OCR Text |
Show fULififliilill u OfiOSafi (Continued From Page 8.) On the other hand, no such departure, depart-ure, however serious the provocation, would have boon possible for this country, which was bouud by no alliances, alli-ances, with the exception of thqse of Japan and Portugal, while the making of fresh alliances was prohibited by article 5. In a word, as appeared still more evident later, there was to be a guarantee of absolute neutrality on one side, but not on the other. It was impossible for us to enter into a contract, ao obviously inequitable and the formula accordingly was rejected by Sir Edward Grey (the British foreign for-eign minister). Grey Presents Formula. Count Paul Wolff-Metteruich (then German ambassador to Great Britain) upon this, pressed for counter proposals, pro-posals, which ho stated would be without prejudice and not binding un- less we were satisfied our wishes were met on the naval question. On this understanding, Sir Edward Grey, on the 14th of March, 1912, gave Count Wolff-Metternlch the following draft formula which had been approved ap-proved by the cabinet: "England will make no unprovoked attack upon Germany and pursue no aggressive policy toward her. Aggression Ag-gression upon Germany is not the sub-joct sub-joct and forms no part of any treaty, understanding, or combination to which England Is now a party, nor will she become a party to anything that has such an object." Count Wolff-Metternich thought this formula Inadequate and suggested suggest-ed two alternative additional clauses: "England will therefore observe at least benevolent neutrality should war be forced upon England," or "England will therefore, as a matter of course, remain neutral if war is forced upon Germany." This, he added, would not be binding bind-ing unless our wishes were met with regard to the naval program. Sir Edward Grey considered that the British proposals were sufficient. He explnlned that If Germany desired to crush France, England might not be able to sit still, though if France were aggressive or attacked Germany, no support would be given by his majesty's majes-ty's government or approved by England. Eng-land. Sees Bad Faith. It is obvious that the real object of tho German proposal was to obtain the neutrality of England In all eventualities, since should war break out, Germany would certainly contend that it had been forced uppn her and would claim that England should remain re-main neutral. An udmlrable example of this is the present war, in which, in spite of the facts, Germany contends war has been forced upon her. Even the third member of the triple alliance, who had sources of information not open to us, did not share this view, but regarded It as an aggressive war. Sir Edward Grey eventually pro- posed the following formula: "The two powers being mutually desirous of securing peace and friendship friend-ship between them, England declares that she will neither mak6 nor join in any unprovoked attack on Germany. Ger-many. Aggression upon Germany forms no part of any treaty, understanding under-standing or combination to which England now s a party, nor will she become a party to anything that has such an object." Sir Edward Grey, when he handed this formula to Count Wolff-Metternich, said that the use of the word neutrality would convey the Impression Impres-sion that more was meant than was warranted by the text. He suggested that the substance of what was required re-quired would be obtained from the more accurately expressed words, "Will neither make nor join in any unprovoked attack." Chancellor Insists. Count Wolff-Metternich thereupon received instructions to make it quite, clear that the chancellor could recommend recom-mend to the emperor to give up the essential parts of the novelle (the bill then pending for an increase of the German navy) only if we could conclude con-clude an agreement guaranteeing neutrality neu-trality of a far-reaching character and leaving no doubt as to any interpretation. interpre-tation. He admitted that the chancellor's chancel-lor's wish "amounted to a guarantee of absolute neutrality, falling which the novelle must proceed. Count Wolff-Metternich stated that there was no chance of withdrawing the novelle, but said that it might be modified It would be disappointing to the chancellor if we did not go beyond the formula we had suggested. Sir Edward Grey said that he could understand that there would be disappointment disap-pointment if his majesty's government govern-ment were to state that the carrying out of the novelle would put an end to the negotiations and form an insurmountable in-surmountable obstacle to better relations rela-tions His majesty's government did not say this and they hoped that the formula which they had suggested might be considered in connection