The Sentinel=record., 1915-01-27
REPLIES TO INTERVIEW GIVEN OUT BY THE GERMAN IMPE.
 RIAL CHANCELLOR.
HAS RESPECT FOR TREATIES
Declares That the German Chancellor in Former Stat ment Referred to the Belgium Neutrality Treaty as a Scrap Of Paper

london, Jan 26.-6:30 D. m.-sir Edward Grey the British secretary of
 state for foreign affairs, today all lhorIzed the following statement i9
 reply 10 an interview with Dr. Won
 BethmanuIollweg, the German inn
 rer.al chancellor. obtained by a rep.
 reseutative of the Associated Press
 and published in London January % and in the United States January 25: Tt Is not surprising that the Ger
 man chancellor should show anxiety
 to explain away his now historic
 Phrase about a treaty being d mere
 scrap of paper
 The phrase has made a deep im- l pressicn because the rrogress of the
 world largely depends upon the sane 1 tity of agreements begWeel individ- uaIs and between nations. and the
 policy disclosed in Herr Von Beth mann-Hollwee's phrase tends to de-
 base the legal and moral currency ot civilization.
 "Nhat the German chancellor sail
 was that Great Britain. in requiring 1 Germany to respect the neutrality of
 Belgium was going 10 make war just for word. just for a scrap of rapar, ! that is that Great Britain was maa. ing mountain cut ol a mole hin. He now asks the Ame.ican public to he- lieve that he mean. uhe exact oppo site of what he said; that it was 1 Great Britain who really regarded the neutrality of Belgium as a mere trifle and that it was Germany who took her responsibilities toward the neutral states so seriously
 "The arguments by which Herr Von 1 BethmaaaIIollWeg seeks to establish the two sides of this case are in fat contradiction to the plain facts
 First the German chancellor al- leees that England in 1911 was de- termined to throw troops into Bel eium without the assent the Belgian goycrnmeut This allegation is absa- lutely false It is based uroa certain documents found in Brussels Whicn record conversations between British and Belgian officers in 190G and agaIl in lgl1
 "Tle fact that there is no note of these conversations in the British war office or the foreign office snow that they were Of a purely informal character and that no military agree ment Of any sort was made at either time between the two governments. Before any conversations took place between the British and Belgian ofti- cers it was expressly laid down on the British side that discussion of the military possibilities was To be ad- dressed to the manner which, in case of need British assistance could be most effectually afforded 10 Bel eium for the defense of her neutrality and on the Belgian side a maIoi lal note upon the record explains that the entry of the English into Belgium would only take place after the viola tiou of our CBelgian) 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 i'm 1918 Sir Edward Grey gave the Belgian government a catesorical as. surance that no British government would violate the neutrality of Bel gium. and that so long as it was not violated by any other power we should certainly not send troops our selves into their territory
 "Tbe chancellor's method of mis. using documents may be Illustrated in this connection He reports Sir Ed ward Grey as saying, he did not be- Iueye England would take such a step because he did not think English pub- lie opinion would justify such action,
 "What Sir Edward Grey actually said was I said that | was certain that this government would not he the first to violate the neutrality Of Belgium and | did not believe that any British government would be the 1 first 10 do SO, nor would public opin- ion cause it.
 "The German chancellor wishes to know why there was conversations on
 military subjects between British and Belgian officers He may find one
 reason in a fact well known to him, namely. that Germany was establish. l ing an elaborate network of straIeIi-