FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   264   265   266   267   268   269   270   271   272   273   274   275   276   277   278   279   280   281   282   283   284   285   286   287   288  
289   290   291   292   293   294   295   296   297   298   299   300   301   302   303   304   305   306   307   308   309   310   311   312   313   >>   >|  
ake war on a kindred nation. At what price would that compact [neutrality] have been kept? Has the British Government thought of that? Sir William Goschen replied, that fear of consequences would hardly be regarded as an excuse for breaking a solemn engagement. [Official report of the British Ambassador in Berlin to his Government.] It is very clear from these documents that Germany had for a long time premeditated the violation of the neutrality of Belgium and that she has even reconciled herself to the terrible danger of war with Great Britain, rather than renounce the advantages she thought she would gain by not respecting the treaty. In the face of these confessions the allegations that France wished to violate the neutrality of Belgium, an allegation supported by no proof, falls to the ground. To continue the analysis of the German note: If Belgium consents to assume in the war which is about to commence the attitude of friendly neutrality toward Germany, the German Government, on its side, engages, when peace is restored, to guarantee the integrity of the kingdom and its possessions. Could Belgium, without being false to her duties of neutrality, take up the position which the German Government calls "friendly neutrality"? That is to say, could she allow the German armies to pass without opposition through her territory? Can the German Government itself answer that question? It is enough to reread the conversation given above between the British Ambassador and the German Secretary of State to come to a clear conclusion in that respect. If the violation of Belgian territory was to procure so signal an advantage to Germany that she had no fear of bringing on war with England to attain it, then for Belgium to lend herself to the passage of German troops must have meant the certainty of fatal consequences for France. Thus for Belgium to have yielded to the German ultimatum would _ipso facto_ have conferred a considerable advantage to Germany, to the detriment of the other belligerent, and would have constituted a breach of neutrality. Germany concludes her note by threats. She engages, on the condition already defined, to evacuate Belgian territory at the conclusion of peace. If Belgium behaves in a hostile manner [_that is to say, if she does her duty_] Germany will be obliged to consider Belgium as an enemy. She would then leave the ultimate arrangements of the relations o
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   264   265   266   267   268   269   270   271   272   273   274   275   276   277   278   279   280   281   282   283   284   285   286   287   288  
289   290   291   292   293   294   295   296   297   298   299   300   301   302   303   304   305   306   307   308   309   310   311   312   313   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

Belgium

 

German

 

neutrality

 

Germany

 
Government
 
territory
 

British

 

violation

 

friendly

 

conclusion


Belgian

 
advantage
 

engages

 

France

 
Ambassador
 

consequences

 
thought
 
procure
 
respect
 

signal


bringing

 

passage

 
troops
 

kindred

 

England

 
attain
 

nation

 

opposition

 
armies
 
answer

question
 

Secretary

 
conversation
 
reread
 

certainty

 

manner

 

hostile

 

behaves

 
defined
 

evacuate


arrangements

 
relations
 

ultimate

 

obliged

 

condition

 

conferred

 

ultimatum

 

yielded

 

considerable

 

detriment