The New York Times Current History, A Monthly Magazine: The European War, March 1915Various
History
The New York Times Current History, A Monthly Magazine: The European War, March 1915
Various
World War, 1914-1918
It will be remembered from the British "White Book" that in November,
1912, a correspondence passed between Sir Edward Grey and the French
Minister in London, in which it was stated that British and French
military and naval experts had consulted together from time to time as
to plans to be followed in case of war, and it was stated in this
correspondence that in accordance with such prearranged plans the
French fleet would stay in the Mediterranean to safeguard the joint
interests there, whereas the British fleet would safeguard their
interests in the north. Of this correspondence the members of the
British Cabinet remained ignorant until the Cabinet meeting
immediately preceding the written statement by Great Britain on Aug. 2
that in case a German fleet attacked the French coast or passed into
the Channel, England would give all the assistance in her power,
(British "White Papers," No. 148,) and it was also, of course,
concealed from the British public until the speech of Sir Edward Grey
on Aug. 3. It will be remembered that in consequence of this
revelation the British Minister of Commerce, Mr. John Burns, and two
other members, Lord Morley and Mr. Trevelyan, left the British Cabinet
under protest; that the leader of the British Labor Party, Mr. Ramsey
Macdonald, resigned from the leadership and that Mr. Arthur Ponsonby
in his famous letter denounced Sir Edward Grey's practices.
Mr. Ponsonby said that time and again they had been assured that there
were no obligations whatsoever on the part of Great Britain to come to
France's assistance and yet they found themselves now so hopelessly
entangled that as a matter of fact the British Government could not
back out.
The fact of these consultations, by which, of course, all the plans of
mobilization of both the British and French armies were disclosed to
the two allies and which include the landing of English troops in
France, is now fully established by the annexed documents. They show
that these conversations were also held with Belgium, that plans had
been concerted to invade Belgium with an army of 100,000 men by way of
three French ports--viz., Dunkirk, Calais, and Boulogne--and that the
British plans even considered a landing by way of the Scheldt, thus
violating also Dutch neutrality.
The documents, giving all the details as translated and showing that
Belgian railway cars were to be sent to the named French ports in
order to transport the British troops into Belgium, are dated from
1906.
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