with Germany, Grey gave to the representatives of the people news of
certain agreements which made it a duty for Great Britain to work
together with France in any European crisis.

The fateful document, which in the form of an apparently private letter
to the French Ambassador, dealt with one of the most important compacts
of modern history, was written toward the end of the year 1912, and is
published in the British "White Paper" No. 105, Annex 1:

     London Foreign Office, Nov. 22, 1912.

     My Dear Ambassador:

     From time to time in recent years the French and British naval and
     military experts have consulted together. It has always been
     understood that such consultation does not restrict the freedom of
     either Government to decide at any future time whether or not to
     assist the other by armed force. We have agreed that consultation
     between experts is not, and ought not to be, regarded as an
     engagement that commits either Government to action in a
     contingency that has not arisen and may never arise. The
     disposition, for instance, of the French and British fleets
     respectively at the present moment is not based upon an engagement
     to co-operate in war.

     You have, however, pointed out that, if either Government had grave
     reason to expect an unprovoked attack by a third power, it might
     become essential to know whether it could in that event depend upon
     the armed assistance of the other.

     I agree that, if either Government had grave reason to expect an
     unprovoked attack by a third power, or something that threatened
     the general peace, it should immediately discuss with the other
     whether both Governments should act together to prevent aggression
     and to preserve peace, and, if so, what measures they would be
     prepared to take in common. If these measures involved action, the
     plans of the General Staffs would at once be taken into
     consideration, and the Governments would then decide what effect
     should be given to them.

     Yours, &c.,

     E. GREY.

Was Parliament Deceived?

A few members of the English Parliament who on Aug. 3 dared to gingerly
protest against the war may have had reason to complain about the hiding
of facts from the House of Commons. When such understandings can be made
without any one having an idea of their existence, then--so far as
England is concerned--the supervision of the Government, theoretically
being exercised by a Parliament, becomes a fiction.

Veiled Defensive Alliance.

As a matter of fact, Grey does not desire to have accepted as political
obligations the conversations of the French and English Army and Navy
General Staffs concerning the future plans of campaign which took place
from time to time in times of peace. However, the true tendency of this
agreement, for such it is, gives itself away in the promise to
immediately enter with France into a political and military exchange of
opinions in every critical situation; it means in realty nothing less
than a veiled defensive alliance which by clever diplomatic
manipulations can be changed without any difficulty to an offensive one,
for inasmuch as the English Government promises to consult and work
together with France, and consequently also with its ally, Russia, in
every crisis, before a serious investigation of the moments of danger,
it waives all right of taking an independent position.

How would England ever have been able to enter a war against France
without throwing upon itself the accusation of faithlessness against one
with whose plans for war it had become acquainted through negotiations
lasting through years?

Here a deviation may be permissible, which leaves for a moment the basis
of documentary proof.

If one considers how this agreement of such immeasurable
consequences was not only hidden from the British Parliament by the
Cabinet, but how to the very edge of conscious deceit its existence was
denied--in the year 1913 Premier Asquith answered a query of a member of
the House of Commons that there were no unpublished agreements in
existence which in a case of war between European powers would interfere
with or limit free decision on the part of the British Government or
Parliament as to whether or not Britain should take part at a war--then
certain reports making their appearance with great persistency in June,
1914, concerning an Anglo-Russian naval agreement are seen in a
different light.

Persons who were acquainted with the happenings in diplomacy then stated
that the Russian Ambassador in Paris, M. Iswolski, during the visit
which the King of England and Sir Edward Grey were paying to Paris, had
succeeded in winning the English statesmen for the plan of such an
agreement. A formal alliance, it was said, was not being demanded by
Russia immediately, for good reasons. M. Iswolski was attempting to go
nearer to his goal, carefully, step by step.

It had been preliminarily agreed that negotiations should be started
between the British Admiralty and the Russian Naval Attaché in London,
Capt. Wolkow. As a matter of fact Wolkow during June went to St.
Petersburg for a few days to, as was assumed, obtain instructions and
then return to London.

Grey's "Twisty" Answer.

These happenings aroused so much attention in England that questions
were raised in Parliament concerning them. It was noted how twisty
Grey's answer was. He referred to the answer of the Premier, already
mentioned, stated that the situation is unchanged, and said then that no
negotiations were under way concerning a naval agreement with any
foreign nation. "As far as he was able to judge the matter," no such
negotiations would be entered into later on.

The big Liberal newspaper, The Manchester Guardian, was not at all
satisfied with this explanation; it assumed that certain conditional
preliminary agreements might not be excluded.

This Russian plan, which was later worked out in St. Petersburg, went
into oblivion on account of the rapidly following European war. In the
light of the following revelation of Grey's agreement with France, the
news of the naval agreement desired by Iswolski assumed another aspect.

