Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1911-02-05


and interests. The London Times recent
", commenting upon the Dutch defense
BILL" declared that it would seem cni-
nently lit that there should be an eN-
change of friendly and full explanations
as recently proposed by Baron Won Beth
in his speech in the reich
stag OF December 10.
!, Z.
The French press maintains generally
that France. one OF the powers 10 guar
antec the neutrality OF Be-
Hollands GUM. cannot remain indif-
n... ferent 10 n project like ths
1VSAIloI. Dutch defense bill. Tho
Echo de Paris in particular points ont
that Holland has. by the project. placed
herself in peculiar position. Holland
has subscribed to article OF the treaty "r
April, 1899 recognizing the perpetual nett
trality of Belgium. and now proclaims her
intention Of terrifying the mouth of tho
Scheldt. which commands the route to
Antwerp.
The independent radical organ. the Pc
lite Rcpublique. denies that Franco Is
harboring schemes against Holland. On
the other hand. the French government
had the right to examine tie question
raised by Belgian public opinion on tho
ground of a treaty signed by France
The Journal des Debats of January 20
draws attention to the fact that Holland
has recognized the right of the signatorN
powers. When Holland interprets the
law written In the treaty TO mean that
her sovereign rights are not diminished
by any stipulation, and that she was free
to construct Notifications at any point
in her territory. Belgian opinion contends
that the Flushing fortiications could
nj
Scheidt in the event of AN international
conflict and 10 prevent any of tie guar
anteeing powers from Transporting to
Antwerp the force which would be neces-
sary in order to preserve the neutrality
of Belgium. The powers which have
guaranteed the neutrality of Belgium AMI
the freedom of the Scheldt do not con-
slider themselves competent 10 dispute
Hollands right to repair old Notifications
at Flushing. or to construct new forts al
the mouth OF the Scheidt On The other
hand they are justified in asking them
selves whether the exercise by other
people of their rights does not infringe
their own rights. and whether they ought
not to take precautions against any sur
prises in the event of an appeal TO them
by the state whose neutrality they have
guaranteed.
The London Times. commenting upon
the Dutch defense bill, writes that Ger
many says in SO many words that she
will not lend hand To a curtailment Of
the sovereign rights of the Netherlands
such deduced from NJ. Pichons words
This lends to the German 'communique'
a character of ill-disguised malevolenca
and even of menace, for II imputes to
the French minister the desire 10 forbid
a country whose international status Is
subject TO no restrictive conditions or
neutrality to take such measures OF de-
Tense as seem 10 IT appropriate on It's
own soil"
Germany is now celebrating the fortieth
anniversary of the creation of the new
German empire. She boasts
GermanyS that notwithstanding her
MILL: immense military resources
oiItAudy. she has not broken the
peace Of Europe. But the Times remarks
in that interest the preservation of the
peace has been due more to the forbear-
ance of others while the relentless
growth Of her ornaments and i,nperious
methods of her diplomacy have proved
of late years entirely disturbing eie-
ments of embarrassing menace"
The status of belgium neutral state
is defined by three treaties concluded AZ
London April ~, 1880 In the first the
contracting parties were >..eat Britain.
Austria, France, Prussia and Rus
lands on the other. Article constitutes
Belgium neutral and Independent state
perpetually under the auspices of Great
Britain. Austria, France. Prussia and
Russia. In the second a treaty was con-
cluded between Belgium and the Neither
lands providing for the separation OF the
two countries.
In the two treaties the independence
and neutrality OF BELGIUM were recoe-
niEed by the five powers and by the
that this status was qua. anteed. To this
treaty the Netherlands was not a party
1t was concluded between the five powe:
on the one hand and Belgium on the
other.
The Independence Beige OF the 2isi
ultimo attaches great interest TO The
Times leader of the Goth. which declared
that when parliament met Sir Edwa!
Grey would make declaration similar
to that Of NJ. Pichon. for the purpose OF
bring nS the Flushing question into the
domain of International discussion and
without offense to Holland.
In the committee of the states general
at The Hague the oGth uItimo seve.al
members expressed the opinion that CIV
eminent was deserving of praise for tax
ing up the question of coast defense. It
the same time they admitted II woui'i
have been better To have applied tha
funds 10 the completion of the fcrtitica-
lions at Amsterdam and the Improvement
Of the lines of defense by atfofdins
greater facilities for flooding the coun-
try. Members also urged that govern
ment should be requested TO Join with
Germany in making representations 10
Great Britain with view TO obtaining
an indemnity for their respective nation
ais as employees of the South African
Netherlands railway.
The Temps of Paris. commenting upon
the affair at Flushing, points out that
the proposal to fortify is not warranted
by any political reason save that of
creating means OF defense against an
attack by Great Britain. from whom Hol-
land has nothing to fear. if she QIolland)
in the event of European war is not
bound to Germany.
The Temps resumes the situation round
~. thus:
1T must be clearly understood that If
Holland takes advantage of the di-
vergence of views among the great pow
ers to fortify Flushing she will thereby
notify in the plainest possible manner all
whom it may concern that she has joined
the triple alliance"
Gil. CHAIL.LE-LONG.