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
"The phrase has made a deep impression because the progress of the
world largely depends upon the sanctity of agreements between
individuals and between nations, and the policy disclosed in Herr von
Bethmann-Hollweg's phrase tends to debase the legal and moral currency
of civilization.
"What the German Chancellor said was that Great Britain in requiring
Germany to respect the neutrality of Belgium 'was going to make war
just for a word, just for a scrap of paper'--that is, that Great
Britain was making a mountain out of a molehill. He now asks the
American public to believe that he meant the exact opposite of what he
said; that it was Great Britain who really regarded the neutrality of
Belgium as a mere trifle, and that it was Germany who 'took her
responsibilities toward the neutral States so seriously.'
"The arguments by which Herr von Bethmann-Hollweg seeks to establish
the two sides of this case are in flat contradiction of the plain
facts.
"First, the German Chancellor alleges that 'England in 1911 was
determined to throw troops into Belgium without the assent of the
Belgian Government.' This allegation is absolutely false. It is based
upon certain documents found in Brussels which record conversations
between British and Belgian officers in 1906, and again in 1911.
"The fact that there is no note of these conversations at the British
War Office or the Foreign Office shows that they were of a purely
informal character and that no military agreement of any sort was at
either time made between the two Governments. Before any conversations
took place between the British and the Belgian officers it was
expressly laid down on the British side that discussion of the
military possibilities was to be addressed to the manner in which, in
case of need, British assistance could be most effectually afforded to
Belgium for the defense of her neutrality, and on the Belgian side a
marginal note upon the record explains that 'the entry of the English
into Belgium would only take place after the violation of our
(Belgium's) neutrality by Germany.'
"As regards the conversation of 1911, the Belgian officer said to the
British officer: 'You could only land in our country with our
consent'; and in 1913 Sir Edward Grey gave the Belgian Government a
categorical assurance that no British Government would violate the
neutrality of Belgium and that 'so long as it was not violated by any
other power we should certainly not send troops ourselves into their
territory.'
"The Chancellor's method of misusing documents may be illustrated in
this connection. He represents Sir Edward Grey as saying, 'he did not
believe England would take such a step because he did not think
English public opinion would justify such action.'
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