Opening the text

The Evidence in the Case: A Discussion of the Moral Responsibility for the War of 1914, as Disclosed by the Diplomatic Records of England, Germany, RussiaBeck, James M. (James Montgomery)

Philosophy

The Evidence in the Case: A Discussion of the Moral Responsibility for the War of 1914, as Disclosed by the Diplomatic Records of England, Germany, Russia

Name: The Evidence in the Case: A Discussion of the Moral Responsibility for the War of 1914, as Disclosed by the Diplomatic Records of England, Germany, Russia
Author: Beck, James M. (James Montgomery)

Beck, James M. (James Montgomery)

World War, 1914-1918 -- Causes

On July 31, 1914, the Belgian Foreign Minister, in a conversation with
Herr von Below, the German Minister at Brussels, asked him whether he
knew of the assurance which, as above stated, had been given by von
Bethmann-Hollweg through the German Ambassador at Brussels to the
Government at Belgium in 1911, and Herr von Below replied that he did,
and added, "that he was certain that the sentiments to which
expression was given at that time had not changed."

Thus _on July 31, 1914_, Germany, through its accredited
representative at Brussels, repeated the assurances contained in the
treaty of 1839, as reaffirmed in 1870, and again reaffirmed in 1911
and 1913.

Germany's moral obligation had an additional express confirmation.

The second International Peace Conference was held at The Hague in
1907. There were present the representatives of forty-four nations,
thus making as near an approach to the poet's dream of the "federation
of the world" and the "parliament of man" as has yet been possible in
the slow progress of mankind.

That convention agreed upon a certain declaration of principles, and
among the signatures appended to the document was the representative
of His Majesty, the German Emperor.

They agreed upon certain principles of international morality, most
of them simply declaratory of the uncodified international law then
existing, and these were subsequently ratified by formal treaties of
the respective governments, including Germany, which were deposited in
the archives of The Hague. While this treaty _as an express covenant_
was not binding, unless all belligerents signed it, yet, it recognized
an existing _moral_ obligation. The Hague Peace Conference proceeded
to define the rights of neutral powers, and in so doing simply
reaffirmed the existing international law.

The pertinent parts of this great compact, with reference to the
sanctity of neutral territory, are as follows:

                    _CONVENTION V_

     _CHAPTER I.--"THE RIGHTS AND DUTIES OF NEUTRAL POWERS_"

                    ARTICLE I.

     _The territory of neutral Powers is inviolable._

                    ARTICLE II.

     _Belligerents are forbidden to move troops or convoys of
     either munitions of war or supplies across the territory of
     a neutral Power._

                    ARTICLE X.

     _The fact of a neutral Power resisting, even by force,
     attempts to violate its neutrality cannot be regarded as a
     hostile act._

Notwithstanding these assurances, it had been from time to time
intimated by German military writers, and notably by Bernhardi, that
Germany would, in the event of a future war, make a quick and possibly
a fatal blow at the heart of France by invading Belgium upon the first
declaration of hostilities, and it was probably these intimations that
led the Belgian Government on July 24, 1914, to consider:

Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.

Opening the text

The Evidence in the Case: A Discussion of the Moral Responsibility for the War of 1914, as Disclosed by the Diplomatic Records of England, Germany, RussiaBeck, James M. (James Montgomery)

Philosophy

The Evidence in the Case: A Discussion of the Moral Responsibility for the War of 1914, as Disclosed by the Diplomatic Records of England, Germany, Russia

Beck, James M. (James Montgomery)

World War, 1914-1918 -- Causes

On July 31, 1914, the Belgian Foreign Minister, in a conversation with
Herr von Below, the German Minister at Brussels, asked him whether he
knew of the assurance which, as above stated, had been given by von
Bethmann-Hollweg through the German Ambassador at Brussels to the
Government at Belgium in 1911, and Herr von Below replied that he did,
and added, "that he was certain that the sentiments to which
expression was given at that time had not changed."

Thus _on July 31, 1914_, Germany, through its accredited
representative at Brussels, repeated the assurances contained in the
treaty of 1839, as reaffirmed in 1870, and again reaffirmed in 1911
and 1913.

Germany's moral obligation had an additional express confirmation.

The second International Peace Conference was held at The Hague in
1907. There were present the representatives of forty-four nations,
thus making as near an approach to the poet's dream of the "federation
of the world" and the "parliament of man" as has yet been possible in
the slow progress of mankind.

That convention agreed upon a certain declaration of principles, and
among the signatures appended to the document was the representative
of His Majesty, the German Emperor.

They agreed upon certain principles of international morality, most
of them simply declaratory of the uncodified international law then
existing, and these were subsequently ratified by formal treaties of
the respective governments, including Germany, which were deposited in
the archives of The Hague. While this treaty _as an express covenant_
was not binding, unless all belligerents signed it, yet, it recognized
an existing _moral_ obligation. The Hague Peace Conference proceeded
to define the rights of neutral powers, and in so doing simply
reaffirmed the existing international law.

The pertinent parts of this great compact, with reference to the
sanctity of neutral territory, are as follows:

                    _CONVENTION V_

     _CHAPTER I.--"THE RIGHTS AND DUTIES OF NEUTRAL POWERS_"

                    ARTICLE I.

     _The territory of neutral Powers is inviolable._

                    ARTICLE II.

     _Belligerents are forbidden to move troops or convoys of
     either munitions of war or supplies across the territory of
     a neutral Power._

                    ARTICLE X.

     _The fact of a neutral Power resisting, even by force,
     attempts to violate its neutrality cannot be regarded as a
     hostile act._

Notwithstanding these assurances, it had been from time to time
intimated by German military writers, and notably by Bernhardi, that
Germany would, in the event of a future war, make a quick and possibly
a fatal blow at the heart of France by invading Belgium upon the first
declaration of hostilities, and it was probably these intimations that
led the Belgian Government on July 24, 1914, to consider:

Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.

The Evidence in the Case: A Discussion of the Moral Responsibility for the War of 1914, as Disclosed by the Diplomatic Records of England, Germany, Russia

The Evidence in the Case: A Discussion of the Moral Responsibility for the War of 1914, as Disclosed by the Diplomatic Records of England, Germany, Russia

No reviews yet