Let us return to the Anglo-French agreement. The following remarks by
the French Ambassador in London, reported by Grey, prove that, on the
ground of this agreement, France, with very little trouble, would be
able to make out of a diplomatic entanglement a case for Allies'
interest as far as England is concerned.

A German "Attack."

He [Cambon] anticipated that the [German] aggression would take the form
of either a demand to cease her preparations or a demand that she should
engage to remain neutral if there was war between Germany and Russia.
Neither of these things would France admit.--(British "White Paper" No.
105.)

Therefore, even the demand addressed to France not to, jointly with
Russia, attack Germany became a German "attack," which obliged England
to come to the aid!

In spite of this, even on July 27 in a conversation with Cambon, Grey
gave himself the appearance as if his hands were free. He told the
Frenchman:

     If Germany became involved and France became involved we had not
     made up our minds what we should do; it was a case that we should
     have to consider.... We were free from engagements and we should
     have to decide what British interests required us to do.--(British
     "White Paper" No. 87.)

M. Cambon remarked in reply that the Secretary of State had clearly
pictured the situation, but on the very following day the French
Ambassador took the liberty to remind Grey of the letter written in
1912. (British "White Paper" No. 105.)

Grey did not deny the claim implied in this reminder, but even as late
as July 31 he reports as follows concerning the conversation with
Cambon:

     Up to the present moment we did not feel and public opinion
     did not feel that any treaties or obligations of this country were
     involved.... M. Cambon repeated his question whether we would help
     France if Germany made an attack on her. I said I could only adhere
     to the answer that, as far as things had gone at present, we could
     not take any engagement.... I said that the Cabinet would certainly
     be summoned as soon as there was some new development; that at the
     present moment the only answer I could give was that we could not
     undertake any definite engagement.--(British "White Paper" No.
     119.)

Now, if we remember that even on the day before Grey had informed the
German Imperial Chancellor that it would be a shame for England to
remain neutral and allow France to be crushed, we here find a new proof
of the unreliability of his conduct. If he has been gullible, the
declaration of 1912, the dangerous character of which is increased by
its apparently undefined tenor, has enmeshed him more and more. Also the
military and naval circles, whose consultations with the representatives
of the French Army and Navy certainly have been continued diligently
since the beginning of the Servian crisis, were forcing toward a
decision.

At all events, it became more impossible with every hour for Germany to
keep England out of the way by any offers whatsoever. This is proved by
Grey's conversation of Aug. 1 with the German Ambassador:

     He asked me whether if Germany gave a promise not to violate
     Belgian neutrality we would engage to remain neutral. I replied
     that I could not say that; our hands were still free, and we were
     considering what our attitude should be.... The Ambassador pressed
     me as to whether I could not formulate conditions on which we would
     remain neutral. I said that I felt obliged to refuse definitely any
     promise.... (British "White Paper" No. 123.)

Belgium Not the Cause.

Hence, only if Germany would permit herself to be humiliated war with
England could be avoided. The violation of Belgium's neutrality was in
no way the cause of England joining Germany's enemies, for while German
troops did not enter Belgium until the night from Aug. 3 to 4, Grey gave
on Aug. 2 the following memorandum to the French Ambassador after a
session of the Cabinet in London:

     I am authorized to give an assurance that if the German fleet comes
     into the Channel or through the North Sea to undertake hostile
     operations against French coasts or shipping, the British fleet
     will give all the protection in its power.--(British "White Paper"
     No. 148.)

As the aim of this decision, of which M. Cambon was informed verbally,
was to give France an assurance that it would be placed in a position
"to settle the disposition of its own Mediterranean fleet," Grey would
not accept the version of Cambon that England would take part in a war
with Germany. This is a case of splitting hairs in order to put the
blame of starting the war on Germany, for while England promised to
protect the French coast and to make it possible for the French fleet to
stay in the Mediterranean, she almost immediately proceeded to a warlike
action against Germany, especially as the English Minister
simultaneously refused to bind himself to maintain even this peculiar
neutrality.

IV.

BELGIAN NEUTRALITY.

The highest representatives of the German Empire with emphatic
seriousness declared that it was with a heavy heart and only following
the law of self-preservation that they decided to violate the neutrality
of the Kingdom of Belgium, guaranteed by the great powers in the
treaties of 1831 and 1839.

The German Secretary of State on Aug. 4 informed the English Government
through the embassy in London that Germany intended to retain no Belgian
territory, and added:

     Please impress upon Sir E. Grey that German Army could not be
     exposed to French attack across Belgium, which was planned,
     according to absolutely unimpeachable information. Germany had
     consequently to disregard Belgian neutrality, it being with her a
     question of life or death to prevent French advance.--(British
     "White Paper" No. 157.)

