The Washington times., 1915-10-13

DE COf1DHTtu, IOT III tHt HTst
the question resolves itself about the
threatening french advance through
Belgium against the existence OF the
German empire.
Military Opportunity.
"Thc landing OF entente troops at
Salonika was not founded on any such
distressing emergency. 1t was based en-
tireiy upon the ground Of political and
military opportunity.
"As we were forced to enter belgium.
W. repeated to the Belgian government
most liberal offers to spare that coun-
try from wars horrors lncited by
England and fettered to England by
secre. military conventions. tie Bel
gian government plunged tn. country
into war
at has not been announced whether
the entente powers Eiade similnr guar
hntees for the security OF 'ireece. which
Germany made to- Belgium. II rppcars.
how, vei that such IL not the case. In
stead. Eng land and France violated
Greek neutrality in the most brutal
ma met. Therefore. this explains the ar
ticlrs in the French and English news
papers which threatened that II new
Greek government would ne formed al
ter the resignation OF Premier Neni-
zelos. with violence on land. II the
wishes Of the entente were not piiantly
accepted.
Also. Bulgaria has now Just learned
how England pretends to confer free
dom upon little states.
Sacrifice Its Honor.
I'm England's press. there appears.
IN true British manner OF thinking. the
viewpoint that because English inter-
csts required Belgian resistance to the
German invasion. the whole world was
made indignant over Germany's act.
In the case OF Greece, the world is ST.
lent. bvcause English interests are
served by silence. In Belgium's case.
that country was asked to offer the
country's honor for English opinion
and for Engiand's interest. Now Greece
must sacrifice its honor because II cor
responds with England's interest to do
SO.
Above all 1t Is interesting to note
how the viewpoint OF England's states
men and English public opinion have
changed over Belgian neutrality. ]
| read recently a Dispatch from former
Ambassador Hatfield. at London, dated
February I. 1885,. The ambassador re-
ported that an anonymous letter was
printed In the Standard In which II was
pointed out that although England had
! taken over the guarantee OF Belgian
| neutrality. yet circumstances had
| changed and II lay to the interests of
English politicians to grant Germany.
II necessary the right to pass throug n
Belgium provided Germany did not
touch Belgian integrity after the war.
Example of England.
THE Standard. then known as a
conservative party organ. shared this
| viewpoint In leading editorial. The
Pail Mall Gazette. on the same day.
designated the Standards assertion as
! an invitation to Germany. in case of
military necessity. not 70 regard Bel
gian neutrality. that for England. above
all. there existed no obligation to In
tercedc for Belgian neutrality.
AS you see by It's example, as now
| clearly demonstrated by England's pro-
| cedure in Greece. the whole English
storm OF Indignation at the German
violation of Belgian neutrality. is moth
| Inc more than what Is called In Eng
| lIsh cant an expression for which there
| is no possible translation. think
| Schwindel' comes nearest"