The Wounded, the Red Cross, and the Geneva Convention
What is the aim and object of battles between belligerent2 powers? To put out of action as large a number as possible of enemy soldiers, and thus, as much as may be, to break the enemy’s resistance. That, at least, is the conception of the aim of war entertained by all civilised nations, since only barbarians3, from desire for revenge, from blindness and brutality4, would seek to do injury for its own sake, and to seize the opportunity of a state of war to gratify their instincts for plunder5. This conception, let us repeat, Germany, like all other nations, has countersigned6 in solemn covenants7.
Nevertheless, the aims which this war is laying bare in them are contrary to these pledges.
In fact, we see Germany deliberately8 killing either those whom she could prevent from doing her any injury by keeping them as prisoners, or even those who were non-combatants. Some have thought that the Germans aimed, in a manner, at the annihilation of the race in nations hostile to Germany. It would be dreadful if this were the case. As for ourselves, we shall neither say that this has not been proved nor that it is impossible. What is certain is that the number of outrages9 committed by Germany can only be explained by a deliberate attempt at barbaric destruction.
[84]
Beyond question they have attempted to damage the property of the enemy. Pillage10 in their eyes has not been one of the more or less inevitable11 concomitants of war: it has been one of its deliberate aims. Moreover, the policy of terrorisation is a part of their general plan of action. In their view fear is a good ally of invasion, and in order to reap all the advantage of it they have left untried no form of violence or even of cruelty.
Besides, we are not here concerned with policy shaped from above, by the Government or the higher command: in the rank and file we may take everything for granted. “Let us kill them all: there will be so many the fewer left.” Who knows how often this monstrous12 thought has entered the brain of people whose cruelty and violence is a part of their plans of war? How often has it not been a necessity to kill, as to sack, in order to overthrow13, to reduce, to weaken an enemy nation not merely in war, but in general, and even as regards the future in which rehabilitation14 might be anticipated. But civilised nations look to treaties to prevent the rehabilitation of the enemy. By looting and robbing industrial establishments, the property of private individuals, the Germans showed that their peculiar15 method was to try to prevent it by war itself, to draw up a schedule of barbarism which by its very nature endangers life itself, which includes murder as well as pillage. Thus we understand how the Germans, both in theory and practice, have violated the most widely accepted conventions which, in the midst of the havoc16 of war, limit the right to kill either civilians17 or soldiers.
To begin with, the present chapter will be devoted18 to the complete denial of the principles of humanity laid down in the Geneva Convention. We reserve the right of discussion in subsequent chapters of the questions of[85] the treatment of prisoners, of the massacre19 of civilians, etc. The violation20 of that part of the Convention of Geneva which bears upon the wounded and the Red Cross is, in fact, a deliberate crime, without any extenuating21 circumstances; it is inexcusable and unpardonable.
What are the terms of the Convention of Geneva? That “soldiers and other persons officially attached to armies shall, when wounded or sick, be respected and taken care of by the belligerent in whose power they may be, without distinction of nationality.” The latter, therefore, must look for and collect the sick and wounded, and prevent every act by any third party which might do them injury. These sick and wounded will be prisoners of war, but “prisoners who must be taken care of.” As for people attached to the Red Cross, it was declared, and Germany and Austria-Hungary subscribed22 both to this and to the preceding stipulations, that “the personnel engaged exclusively in the collection, transport and treatment of the wounded and sick, as well as in the administration of medical units and establishments, and the chaplains attached to armies, shall be respected and protected under all circumstances; if they fall into the hands of the enemy they shall not be treated as prisoners of war.”
Principles of the Geneva Convention which Germans have violated
We have already stated in the preceding chapter how seldom the Germans have carried out these principles, for, contrariwise, they have deliberately aimed their artillery23 at establishments for the shelter of the wounded, the sick, and the hospital services. This fact is not the only one which shows the contempt displayed by the[86] Germans for the Geneva Convention. It seems that they have eagerly seized upon every opportunity which presented itself to violate this convention in every way. Not only have the wounded who fell into their hands not been properly treated by them, but in many instances these wounded have been put to death. Sometimes, before killing them, they treated themselves to the enjoyment24 of making them suffer. It is scarcely credible25, but it is true, that in more than one case the killing of the wounded assumed the form of a command issued by the officers themselves. We have said that the Germans have also fired on ambulances. They have killed and ill-treated Red Cross nurses, male and female, and the doctors engaged on Red Cross work.
