Albuquerque morning journal. [volume] (Albuquerque, N.M.) 1903-1926, 1915-01-27
OiSSectS Interview of Dr. Won
Bethmann-HoIIweg Given to
Representative Of the ASSo-
Ciated Press,
GIVES BRITISH VERSION
OF BELGIAN AGREEMENT
Disputes Statements
Regarding What Kaiser S
Chancellor Meant by Merely
a Scrap of Paper,

isY soHnsa ioURHsL srsciAl lfAsIo wtHst
London, Jan. 26 (dt30 y. m.1--Sir
Edward Grey, the British secretary OF
state for foreign affairs, today author
lied the following statement in reply
10 an interview with Dr. Won Beth
ll0llweg. the German imperial
chancellor, obtained by representa-
tive of the Associated Press and pub
lished in London January iG and In
the United States January 25
Tho secretary OF state for foreign
affairs authorizes the publication OF
the following observations upon the
report of an Interview recently grant
ed by the German chancellor to an
American correspondent
1T is not surprising that the Ger
man chancellor should show anxiety
to explain away his now historic
phrase about a treaty being a mere
scrap Of paper
THE phrase has made deep i'm
preston because the progress Of the
world largely depends upon the sane
tity of agreements between individ-
uals and between nations and the poll
Icy disclosed In Herr Won Bethmann-
Hollwegs phrase tends to debase the
legal and moral currency of the
world
Attempts 10 Change Meaning.
What the German chancellor said
was that Great Britain In requiring
Germany to respect the neutrality of
Belgium was going 10 make war just
for word, Just for a scrap of paper
that Is, that Great Britain was
making "a mountain out OF a mole hill
He now asks the American public TO
| believe that he meant the exaet OPP
posite of what he said. that II was
Great Britain who really regarded tho
! neutrality of Belgium as mere tri-
file and that il was Germany who
took her responsibility towards the
neutral states 80 seriously.
The arguments by which Herr Won
Bethmann- flollweg seeks TO establish
the two sides of this case are in flat
contradiction Of the plain facts.
First, the German chancellor al
leges that England IN 1911, was de-
termined to throw troops into Belgium
without the consent of the Belgian
government. This allegation Is abso-
lutely false It is based upon certain
documents found in Brussels which
record conversations between British
ana Belgian officers in 1906 and again
in 1911
No Military Argument.
THE fact that there is no note of
offirc or ia foreign offIeo si,o,,s M
they were Of a purely informal char
acter and that no military mgreement
of any sort was at either time made
between the Two governments Before
any conversations took place between
the British and the belgian officers,
II was expressly laid down ON the
British side that discussion Of the mil
itary possibilities was To be addressed
to The manner in which, in case of
need British assistance could be most
effectually afforded to Belgium for
the defense Of her neutrality and on
the Belgian side a marginal note upon
the record explains that entry of the
English INTO Belgium would only take
place after the violation Of our (Bel-
glan) neutrality by Germany.
AS regards the conversation of
1911 the Belgian officer said TO the
British officer. You could only land
in our country with our consent. and
in 1913, Sir Edward Grey give the
Belgium government "A categorical as
AtllUnGN ll1Hi no hIlllNtt government
would violate the neutrality of Bel |
GUM and that so long as IL was not
violated By any other power we would |
certainly not send troops ourselves
into their territory
cbnrocs uisstatcmcn,
..,r,. I,1.''.,,,,.,,.. -,
~ +" IL, " ini,
,is,S i'i%s ~ Wv a,ou ~, ~
~, =, y, ~ lvp' 15o",s ~
49, i''t ''''" G'rS " a'Si,s ~ nv
peiiote N,,s anu Wpu,u NM 1ren
step peeauso ~ Wy ~, 'l,ns ms ~
pup'io oplh'oH Nou'" justly e"ui' ""-
''o .o,,,Aa, e,. r,., g., 4..a,,,.
'iat 81 i,u"ol - uui'g
wlu'o Was' saIu .h,l Wna sutp
,hu' tniS s"Nri niiiou. Win ~, ~.
t t, iiist W 'ipiaIV '"e "sp niio ',''S
nVlsi ,,l,. anu u'u ny pv,i1Ft 10
Sny pi',,s' eoye,ni,io,t Wv ,,hI W. t