justification of Germany. Yet no friend of
Germany can find fault with those who would wish to defer
a verdict until such time when Germany can present her
complete proof to the world, and this may be when the war is
over.
This naive suggestion, that the vital question of fact should be
postponed, and in the meantime judgment should be entered for Germany,
is refreshing in its novelty. Its only parallel was the contention of
the celebrated Dr. Cook, who contended that the world should accept
his claim as to the discovery of the North Pole and await the proofs
later.
Professor von Mach, in his book, "_What Germany Wants_," further
explains this dilatory defense and amplifies it in a manner that is
certainly unusual in an historian. He recognizes that the speech of
the German Chancellor in the Reichstag on August 4th, in which von
Bethmann-Hollweg admitted that the action of Germany in invading
Belgium was wrong and only justified it on the ground of
self-preservation, was a virtual plea of guilty by Prussia of the
crime, of which it stands indicted at the bar of the civilized world.
Germany's scholarly apologist, as _amicus curiae_, then suggests that
in criminal procedure, when a defendant pleads guilty, the Court often
refuses to accept his plea, enters a plea of not guilty for him, and
assigns counsel to defend the case. He therefore suggests that the
Chancellor's plea of guilty should be disregarded and the Court should
assign counsel.
One difficulty with the analogy is that courts do not ordinarily
refuse to accept a plea of guilty. On the contrary, they accept it
almost invariably, for why try the guilt of a man when he himself in
the most formal way acknowledges it?
The only instance in which a court does show such consideration to a
prisoner is when the defendant is both poor and ignorant. Then, and
only then, with a fine regard for human right, is the procedure
suggested by Prof. von Mach followed.
To this humiliating position, Professor von Mach as _amicus curiae_
consigns his great nation. For myself, as one who admires Germany and
believes it to be much greater and truer than its ruling caste or its
over-zealous apologists, I refuse to accept the justification of such
an absurd and degrading analogy.
The blunt acknowledgment of the German Chancellor in the Reichstag,
already quoted, is infinitely preferable to the disingenuous defenses
of Germany's ardent but sophistical
|