Killing of the Wounded ordered by Officers
The German wounded are many. It followed, therefore, that the German medical service was disinclined to encumber26 itself with relays of enemy wounded. Perhaps this is also the reason why orders were given to the soldiers to kill the wounded. General Stenger issued, on the 26th August, an order of the day giving instructions to make no more prisoners and to leave no living man behind. The authenticity27 of this order, the full text of which we give in the next chapter, was confirmed by the evidence of German prisoners.
The prisoners cross-examined, says the Temps, which reported the depositions28, belong to the 112th and 142nd infantry29 regiments30. They were put on oath and signed the report of their examination. A soldier of the 142nd deposed32 that, on the 26th August, about three o’clock, he was in the van of his battalion33 in the forest of Thiaville when the company order giving instructions to[87] kill the wounded was sent along the ranks and repeated from man to man.
This prisoner added that as soon as this order was passed round, ten or twelve French wounded who were lying here and there round about the battalion were dispatched with rifle shots.
Another prisoner in the same regiment31 deposed that, on the 26th August, he saw a cavalry34 officer, unknown to him, come and give the order in question as coming from headquarters. Immediately afterwards rifle shots were heard coming from the head of the detachment in front of him.
A soldier of the 112th declared that he heard, on the 26th August, Captain Curtins, in command of the 3rd Company, say that henceforth no more wounded were to be made prisoners. Shortly afterwards he heard rifle shots fired at the French wounded who happened to be lying along the roads.
Another soldier of the 112th gave evidence that on the same day, between four and five o’clock, some French wounded who happened to be on the sides of the road from Thiaville to Saint Benoit, were killed by order of the commander of the 1st battalion.
About twenty German soldiers who were cross-examined admitted that this order had been given, but without giving details about the manner in which it had been carried out. Some prisoners, who did not know even in the field about the company order of the day, declared that they were subsequently informed of it by their comrades.
Moreover, the German soldier Karl Johannes Kaltenochner (9th company of the regiment of Count Bülow of Tervuenwist), who deserted35 and took refuge in Holland, declared in the Telegraaf of Amsterdam (Temps[88] of 3rd January, 1915) that when Turcos were made prisoners the German officers did not take the trouble to send them to any place behind the lines, and gave orders to the soldiers to shoot them. He quoted Major Botwitz as having given orders to kill two Turco prisoners. It is not, then, to be wondered at that the soldier who made this disclosure accompanied it with the declaration “that the German soldiers have become like wild animals and think only of killing and pillaging36.”
Finally, in the hospital at Nancy two German soldiers who were under treatment there made similar confessions38. One of them, who had a wound in the stomach, confided39 to Dr. Rohmer that it had been caused by a revolver-shot from his officer, because he declined to kill a wounded Frenchman. The other, who was wounded in the back by a shot fired point-blank, declared to Dr. Weiss that, in obedience40 to the order of an officer, a soldier had fired on him to punish him for having carried several wounded Frenchmen into a village not far from the battlefield.
French and Belgian Officers killed by the Germans
The number of officers killed by Germans on the different battlefields to which the war has extended is certainly greater than one would think. The following are two attested41 instances—
On the 9th August, at Ormael in Belgium, the Belgian Commandant Knapen, who was already wounded, was killed.
On the 12th August, after the battle of Haelen in Belgium, the Germans killed, by a revolver-shot in the mouth, Commandant Van Daume, who had been seriously wounded.
[89]
On the 22nd August, at Gommery (Belgian Luxemburg) M. Charles Deschars, former commercial attaché of France at Berlin, was killed under the following disgraceful circumstances. M. Deschars, an interpreter lieutenant42 at the headquarters of General Trentinian, had been wounded at the battle of Elbe, in Belgian Luxemburg, on the 22nd August. On that day he had to be left at an ambulance in the village of Gommery. In the evening came a German troop belonging to the 47th infantry regiment, in command of a non-commissioned officer. The latter pretended that a shot had been fired at his platoon. He asked for an interpreter, and M. Ch. Deschars came down, helped by attendants. He went up to the German non-commissioned officer, and the latter, after exchanging some words with him, drew a revolver and blew out his brains.