In answer Grey caused the English Ambassador in Berlin to demand his
passports and to tell the German Government that England would
take all steps for defense of Belgian neutrality. This, therefore,
represents, in the view which very cleverly has been spread broadcast by
British publicity, the real reason for the war. But in spite of the
moral indignation that is apparent against Germany, the consideration
for Belgium, up until very late, does not seem in any way to have been
in the foreground. We find on July 31 Grey stated to Cambon:

     The preservation of the neutrality of Belgium might be, I would not
     say a decisive, but an important, factor in determining our
     attitude.--(British "White Paper" No. 119.)

Here, therefore, there was no talk about England grasping the sword on
account of Belgium. Now no one will claim that the assumption that the
German troops could march through Belgium would be new or unheard of.
For years this possibility had been discussed in military
literature.[04]

This expression on the part of the historical Faculty is very
interesting. It shows that a plan of campaign between the English and
French had long been considered, and that the Belgian entry into the
alliance against Germany was a matter agreed upon.

A Sudden Decision.

It must also be assumed that the Belgian Government knew toward the end
of July at the latest that the war between Germany and France was
probable and the march of Germans through Belgium very possible.

If England had not taken part in the war against Germany, it may be
assumed that it would have given Belgium the advice to permit the
marching through of the German Army, somewhat in the same manner as the
Grand Duchy of Luxemburg did, with a protest. In doing so the Belgian
people would have been spared a great deal of misery and loss of blood.
On Aug. 3 the Belgian Government replied to an offer of military help by
France as follows:

     We are sincerely grateful to the French Government for offering
     eventual support. In the actual circumstances, however, we do not
     propose to appeal to the guarantee of the powers. Belgian
     Government will decide later on the action which they may think
     necessary to take.--(British "White Paper" No. 151.)

One day later London decided to make Belgian neutrality the cause of the
war against Germany before the eyes of the world. The Ambassador in
Brussels received the following orders:

     You should inform Belgian Government that if pressure is applied to
     them by Germany to induce them to depart from neutrality, his
     Majesty's Government expects that they will resist by any means in
     their power and that his Majesty's Government will support them in
     offering such resistance, and that his Majesty's Government in this
     event are prepared to join Russia and France.--(British "White
     Paper" No. 155.)

Not until England thus stirred Belgium up, holding out the deceptive
hope of effective French and English help, did Belgian fanaticism break
loose against Germany. Without the intervention of England in Brussels
the events in Belgium, one may safely assert, would have taken an
entirely different course, which would have been far more favorable to
Belgium.

But, of course, England had thus found a very useful reason for war
against Germany. Even on the 31st of July Grey had spoken of the
violation of Belgian neutrality as not a decisive factor. On Aug. 1 he
declined to promise Prince Lichnowsky England's neutrality, even if
Germany would not violate Belgium's neutrality. On Aug. 4, however, the
Belgian question was the cause that suddenly drove England to maintain
the moral fabric of the world and to draw the sword.

This suddenly became the new development, which was still
lacking for Grey in order to justify this war before public opinion in
England.

Another English Advantage.

And something else was secured by the drawing of Belgium into the war by
the British Government, which had decided to make war on Germany for
entirely different reasons: the thankful part of the protector of the
weak and the oppressed.

As an English diplomat, when Russia was mobilizing, openly stated, the
interests of his country in Servia were nil, so for Grey even Belgium,
immediately before the break with Germany, was not decisive. However,
when England had irrevocably decided to enter the war it stepped out
before the limelight of the world as the champion of--the small nations.

[02] Recently a book entitled "Why We Make War," in defense of Great
Britain, appeared at Oxford, as the authors of which "Members of the
Faculty for Modern History in Oxford" are mentioned. This work
undertakes, on the ground of the official publications, to whitewash
Grey's policy, and of course incidentally the Russian policy. All
together this publication, parading in the gown of science, is
contradicted by our own presentation of the facts; it may be mentioned
also that this work contains in part positive untruths. Thus it states
on Page 70 (retranslation):

     No diplomatic pressure whatever was exerted [by Germany] on Vienna,
     which, under the protection of Berlin, was permitted to do with
     Servia as she liked.

     Grey's own words contradict this assertion.

[03] In the aforementioned book of the Oxford historians there is
stated on Page 69 (retranslation):

     This mediation [namely, Grey's mediation proposition] had already
     been accepted, by Russia on July 25th.

We have shown in the foregoing that the Russian Government did in no
manner subscribe to the conference plan in binding terms. As an
additional proof, a part of Buchanan's dispatch of the 25th may be
mentioned:

     He [Sazonof] would like to see the question placed on international
     footing.... If Servia should appeal to the powers, Russia would be
     quite ready to stand aside and leave the question in the hands of
     England, France, Germany, and Italy. It would be possible in his
     opinion that Servia might propose to submit the question to
     arbitration.--(British "White Paper" No. 17.)

