The Washington times., 1915-07-21
MORE "PERFIDy" DISCLOSED

been absorbing 'C1vtcS."
MORE "PERFIDY" DISCLOSED
German efforts to force. upon
somebody else the responsibility of
the war, and to justify the national
feeling in Germany that England is
the archconspirator, seem slways to
result unfortunately for the German
case. Berlin diplomacy; persists in
the program, whenever it opens its
mouth, of putting It's foot in.
A German newspaper; published an
account Of negotiations, in 1912, be-
tween Berlin and London, looking to
q general understanding in the in
terest Of peace. The text Of various
proposals made from both sides is
given. Germany wanted 1t agreed
that SHOULD one Of the contracting
parties become engaged in war with
one or more powers. >then the other
contracting party shall adopt at
least an attitude of benevolent neu-
trality and exert every effort to
localize the conflict" =
To this England would not agree,
and proposed: England shall make
no unprovoked sttack on Germany
and shall refrain from aggressive
policy with regard to Germany. An
attack on Germany is the basis Of no
treaty, nor is such object aimed at
in any combination to which Eng
land belongs, and England will not
be party to any arrangement which
aims ut such an attack"
This was just as unsatisfactory to
Germany; and these two proposals
suggest the essence of differences
throughout. Germany, then getting
ready for the present war, but desir-
ing to make sure that England would
not be among her opponents, wanted
to bind England not to join France,
Russia, and Belgium. It was, in
short, an effort to pledge England
not to resent the very thing that
Germany a year ago did do. Eng
land was willing to agree not to be
a party to attacking Germany; she
would not pledge herself to with
draw from the triple entente, and
that was precisely what Germany
was trying to get her to do. The
triple entente did not contemplate
forcing war on Germany. Germany
did contemplate forcing war on the
dual alliance; she wanted to break
up the entente before starting it..
England would not make such an en-
gagement, and frankly said that she
could not 60 further with the nego-
tiations for fear Of endangering her
relations with other powers. That
ought to have been enough to con-
vince Germany that the triple en-
tente meant business; that it was
strong enough to hold together in
case Germany made an unprovoked
attack. Germany made the mistake
of assuming that England would not
stick by her engagements when it
came to the scratch.
The language of the diplomats
does not mean much, in a case like
this; but that language, taken to-
gether with the circumstances and
the developments since that discus
tsion, does plainly point to the fact
that Germany sought to detach Eng
land from the list of possible op-
ponents when Germany should get
ready to strike. She was nearly
ready. It was important to make
sure England would be neutral. The
pledge was put in such form that it
could have been held by Berlin to
bar England from interfering if
Belgium were violated. It was in
tended to@old England neutral while
Germany violated her treaties re-
garding Belgium, and her pacts with
other countries; England declined to
fall into the trap.
Germapy's effort to prove England
the war-maker really adds to the
proof that Germany was the con-
spirator against the peace of Eu-
rope, and wanted to be sure of keep
ing England off the Continent. Once
master of the Continent-well, then,
the treaty with England would, of
course, become the same sort of
scrap Of paper that the Belgian con-
vention became the moment it was
necessary to tear it up.
Scientist says we all become a