740.0011 European War 1939/3619: Telegram
The Chargé in Germany (Heath) to the Secretary of State
[Received 8:37 p.m.]
1751. From Cudahy. Following is submitted for guidance of Department regarding decision as to status of the Belgian Government now reported in France.
Since May 17, German military authorities have assumed charge of all executive and administrative activities in Belgium. German military law has been in effect since that date except in civil cases in which Belgian judicial tribunals continue jurisdiction and render judgment in the name of the King. But the King is a prisoner of war and according to a declaration reported to have been issued by the Prime Minister of Belgium speaking from France, the King is incapable of exercising [Page 213] the prerogative of sovereign. I am reliably informed that the King has expressed an intention to withdraw from all political activity pending determination of his country’s political status.
Before the German occupation, the King had the respect and affection of his people. The Germans, since taking possession of Belgium, have exercised moderation and have displayed a tendency to cultivate the good will of the people. It is amazing how well they are succeeding. Defeated, their country invaded, and resentful in the spectacle of vast destruction, a feeling of hostility has been engendered against French and British Allies, especially the British, with a resultant acquiescence approaching friendliness to the fact of German occupation. Begarding the King, the majority sentiment is one of loyalty and the belief that his decision to surrender his army was based upon a hopeless military position and by heroic humanitarian considerations. This is the view of most returning soldiers and officers who believe that the Belgian Army was hopelessly encircled, that to fight on would have served no useful purpose for the Allies and would have meant further great slaughter. This view is strengthened by the statement of 1938 [1940?] the Cardinal read to all parishes in the country July [June] 2 (my telegram of July 8 [June 7]70).
As previously reported the Belgian Government left Brussels May 16, was reported subsequently at La Panne, Belgium, Poitiers and Le Havre and latest information is that Prime Minister, Foreign Minister, several other Cabinet members and some members of Senate and Chamber are at Nozay, France. Three Ministers have been reported as now returned to Belgium.
The capital and seat of the Government is defined in the Constitution as Brussels. Nothing in Constitution permits or authorizes authoritative act of government when government is sitting outside territorial limits of Belgium. There is no evidence of quorum of Chamber and Senate in Nozay or that alleged government in France has de jure authority to legislate or exercise administrative functions.
All Ministers and Ambassadors to Belgium are accredited only to King as Chief of State. While nearly all Chiefs of Mission have left Brussels nearly half of Missions maintaining a Chargé or Secretary there.
Above is written to indicate in broad and sketchy outline the confusion and difficulty of arriving at political definition of Belgium at this time. My reading of events as reported is that King has not been removed by Ministers nor has he abrogated [abdicated?], but by reason of being a prisoner of war his status as sovereign is suspended.
There is no evidence that Belgian Government in France has any de jure authority.
[Page 214]In practical analysis German authorities are in military occupation of Belgium and pending clarification of whole situation my recommendation would be that Department make no decision at this time regarding recognition of Belgian Government in France. [Cudahy.]
- Telegram No. 1713 not printed.↩