9.—Russia might acquire the Armenian provinces of Turkey. It lies with us to accord her an ice-free port on the Persian Gulf. A Russian protectorate over Persia might in the end be less fatal to Persian nationalism than the present partition and condominium. 10.—Finally, the whole bargain must rest upon Germany’s assent to some scheme of permanent conciliation and the reduction of armaments, and upon our consent to consider a revision of certain usages of sea-warfare. _H. N. Brailsford._ PEACE PROPOSALS AND PROGRAMS 4. GERMANY GERMAN AND AUSTRO-HUNGARIAN SOCIALISTS Vienna, April 12-13, 1915. [Sidenote: Socialists of Central Powers.] 1. Development of the international arbitration courts. 2. Recognition of the right of every people to determine its own destiny. 3. All treaties to be under democratic parliamentary control. 4. International agreement to limit armament with general disarmament as the ultimate goal. BUND NEUES VATERLAND [Sidenote: Bund Neues Vaterland.] 1. Development of international organization. 2. Further development of international law by future Hague conferences. 3. No annexation. 4. No secret treaties. 5. Open door. Freedom of the seas. MANIFESTO OF THE “DEUTSCHE FRIEDENSGESELLSCHAFT” [Sidenote: German Peace Society.] Notwithstanding the prohibition of the Government, demands for annexation are being more or less publicly advocated. Six large agricultural associations go especially far in these ideas; indeed for one petition signatures are collected among those who because of “their rank and education consider themselves the spiritual leaders of public opinion.” This movement has evidently the support of important circles. The worst of this is that those demands are known to the neutrals and to hostile countries, who make them the foundation of their accusations of German desires of conquest. Besides they kindle ill-feeling against Germany, as the Government and the whole German nation are held responsible for all this. There is no doubt that the Imperial Government is unjustly accused in this respect, whatever may be her attitude towards other questions. Should such tendencies be publicly criticized, then the world would soon see that the greater part of the German nation is strongly opposed to them. The prohibition to discuss the aims of the war, which is strictly maintained with respect to ourselves, prevents us from criticizing this question thoroughly; and from organizing our opposition to such tendencies. So far we have gladly obeyed the order not to discuss these questions. After our experience, however, of the way in which this prohibition and the above-mentioned agitation are exploited abroad to the detriment of German interests, we think it our duty to appeal to the Government to grant “free speech to a free nation.”