After this murder the German platoon gave itself up to all sorts of excesses. Dr. Vaissières, who happened to be in the ambulance, was killed. Dr. Sedillot, surgeon-major of the 1st class, was wounded. The majority of the wounded were killed.
A similar crime took place during an engagement between French dragoons and German light cavalry. A French lieutenant, who afterwards told the story in the Matin of the 22nd August, finding he was wounded, called for help. A German came up and, seeing that he had to deal with an officer, appealed to his commandant, M. de Schaffenberg, of the Trèves light cavalry. The latter went behind the French lieutenant, took his cavalry revolver, and at point blank shot him in the stomach. The French officer’s orderly was spared only because Commandant de Schaffenberg thought he was dead.
[90]
Wounded Soldiers tortured before being put to Death
The German crime of killing enemy wounded assumes a still more dreadful aspect when it is committed only after the victims have suffered cruel treatment. The tortures inflicted43 on the wounded argue an exceptional ferocity in those who are guilty of them, and yet such cases are not rare.
On the 16th August, at Dinant, French soldiers were found with their heads smashed in by the butt44-ends of rifles. On the 25th August, at Hofstade in Belgium, a soldier who had been slightly wounded was also killed by blows from the butt-end of a rifle. In a wood not far from the road to Malines, at Tervueren, eighteen Belgian riflemen were killed by bayonet thrusts in the head. One of the French wounded, who had been taken again by the French troops and then left at Besan?on, had been struck on the head and sides with blows from the butt-end of a rifle and kicked. A German soldier had dragged him along the ground. Beside him another wounded Frenchman was dispatched with bayonet thrusts. The Belgian quartermaster Beaudin van de Kerchove (5th lancers), who had been wounded by two German bullets at the battle of Orsmael, on the 20th August, was also tortured. The French sergeant45 Lemerre, who had been wounded in the leg at Rembercourt by a bursting shell, was left on the ground for eight days by the German ambulance, who had, however, seen him. On the fourth day, on the order of an officer who, revolver in hand, was crossing the field of battle, this non-commissioned officer was wounded again by a rifle shot fired by a soldier.
The French Commission of Inquiry46 on their part quote three cases of torture inflicted on the wounded—
[91]
“On the evening of the 25th August,” say the Commission in their report, the Abbé Denis, Curé of Reméreville, tended Lieutenant Toussaint, who had only left the forestry47 school in the previous month of July. As he lay wounded on the field of battle, this young officer had been bayoneted by all the Germans who had passed by him. His body was one great wound from head to foot.
“At the Nancy hospital we saw Private Voger of the infantry regiment, who was still bearing the marks of German barbarism. Seriously wounded in the spinal48 column, in front of the forest of Champenoux, on the 24th August, and paralysed in both legs as a result of his wound, he had remained lying on his stomach, when a German soldier brutally49 turned him over with his rifle and struck him three times with the butt on the head. Others, who were passing near him, also struck him with the butt-ends of their rifles and kicked him.
“Finally, one of them with a single stroke made a wound below and three or four centimetres from each eye with the help of an instrument which the victim could not distinguish, but which in the opinion of Dr. Weiss, chief physician and professor of the faculty50 of Nancy, must have been a pair of scissors.”
These facts appear difficult of belief. Nevertheless a confession37 of similar deeds has been made by German soldiers; for example, Paul Gloede, of the 9th battalion of Pioneers (9th corps), actually writes in his notebook: “Mutilation of the wounded is the order of the day.”
Published Admission by Germans
These acts of German troops did not always make Germans ashamed. On the contrary, in certain cases they even thought it was a clever thing to boast about[92] it. For instance, a story, which had come from the German non-commissioned officer Klemt (154th infantry regiment, 1st company), was published in a newspaper of Jauer in Silesia on the 18th October, 1914. The paper even put as a marginal note the following phrase “The 24th September, 1914, a day of honour for our troops.” In his pamphlet, German Crimes according to German Evidence, M. Bédier has put on record the non-commissioned officer’s story.
