The New York Times Current History of the European War, Vol. 1, January 9, 1915: What Americans Say to EuropeVarious
Philosophy
The New York Times Current History of the European War, Vol. 1, January 9, 1915: What Americans Say to Europe
Various
World War, 1914-1918
PROF. BURGESS'S SECOND ARTICLE.
The Guarantee of Belgian Neutrality
So much has been said about Belgian neutrality, so much assumed, and it
has been such a stumbling block in the way of any real and comprehensive
understanding of the causes and purposes of the great European
catastrophe, that it may be well to examine the basis of it and endeavor
to get an exact idea of the scope and obligation.
Of course, we are considering here the question of guaranteed
neutrality, not the ordinary neutrality enjoyed by all States not at
war, when some States are at war; the difference between ordinary
neutrality and guaranteed neutrality being that no State is under any
obligation to defend the ordinary neutrality of any other State against
infringement by a belligerent, and no belligerent is under any special
obligation to observe it. Guaranteed neutrality is, therefore, purely a
question of specific agreement between States.
On the 19th day of April, 1839, Belgium and Holland, which from 1815 to
1830 had formed the United Kingdom of the Netherlands, signed a treaty
of separation from, and independence of, each other. It is in this
treaty that the original pledge of Belgian neutrality is to be found.
The clause of the treaty reads: "Belgium in the limits above described
shall form an independent neutral State and shall be bound to observe
the same neutrality toward all other States." On the same day and at the
same place, (London,) a treaty, known in the history of diplomacy as the
Quintuple Treaty, was signed by Great Britain, France, Prussia, Austria,
and Russia, approving and adopting the treaty between Belgium and
Holland. A little later, May 11, the German Confederation, of which both
Austria and Prussia were members, also ratified this treaty.
In the year 1866 the German Confederation was dissolved by the war
between Austria and Prussia, occasioned by the Schleswig-Holstein
question. In 1867 the North German Union was formed, of which Prussia
was the leading State, while Austria and the German States south of the
River Main were left out of it altogether. Did these changes render the
guarantees of the Treaty of 1839 obsolete and thereby abrogate them, or
at least weaken them and make them an uncertain reliance? The test of
this came in the year 1870, at the beginning of hostilities between
France and the North German Union. Great Britain, the power most
interested in the maintenance of Belgian neutrality, seems to have had
considerable apprehension about it. Mr. Gladstone, then Prime Minister,
said in the House of Commons: "I am not able to subscribe to the
doctrine of those who have held in this House what plainly amounts to an
assertion that the simple fact of the existence of a guarantee is
binding on every party to it, irrespective altogether of the particular
position in which it may find itself when the occasion for acting on the
guarantee arises."
A One-Year Treaty.
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