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
The approval of President Wilson for neutrality of language can hardly
be construed into complacency in the face of monstrous evil. If a
judicial attitude of mind be not jeopardized a discussion of the issues
raised by Profs. Eucken and Haeckel ought to help us in the attainment
of impartial judgment. A long acquaintance with both these men makes it
hard for the present writer to give expression to such negative
criticism as he is constrained to do. But his plea can be only this: Not
truth but only passion can separate, and truth is greater even than
friendship.
The charge of "brutal national egoism" is laid at England's door. She is
declared to be the instigator of the present world war. "Upon her alone
falls the monstrous guilt and the judgment of history." Such language
from two benevolent philosophers, one of them a winner of the Nobel
Peace Prize for Idealistic Literature, seems to suggest a lack of
information among the German people, including its most enlightened
exponents, of not only their own published "White Paper" dispatches, but
also of the events of the last two months. It seems hardly possible that
in the case of these two gentlemen a deliberate campaign of vituperation
could have been inaugurated with determination to blind themselves to
facts clearly stated in the reports of both contending parties--
First--That Servia, in reply to ten urgent demands on the part of
Austria, acquiesced in nine and proposed to submit the tenth, as
concerning her national integrity, to The Hague Tribunal. Austria,
nevertheless, declared war, with Germany's self-confessed assurances of
support.
Secondly--Germany was the second to declare war, the mobilization of
Russia being assigned as the reason for this step. The objection of
Germany's initial campaign, as shown by events, was not defense against
the confessedly slowly mobilizing Russians, however, but the humiliation
and subjugation of France. And the means employed to that end included
the treaty-breaking invasion, and more than invasion, of Belgium, who is
suffering because of this step "so necessary for Germany."
Thirdly--England, as is repeatedly demonstrated by the official
documents, of both sides, strained every means to bring about a common
understanding. The appeals of Sir Edward Grey for more time in the
Servian ultimatum and for a council of Ambassadors were met by the
Austrian and German Governments respectively with evasion. And England
was the last of the great powers to enter the conflict, her plea being
the moral obligation of supporting treaties in which she guaranteed the
integrity of a weak neighbor and undertook to defend her ally, France,
when attacked.
The Case of England.
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