“We bludgeon and transfix the wounded,” says the wretch51, “for we know that these scoundrels, when we have passed by, would fire at our backs. There lies at full length a Frenchman, face to the ground, but he is shamming52 death. A kick from the foot of a stout53 fusilier lets him know that we are there. Turning round, he asks for quarter, but we say to him, ‘That is how, you ?, your tools work,’ and we pin him to the ground. Beside me, I hear strange crashing noises. They are blows from the butt-end of a rifle which a soldier of the 154th regiment is vigorously applying to a Frenchman’s bald head: very cleverly he used a French rifle for his work, lest he should break his own. Men with exceptionally tender hearts do the French wounded the favour of finishing them off with a bullet, but others distribute as many cuts and thrusts as they can. Our opponents had fought bravely: they were picked troops whom we had in front of us: they let us come as close as thirty and even ten metres to them: too close. Knapsacks and arms thrown in a heap prove that they wanted to take to flight, but at sight of the ‘grey phantoms,’ terror paralysed their limbs, and on the narrow path which they were taking the German bullet brought them the order to ‘halt.’ At the entrance to their hiding-place of boughs54 of trees they lie,[93] groaning55 and asking for quarter. But, whether they were lightly or seriously wounded, the fusiliers spare the fatherland the expensive attentions which would have to be given to a crowd of enemies.”
The non-commissioned officer adds that Prince Oscar of Prussia, on being informed of the exploits of the 154th and of the regiment which with the 154th forms a brigade, declared they were both worthy56 of the name “King’s Brigade.” “When evening came,” he continued, “with a prayer of thanks upon our lips we fell asleep in expectation of the following day.” Then, having added by way of postscript57 a little bit of verse, “Return from Battle,” he brings the whole, prose and verse, to his lieutenant, who countersigns58 it, “Certified to be correct, De Niem, lieutenant and company commander.”
German Murder of People attached to the Medical Service and the Red Cross
No more than the wounded were people engaged in tending or transporting the wounded spared by the Germans.
We have said that in bombardments no distinction was made between Red Cross establishments and the others. But even outside these cases the Geneva Convention was so frequently violated that we are driven to attach no credence59 to the excuses invented in case of bombardment.
Enemy doctors, nurses male and female, ambulance workers have been often ill-treated, wounded and even killed by the Germans. We have noted60 one case, in reporting the murder of the French lieutenant Deschars who had been previously61 wounded. It is not the only one.
[94]
M. Pierre Nothomb reports several in his pamphlet, Belgique Martyre. We must also remember the testimony62 given by Dr. Barbey (Echo de Paris of the 20th January, 1915). Speaking of the cruelties committed by the Germans at Recquignies (Nord), this doctor says—
“On the afternoon of the 6th September German soldiers came to the ambulance; they were very much excited: two of them caught hold of me brutally and another presented his rifle at me. I explained to them that they were in a temporary hospital, where there were no arms, which was true, and, moreover, all arms had been punctiliously63 given up by the civilians at the beginning of the siege. The Boches searched everywhere without finding anything. Then they went off, leading the eight attendants and stretcher-bearers, whom, as they pretended, they needed to bring their wounded to Boussois. The little company set out. As they were passing before my house, which was still uninjured, the Germans, revolver in hand, compelled attendant Jus to set fire to it. They did the same with the mayor’s house, which was next door to mine.
“On the way back from this expedition, as the eight attendants, who all the time had been surrounded by Boches, were going along the railway-line from Paris to Cologne, the leader of the detachment suddenly caused a halt: the French soldiers were lined along the bank: they were ordered to raise their arms and they obeyed.
“‘Shoot them,’ commanded the leader. A volley rang out. The eight men fell. Without troubling further about them the bandits went off at once, shouting, for they were drunk… Fortunately, so drunk, in fact, that their bullets had nearly all missed.[95] Only four of our attendants were wounded: Private Hacrien; Private Caudren, who had his leg broken; a private who was a native of Perenchies, and who had a bullet through his thigh64, and a fourth private who sustained a not very serious wound on the knee. When the Boches were gone the four attendants, who were unhurt and who had been shamming death, lifted up their comrades and brought them to the ambulance.
“On the following day all the wounded under treatment in this ambulance were brought, without food, to Beaumont in Belgium, where a kindly65 major had them collected in a convent which had been transformed into a hospital. There I left them, as I had been authorised to go back alone to France.
