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
At all events, it became more impossible with every hour for Germany to
keep England out of the way by any offers whatsoever. This is proved by
Grey's conversation of Aug. 1 with the German Ambassador:
He asked me whether if Germany gave a promise not to violate
Belgian neutrality we would engage to remain neutral. I replied
that I could not say that; our hands were still free, and we were
considering what our attitude should be.... The Ambassador pressed
me as to whether I could not formulate conditions on which we would
remain neutral. I said that I felt obliged to refuse definitely any
promise.... (British "White Paper" No. 123.)
Belgium Not the Cause.
Hence, only if Germany would permit herself to be humiliated war with
England could be avoided. The violation of Belgium's neutrality was in
no way the cause of England joining Germany's enemies, for while German
troops did not enter Belgium until the night from Aug. 3 to 4, Grey gave
on Aug. 2 the following memorandum to the French Ambassador after a
session of the Cabinet in London:
I am authorized to give an assurance that if the German fleet comes
into the Channel or through the North Sea to undertake hostile
operations against French coasts or shipping, the British fleet
will give all the protection in its power.--(British "White Paper"
No. 148.)
As the aim of this decision, of which M. Cambon was informed verbally,
was to give France an assurance that it would be placed in a position
"to settle the disposition of its own Mediterranean fleet," Grey would
not accept the version of Cambon that England would take part in a war
with Germany. This is a case of splitting hairs in order to put the
blame of starting the war on Germany, for while England promised to
protect the French coast and to make it possible for the French fleet to
stay in the Mediterranean, she almost immediately proceeded to a warlike
action against Germany, especially as the English Minister
simultaneously refused to bind himself to maintain even this peculiar
neutrality.
* * * * *
IV.
BELGIAN NEUTRALITY.
The highest representatives of the German Empire with emphatic
seriousness declared that it was with a heavy heart and only following
the law of self-preservation that they decided to violate the neutrality
of the Kingdom of Belgium, guaranteed by the great powers in the
treaties of 1831 and 1839.
The German Secretary of State on Aug. 4 informed the English Government
through the embassy in London that Germany intended to retain no Belgian
territory, and added:
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