New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1915-08-26
Answer to the Reichstag
Speech Marks Change
in British Policy.
NO IGNOBLE PEACE,
PUBLIC ASSURED
British Foreign Secretary Denies
All Charges Made by DR..
Won Bethmann-Hollweg
IBy Cable 10 The Thbune.l

| [By Cable to The Thbune.l
London, Aug. 25.-Sir Edward Grey.
British Foreign Secretary. tonight
! issued a reply to the speech delivered
! in the Reichstag last week by pr. Won
Bethmann- Hollweg. German Chancellor.
Sir Edwards reply. which is official
in behalf of the Foreign Office. marks
a change In the official British attitude
toward anything said by Germany
Previously it has not troubled to re-
flute German niisstatements. but hence
forth it has apparently decided to nail
.hc enemys lies and counter as soon as
possible before they have any oppor-
tunity of obtaining credence.
Perhaps the reason for this change
is that the government has been con-
WINGED by the American newspapers of
the value of publicity. That this state
ment will not be an isolated one is
shown by the promise to make public
the Anglo German negotiations OF 1872.
which will appear before the end Of the
present week.
The last paragraph OF Sir Edwards
reply, indicating that the Allies will
fight until Germany is crushed. un-
doubtedly serves two purposes. 1t re-
iterates Asauith's original Guildhall
declaration; also. it stops the mouths OF
section of the public who recently
limited their uneasiness regarding the
! possibility Of the government acceding
| to an incomplete and unsatisfactory
/ peace.
Sir Edward deals at length with the
charge that Belgium had trafficked her
neutrality with Great Britain and the
Allies.
Asks for Publicity.
There are some points in the speech
the German Chancellor made last
week." he says, (which may, | think, be
suitably dealt with in letter 70 the
press pending a fuller review Of the
situation, which may be appropriate in
! some other method and at some other
! time.
~ will state the facts and reflections
they suggest as briefly and clearly as
! I can, and | ask YOU to be good enough
| to make them public.
Zone Belgian record, a conversation
with the British military attache, was
published by Germany last autumn to
prove that Belgium had trafficked her
neutrality with US, and was in effect,
| in plot with US against Germany.
The conversation, of which the most
use has been made, never was reported
to the Foreign Offi:e nor, as far as the
records show, TO the War Office at the
time and We saw a record OF 1t the
| first time when Germany published the
Belgian record.
"But it bears on the face of it that
it referred only to the contingency of
! Belgium being attacked, that the en-
I t-y of the British into Belgium would
take place only after violation of
Belgian territory by Germany, and
that it did not commit the British gov
erlment. No convention n agree
ment existed between the British and
Belgian governments.
Wanted Neutrality Respected.
"Why does the German Chancellor
mention these informal conversations
| of 1906 and ignore entirely that Of
| April, 1918? / told the Belgia' Minis
ter most emphatically that what we
desired in the case Of Belgium, as with
other neutral countries, was that their
neutrality should be respected, and
that so long as it was not violated by
any other power we should certainly
not send troops ourselves into their
territory.
LET it be remembered that the first
use made by Germany of the Belgian
document was to charge Belgium with
bad faith to Germany. What is the
true story? On July 90, 1914, the
German Chancellor tried to bride us
| by a promise of future Belgian indie
pandence to become party to the vio-
lation Of Belgian neutrality by Ger
many. On the outbreak OF the war
! he described the Belgian treaty as a
/ scrap of paper, and the German For
! eign Secretary explained that Ger
many must go through Belgium to at
tack France, because she could not take
the time to do otherwise. The state
ment of Herr Won Jagow is worth quot
ing again:
"'The imperial government had TO
/ advance into France BY the quickest
/ and easiest way, so as to be able TO get
/ well ahead with the operations and en-
/ deavor to strike some decisive blow as
/ early as possible. 1t was a matter of
/ life and death with them, as, if they
: had gone by the more southern route,
/ they could not have hoped, in view of
the paucity of roads and the strength
: of the fortresses, to have got through
without formidable opposition, entail
! irg great loss of time. This loss of
/ time would have meant time gained by
/ the Russians for bringing up their
troops to the German frontier. Rapid
ity of action was the great German as
set, while that of Russia was an mex
haustible supply Of troops
Promise to Right Wrong.
an the Reichstag, too, on August 4,
1914, the German Chancellor stated in
referring 10 the violation OF the neu-
trality OF Belgium and Luxembourg:
1.-The wrong, | speak openly, the
wrong we thereby commit we will try
to make good as soon as our military
aims have been attained
THE violation of Belgian neutrality,
therefore, was deliberate, although Ger
many had actually guaranteed that
neutrality, and surely there has been
nothing mere despicably mean than to
attempt to justify it ex-post fscto by
bringing against the innocent, inotfen-
sive Belgian government and people the
totally false charge Of having plotted
against Germany.
THE German Chancellor does not
emphasize in his latest speech that
charge, which has been spread broad
cast against Belgium. Is it with
drawn, and, il so, will Germany make
repsration for the cruel wrong done
to Belgium?
1.-THE two negotiations for an Anglo
German agreement in 1912, referred to
by the German Chancellor, were
brought to a point at which it was
clear they could have no success un-
less we, in effect, gave a promise Of
ahsnlute Mentality while Germany re.