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
without impairing or invalidating the conditions of the said
Quintuple Treaty, shall be subsidiary and accessory to it.
Article III. further provided that these Treaties of 1870 were to expire
twelve months after the conclusion of the existing war, and that
thereafter the independence and neutrality of Belgium would "continue to
rest, as heretofore," on the Treaty of 1839.
These documents tell a plain tale, which is amply confirmed by the
proceedings in Parliament in connection with this matter. On Aug. 5,
1870, while the negotiations leading to the above-mentioned treaties
were still pending, questions were raised in the House of Commons about
the recently published abortive Treaty of 1866-7 between Prussia and
France. In reply Gladstone stated that
the Treaty of 1839 is that under which the relations of the
contracting powers with Belgium are at present regulated;
and that, while he could not explain the intentions of the Government
"in a matter of this very grave character in answer to a question," he
hoped to be able to communicate some further information in an authentic
manner. Three days later, as these treaties with France and Prussia had
been virtually concluded, Gladstone was able to satisfy the anxiety of
the House and outlined their terms. He explicitly stated that, after
their expiration,
the respective parties, being parties to the Treaty of 1839,
shall fall back upon the obligations they took upon themselves
under that treaty.
After Gladstone had finished speaking the leader of the opposition,
Disraeli, took the floor and pointed out that, as a general proposition,
when there is a treaty guarantee so explicit as that expressed
in the Treaty of 1839, I think the wisdom of founding on that
another treaty which involves us in engagements may be open to
doubt.
But he accepted Gladstone's statement
as the declaration of the Cabinet, that they are resolved to
maintain the neutrality and independence of Belgium, I accept
it as a wise and spirited policy, and a policy, in my opinion,
not the less wise because it is spirited.
Gladstone then replied, saying that the reason the Government had not
made a general declaration of its intentions regarding Belgium was that
much danger might arise from such a declaration and that inadvertently
they might have given utterance to words
that might be held to import obligations almost unlimited and
almost irrespectively of circumstances.
We had made up our minds, he continued, that we had a duty to perform,
and we thought a specific declaration of what we thought the obligations
of this country better than any general declaration. Referring to the
two treaties in process of ratification, he concluded:
We thought that by contracting a joint engagement we might
remove the difficulty and prevent Belgium from being
sacrificed.
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.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account