“I set out on foot, without a copper66, on an empty stomach. On the way, I met with a German patrol; without parley67, the savages68 belaboured me with the butt-ends of their rifles and left me for dead, having just stripped me of all I had left—namely, my clothes.”
M. Herriot, Mayor of Lyon, on his part, in a letter to a French minister, declares that “he knows ten French doctors whose ambulances had been bombarded and their attendants killed,” and that “the Chief Rabbi of Lyon was killed as he was endeavouring to get the wounded out through the window of an ambulance which had been set on fire by shells.”
On the other hand, the French Commission of Inquiry states in its report that, on the 25th August, at Einvaux some Germans had opened fire at 300 metres on Dr. Millet69, surgeon-major of the colonial regiment, just when, with the help of two bearers, he was dressing70 the wounds of a man who was lying on a stretcher. As his left side was turned to them they saw his brassard[96] perfectly71. Besides, they could not have been mistaken about the kind of job on which the three men were engaged.
“At Xivry-Circourt,” writes M. Bonne, senior curé of étain, in a report which he drew up, “the Germans seized an ambulance and a convoy72 of wounded, only the first carriage of which succeeded in escaping, in a hail of bullets.”
In a report on the outrages and crimes committed by the Germans at Arras, M. Briens, prefect of the Department of Pas de Calais, remarks: “The most painful feelings have been roused by the taking away of all the wounded under treatment at the hospitals whom it was possible to carry… The surgeon-majors of the Medical Service and the Red Cross attendants were attached to this convoy of prisoners.”
Finally, before Lunéville, a French Red Cross nurse, Mme. Prudennec, while on the look-out for wounded on the battlefields, tended a German officer who, to show his gratitude73, gave her a sabre thrust in return. The nurse was injured in the leg, and for five days remained wounded in the hands of the Prussians. But when the time came for them to retreat the Germans left behind the nurse (who was unable to walk), and so it came to pass that she was saved by French soldiers.
点击
收听单词发音
收听单词发音 |
1
killing
|
|
| n.巨额利润；突然赚大钱，发大财 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
2
belligerent
|
|
| adj.好战的，挑起战争的；n.交战国，交战者 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
3
barbarians
|
|
| n.野蛮人( barbarian的名词复数 )；外国人；粗野的人；无教养的人 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
4
brutality
|
|
| n.野蛮的行为，残忍，野蛮 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
5
plunder
|
|
| vt.劫掠财物，掠夺；n.劫掠物，赃物；劫掠 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
6
countersigned
|
|
| v.连署，副署，会签 （文件）( countersign的过去式 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
7
covenants
|
|
| n.（有法律约束的）协议( covenant的名词复数 )；盟约；公约；（向慈善事业、信托基金会等定期捐款的）契约书 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
8
deliberately
|
|
| adv.审慎地；蓄意地；故意地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
9
outrages
|
|
| 引起…的义愤，激怒( outrage的第三人称单数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
10
pillage
|
|
| v.抢劫；掠夺；n.抢劫，掠夺；掠夺物 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
11
inevitable
|
|
| adj.不可避免的，必然发生的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
12
monstrous
|
|
| adj.巨大的；恐怖的；可耻的，丢脸的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
13
overthrow
|
|
| v.推翻，打倒，颠覆；n.推翻，瓦解，颠覆 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
14
rehabilitation
|
|
| n.康复，悔过自新，修复，复兴，复职，复位 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
15
peculiar
|
|
| adj.古怪的，异常的；特殊的，特有的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
16
havoc
|
|
| n.大破坏，浩劫，大混乱，大杂乱 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
17
civilians
|
|
| 平民，百姓( civilian的名词复数 )； 老百姓 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
18
devoted
|
|
| adj.忠诚的，忠实的，热心的，献身于...的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
19
massacre
|
|
| n.残杀，大屠杀；v.残杀，集体屠杀 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
20
violation
|
|
| n.违反(行为)，违背(行为)，侵犯 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
21
extenuating
|
|
| adj.使减轻的，情有可原的v.（用偏袒的辩解或借口）减轻( extenuate的现在分词 )；低估，藐视 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
22
subscribed
|
|
| v.捐助( subscribe的过去式和过去分词 )；签署，题词；订阅；同意 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
23
artillery
|
|
| n.(军)火炮，大炮；炮兵(部队) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