with the discussion of territorial arrangements, ar-rangements, even if it did not prove effective in preventing an increase in the naval expenditures. Sir Edward Grey added that if some arrangement could be made between be-tween the two governments it would have a favorable, though indirect effect ef-fect upon naval expenditures; as time wont on, It would have, moreover, a favorable direct effect on the public opinion of both countries. A few days afterward Count Wolff-Metternich Wolff-Metternich communicated to Sir Edward Ed-ward Grey the 'substance of! a letter from the chancellor, in which the latter said that as tho formula suggested sug-gested by his majesty's government was, from the German point of view, insufficient, and as his majesty's government gov-ernment could not agree to the larger formula for which ho had asked, the novelle must proceed on the lines on which it had been presented to tho federal council. The negotiations then came to an end and with them the hope of a mutual reduction in the expenditure for armaments by the two countries. MISLEADING IS GERMAN STORY According to the British Foreign For-eign Office Which Issues a Statement London, Aug. 31. The British foreign for-eign offlco tonight Issued a lengthy statement concerning tho negotiations between Great Britain and Gormany In 1912, compiled from the official records in the foreign office. The statement follows: An account of tho 1912 Anglo-German negotiations was published in the BomJwof'ficial Norddeutsche Allge-meine Allge-meine Zoltung last month. This account ac-count was misleading and no doubt was intended to mislead. It mado it appear that tho British government had at that time rejected what would be regarded In many quarters as a reasonable offer of friendship from Gormany. In these circumstances It may be as well to publish a statement state-ment of facts compiled from the official of-ficial records here. Early In 1912 the German chancellor chancel-lor sketched to Lord Haldane (the British lord high chancellor) the following fol-lowing formula as one which would moot the views of the imperial government: gov-ernment: First: The high contracting parties assure each other mutually of their desire.for peaco and friendship, Second: They will not, either of them, mako or prepare to make, any unproVokcd attack upon the other or join in any combination or design against tho other for the purposes of aggression, or become a party to any plan of naval or military enterprise, alone or In combination with any other power, directed to such an end, and declare themselves not to be bound by any such engagement Benevolent Neutrality. Third- If either of the high contracting con-tracting parties becomes entangled in war with one or more powers, in I which It cannot bo said to be the ag- I gressor. the other party will at least 1 observe toward the power so entan f gled benevolent neutrality, and will I use its utmost endeavor for the lo- ' nall7ntlnn nf tho rnnfllot Tf oltVim- i of the high contracting parties is forced to go to war by obvious provocation provo-cation by a third party, thoy bind themselves to enter into an exchange of views concernIng their attitude on such a conflict Fourth: The making of now agreements agree-ments which render It Impossible for either of the parties to observe neutrality neu-trality toward the other beyond what s provided by the preceding limitation limita-tion is excluded In conformity with the provisions of article 2. Sixth: The high contracting parties declare they will do all In their power to prevent differences and misunderstandings misunder-standings arising between them and other powers. These conditions, although In aD-pearance aD-pearance fair, as between the parties would have been grossly unfair and one-sided In their operation. Owing to the general position of the Euro-ncan Euro-ncan powers and treaty engagements by which they were bound, the result of articles 4 and 5 would have been that while Germany, In case of a European conflict, would have remained re-mained free to support her friends, this country would have been forbidden forbid-den to raise a finger in defense of hers. Germany could arrange without difficulty dif-ficulty that the formal inception of hostilities should rest with Austria. If Austria and Russia were at war Germany would support Austria, as is evident from what occurred at the end of July, 1914, while as soon as Russia was attacked by two powers, France was bound to come to her assistance. In other words, the pledge of neutrality offered by Ger-niany Ger-niany would have been absolutely valueless val-ueless because she could always plead tho necessity of fulfilling her existing obligations under the triple alliance as an excuse for departing from neutrality. neu-trality. (Continued on Pago 7) nn |