copy-book, but a man who acts upon them had better sheath his sword for ever ”

NEWSPAPER CORRESPONDENTS AS SPIES. The question was raised in the RussoJapanese war as to whether newspaper correspondents using wireless could be regarded as spies. The proprietors of The Times had the steamer llaimun fitted up with Do Forest s wireless apparatus. This vessel cruised among the belligerents, and sent messages in code to Wai-hai-wci, whence they were transmitted through neutral country overland to lamdon. Tho vessel was scveraJ times submitted to "visit and search on the part of both 1 olligerents. A little later Admiral Alexieff sent a circular letter to the Powers, which ran in the following terms; — “T am instructed by m\ Goternment in order that Chore may be no misunderstanding. that the lieutenant ol his Imperial Majesty in the Far East has iust made the following declaration; In case neutral vessels, having on board correspondents who may communicate news hv moans of improved apparatus not vet 'provided for by existing conventions should bo arrested off Krangtung or within the zone of operations of the Russian fleet, such correspondents shah ho regarded its spies, and the vessels provided with such apparatus shall be seized as lawful prizes. Such were tho fortunes of war, however that Admiral Alexeieff had no opportunity of putting his threat into effect. Had ho done so, it would have been in direct contravention of the Ha!gue Convention, lot that agreement defines a spy as one acting “clandestinely or on false pretences, or who obtains or seeks to obtain information in the zone of operations of a belligerent with the intention of communicating it to the hostile party." The newspaper correspondent in this case did none of these things. Ho acted quit® openly, explaining the working of his apparatus then quite novel, to the commander of the Russian cruiser Bay an, and did not communicate the result of his investigations to the Japanese authorities. At the same time, the Russian Government had this much to be said in its lavour. that publication nt important movements in The Times might he regarded as equivalent to directly communicating willt the enemy. * s the Government of that count rv would he immediately informed hv 'their diplomatic representatives in London. In this particular case

both belligerents had signed the Hague Convention dealing with this matter, and so both were bound by it. That even the Japanese Government was quite alive to the posslcilities of trouble through newspaper enterprise is evidenced by the fact that at a later date in the conflict it forbade The Times correspondent from going north of a line drawn from Chixu to Chemulpo. Of course, if a correspondent were actually found conveying information to the enemy, then he might quite lawfully b* summarily dealt with.