24
enjoyment
|
|
| n.乐趣；享有；享用 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
25
credible
|
|
| adj.可信任的，可靠的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
26
encumber
|
|
| v.阻碍行动，妨碍，堆满 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
27
authenticity
|
|
| n.真实性 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
28
depositions
|
|
| 沉积（物）( deposition的名词复数 )； （在法庭上的）宣誓作证； 处置； 罢免 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
29
infantry
|
|
| n.[总称]步兵(部队) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
30
regiments
|
|
| （军队的）团( regiment的名词复数 )； 大量的人或物 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
31
regiment
|
|
| n.团，多数，管理；v.组织，编成团，统制 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
32
deposed
|
|
| v.罢免( depose的过去式和过去分词 )；（在法庭上）宣誓作证 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
33
battalion
|
|
| n.营；部队；大队(的人) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
34
cavalry
|
|
| n.骑兵；轻装甲部队 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
35
deserted
|
|
| adj.荒芜的，荒废的，无人的，被遗弃的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
36
pillaging
|
|
| v.抢劫，掠夺( pillage的现在分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
37
confession
|
|
| n.自白，供认，承认 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
38
confessions
|
|
| n.承认( confession的名词复数 )；自首；声明；（向神父的）忏悔 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
39
confided
|
|
| v.吐露（秘密，心事等）( confide的过去式和过去分词 )；（向某人）吐露（隐私、秘密等） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
40
obedience
|
|
| n.服从，顺从 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
41
attested
|
|
| adj.经检验证明无病的，经检验证明无菌的v.证明( attest的过去式和过去分词 )；证实；声称…属实；使宣誓 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
42
lieutenant
|
|
| n.陆军中尉，海军上尉；代理官员，副职官员 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
43
inflicted
|
|
| 把…强加给，使承受，遭受( inflict的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
44
butt
|
|
| n.笑柄；烟蒂；枪托；臀部；v.用头撞或顶 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
45
sergeant
|
|
| n.警官，中士 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
46
inquiry
|
|
| n.打听，询问，调查，查问 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
47
forestry
|
|
| n.森林学；林业 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
48
spinal
|
|
| adj.针的，尖刺的，尖刺状突起的；adj.脊骨的，脊髓的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
49
brutally
|
|
| adv.残忍地，野蛮地，冷酷无情地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
50
faculty
|
|
| n.才能；学院，系；(学院或系的)全体教学人员 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
51
wretch
|
|
| n.可怜的人，不幸的人；卑鄙的人 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
52
shamming
|
|
| 假装，冒充( sham的现在分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
54
boughs
|
|
| 大树枝( bough的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
55
groaning
|
|
| adj. 呜咽的, 呻吟的 动词groan的现在分词形式 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
56
worthy
|
|
| adj.(of)值得的，配得上的；有价值的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
57
postscript
|
|
| n.附言，又及；(正文后的)补充说明 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
58
countersigns
|
|
| v.连署，副署，会签 （文件）( countersign的第三人称单数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
|
59
credence
|
|
| n.信用，祭器台，供桌，凭证 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
60
noted
|
|
| adj.著名的，知名的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
61
previously
|
|
| adv.以前，先前（地） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
62
testimony
|
|
| n.证词；见证，证明 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
63
punctiliously
|
|
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
64
thigh
|
|
| n.大腿；股骨 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
65
kindly
|
|
| adj.和蔼的，温和的，爽快的；adv.温和地，亲切地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
66
copper
|
|
| n.铜；铜币；铜器；adj.铜(制)的；(紫)铜色的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
67
parley
|
|
| n.谈判 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
68
savages
|
|
| 未开化的人，野蛮人( savage的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
69
millet
|
|
| n.小米，谷子 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
70
dressing
|
|
| n.(食物)调料；包扎伤口的用品，敷料 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
71
perfectly
|
|
| adv.完美地，无可非议地，彻底地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
72
convoy
|
|
| vt.护送，护卫，护航；n.护送；护送队 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
73
gratitude
|
|
| adj.感激，感谢 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
| 欢迎访问英文小说网 |