573
As we all know there existed, and must always exist, an only too natural trade-jealousy between the two leading traders of the world-England and Germany- but that surely would not cause any English Govern- ment, least of all a Liberal Cabinet (mainly composed of confirmed pacifists), to force a Continental War. That is however what X.... means.
That England, in face of a Continent armed to the teeth, should properly prepare herself is of course quite another matter, but even this had been neglected as to military preparations. And can X.... wonder that England has entered into "ententes" to counter-balance Germany's alliances and her growing naval and military strength?
Why, the Liberal Cabinet even initiated discussions with Germany as to a mutual stoppage of armaments. Foredoomed to failure, if not Utopian, as these ideas were, they showed at least honest intent and a strong desire for peace.
Above all, England required peace to settle her serious domestic (and imperial) problems which, as you are aware, require solution at the present time. As one of our historians has said "It is here (for England to shape out these problems) that Germany's will to power comes into tragic conflict with England's will to peace."
Moreover, had England been as selfish as X.... depicts her to be, she would not have joined in the war because that would have paid her a great deal better.
The German White Book, published in August last, is entitled: "How Russia and her Ruler betrayed Germany's confidence and thereby caused the European War." Not a word against England in the whole Book. Russia was said to be "exclusively responsible." And yet, England is now said to be the responsible party!
Furthermore, the "Times" on August 12th publish- ed a letter which, as this paper stated, bears the name of a personage holding a prominent position
14
in Germany and being in a close personal relationship to the German Emperor. That German letter which was dated the 2nd of August concluded:
"It must be stated again: Russia alone forces the war upon Europe. Russia alone must carry the full weight of responsibility."
No doubt, we shall hear later the name of that im- portant personage. Of course, until the authenticity of this letter is proved, I do not consider it as evidence.
In my letter to Shanghai of the 14th December I wrote that England could perhaps have prevented Germany's declaration of war against Russia and France had she been more bellicose. Since then, Germany has stated one of her main reasons for holding England responsible for the war to be that England "did not declare at once that she would stand by France and Russia," because that would have prevented the war.
Possible as that might have been, how can any- body be held responsible for hesitating to make such a momentous declaration! Is not this hesitation a further proof of England's pacific intentions?
To adhere to these became, however, quite im- possible-even for a Liberal Government-after Ger- many's decision to march through Belgium, to attack France on that frontier.
And, if Germany at the time attached so much importance to England's neutrality and friendship, why did she not desist from marching through Belgium and accept England's ultimatum? This would have made it quite impossible for England to join in the war! No doubt, Germany had an alternative plan of campaign in regard to France quite ready.
That would of course have been a bitter pill for Germany. However, if she refused the medicine, she surely has no right to now blame the doctor, let alone to curse him!
Germany argues that certain documents which were found in Brussels disclosed that England herself
15
NOTE. The re-printing of these pages gives me the opportunity to add that the authenticity of the letter referred to above has since been proved. Its writer is Herr A. Ballin of the H. A. Line.
H. S.
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.