New York Times Current History: The European War from the Beginning to March 1915, Vol 1, No. 2: Who Began the War, and Why?Various
History
New York Times Current History: The European War from the Beginning to March 1915, Vol 1, No. 2: Who Began the War, and Why?
Various
World War, 1914-1918
From the declaration made by the Imperial German Chancellor it may be
seen that the German Government is conscious of its wrongdoing. As one
of the guarantors of Belgium's neutrality, it wanted to force Belgium to
relinquish its neutrality for Germany's benefit. Because Belgium would
not consent to this injustice and because Germany could not reproach her
with anything else, Germany invaded and covered with blood and ruin a
small peaceful country of hard-working and honest people, a country
which it had promised to protect.
This attack upon her neutrality is the first violation for which Belgium
asks judgment from the universal conscience.
The entire Belgo-German question today is dominated by the fact of this
violation of the neutrality of Belgium. Therefore, there is not a single
shot fired by a German soldier in Belgium, which is not manifestly and
avowedly belying most sacred things: the keeping of a solemn pledge, and
the right for an honest nation that never wanted war, nor showed
aggressive dispositions, to be allowed to live its peaceful and neutral
life.
Such is the Belgian case. Humanity will judge it.
* * * * *
Belgo-British Plot Alleged by Germany
Statement Issued by German Embassy at Washington, Oct. 13.
The German Ambassador drew special attention today to the telegram which
came from German headquarters. This telegram proves the German
contention that the Allies did not intend to respect Belgian neutrality.
It even proves more, namely, that Belgian neutrality practically did not
exist and that the Belgian Government was conspiring with the Allies
against Germany. Notwithstanding the denials coming from French sources
it is a fact that French prisoners were taken at Liege and Namur, who
acknowledged that they had been in those fortresses before the German
troops entered Belgium.
On the French side it has been asserted that the German Chancellor in
Parliament had acknowledged that Germany was doing wrong in violating
Belgian neutrality. It must, however, not be overlooked that the
Chancellor further said:
We know that the Allies do not intend to respect Belgian
neutrality, and Germany, in the position she is in, attacked from
three sides, cannot wait, while the Allies can wait.
At that time the Belgian archives were not at the disposal of the German
Government. If the Chancellor had known at the time he made his speech
that Belgium was not neutral he would certainly have spoken of the
alleged Belgian neutrality in a different way.
Germany has violated the frontiers of no really neutral country, while
the Allies are on record for disregarding all obligations toward China.
Text of Wireless Message.
Headquarters report German military authorities searching archives of
Belgian General Staff at Brussels, found portfolio inscribed
"Intervention Anglaise-Belgique," containing important documents:
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