Current History: A Monthly Magazine of the New York Times, May 1918: Vol. VIII, Part I, No. 2Various
History
Current History: A Monthly Magazine of the New York Times, May 1918: Vol. VIII, Part I, No. 2
Various
World War, 1914-1918
"Nobody will reproach the Prince with this belief in himself. He was
also free to make notes about events, and his attitude toward them, but
he should then have considered it a duty that his views should not have
become known to the public, and, no matter how small his circle of
readers was, it was his duty to state nothing contradicting facts which
he knew. As things now are, the memorandum will cause enough harm among
malevolent and superficial people. The memorandum has no historical
value whatever."
Referring to a manifolded copy of a letter from Dr. Mühlon, who is at
present in Switzerland, and at the outbreak of war was on Krupps' Board
of Directors, Herr von Payer said that the letter related to the
utterances of two highly placed gentlemen from which he drew the
conclusion that the German Government in July, 1914, lacked a desire
for peace. Both these gentlemen had stated in writing that Dr. Mühlon
had suffered from nerves, and he (Herr von Payer) also took the view
that his statements were those of a man of diseased mind.
In the discussion that followed, Herr Scheidemann said that the
Socialist Party regarded imperialism as the fundamental cause of the
war. Prince Lichnowsky's memorandum, in which he attempted to put the
blame for the war on Germany, could, in his opinion, only make an
impression on so-called out-and-out pacifists.
Herr Müller-Meiningen said that, notwithstanding what Dr. Mühlon and
Prince Lichnowsky had said, he was absolutely convinced that the
overwhelming majority of the German people, the Chancellor, and the
representatives of the Foreign Office, and, above all, the German
Emperor, always desired peace.
Herr Stresemann expressed a desire to see the last White Book
supplemented. Prince Lichnowsky's memorandum could not be taken
seriously.
Herr von Payer, intervening, said that the question as to whether
criminal or disciplinary action might be taken against Prince Lichnowsky
was considered by the Imperial Department of Justice. The result was
that, on various legal grounds, neither a prosecution of the Prince for
diplomatic high treason in the sense of Paragraph 92 of the Penal Code,
nor proceedings under Paragraph 89 or Paragraph 353, the so-called Arnim
paragraph, would have offered any chance of success. After the Prince's
retirement, there was no longer any question of disciplinary proceedings
against him. The Prince has been prohibited by the Foreign Office from
publishing articles in the press.
LICHNOWSKY'S "OPTIMISM"
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account