Hence, not if England, but only if Servia would propose arbitration by
the powers, Mr. Sazonof was willing! The most amusing part of this is
that the Russian Minister himself considers such a proposition on the
part of Servia merely as "possible"; evidently it would have appeared as
a great condescension on the part of the Government at Belgrade if it,
standing on the same basis as Austria-Hungary, would appear before a
European tribunal! For us there is no additional proof necessary that a
mediation conference, which for Austria was not acceptable even when
proposed by England, would be unthinkable if the move for such came from
Servia. In expressing such an idea. Mr. Sazonof proved that it was his
intention to bring war about.

[04] The book, which appeared at Oxford, "Why We Are at War," mentioned
previously states on Page 27 (retranslation):

     That such a plan [the marching through Luxemburg and Belgium] had
     been taken into consideration by the Germans has been known in
     England generally for several years; and it has also been generally
     accepted that the attempt to carry out this plan would bring about
     the active resistance of the British armed forces: one assumed that
     these would be given the task of assisting the left wing of the
     French, which would have to resist German advance from Belgian
     territory.

"Truth About Germany"

Attested by Thirty-four German Dignitaries.[05]

Board of Editors.

     Paul Dehn, Schriftsteller, Berlin.

     Dr. Drechsler, Direktor des Amerika-Instituts, Berlin.

     Matthias Erzberger, Mitglied des Reichstags, Berlin.

     Prof. Dr. Francke, Berlin.

     B. Huldermann, Direktor der Hamburg-Amerika Linie, Hamburg.

     Dr. Ernst Jaeckh, Berlin.

     D. Naumann, Mitglied des Reichstags, Berlin.

     Graf von Oppersdorff, Mitglied des preussischen Herrenhauses,
       Mitglied des Reichstags, Berlin.

     Graf zu Reventlow, Schriftsteller, Charlottenburg.

     Dr. Paul Rohrbach, Dozent an der Handelshochschule, Berlin.

     Dr. Schacht, Direktor der Dresdner Bank, Berlin.

Honorary Committee.

     Ballin, Vorsitzender des Direktoriums der Hamburg-Amerika Linie,
       Hamburg.

     Fürst von Bülow, Hamburg.

     Dr. R.W. Drechsler, Direktor des Amerika-Instituts, Berlin.

     D. Dryander, Ober-Hof-und Domprediger, Berlin.

     Dr. Freiherr von der Goltz, Generalfeldmarschall, Berlin.

     Von Gwinner, Direktor der Deutschen Bank, Berlin.

     Prof. Dr. von Harnack, Berlin.

     Fürst von Hatzfeldt, Herzog zu Trachenberg.

     Dr. Heineken, Direktor des Norddeutschen Lloyds, Bremen.

     Fürst Henckel von Donnersmarck.

     Dr. Kaempf, Praesident des Reichstags, Berlin.

     Prof. Dr. Eugen Kühnemann, Breslau.

     Prof. Dr. Lamprecht, Leipsic.

     Dr. Theodor Lewald, Direktor im Reichsamt des Innern, Berlin.

     Franz von Mendelssohn, Praesident der Handelskammer, Berlin.

     Fürst Münster-Derneburg, Mitglied des Herrenhauses.

     Graf von Oppersdorff, Mitglied des Herrenhauses und des Reichstags,
       Berlin.

     Graf von Posadowsky-Wehner.

     Dr. Walther Rathenau, Berlin.

     Viktor Herzog von Ratibor.

     Dr. Schmidt, Ministerialdirektor, Berlin.

     Prof. Dr. von Schmoller, Berlin.

     Graf von Schwerin-Löwitz, Praesident des Hauses der Abgeordneten.

     Wilhelm von Siemens, Berlin.

     Friedrich Fürst zu Solms-Baruth.

     Max Warburg, Hamburg.

     Siegfried Wagner, Baireuth.

Try to realize, every one of you, what we are going through! Only a few
weeks ago all of us were peacefully following our several vocations. The
peasant was gathering in this Summer's plentiful crop, the factory hand
was working with accustomed vigor. Not one human being among us dreamed
of war. We are a nation that wishes to lead a quiet and industrious
life. This need hardly be stated to you Americans. You, of all others,
know the temper of the German who lives within your gates. Our love of
peace is so strong that it is not regarded by us in the light of a
virtue, we simply know it to be an inborn and integral portion of
ourselves. Since the foundation of the German Empire in the year 1871,
we, living in the centre of Europe, have given an example of
tranquillity and peace, never once seeking to profit by any momentary
difficulties of our neighbors. Our commercial extension, our financial
rise in the world, is far removed from any love of adventure, it is the
fruit of painstaking and plodding labor.

We are not credited with this temper, because we are insufficiently
known. Our situation and our way of thinking are not easily grasped.

Every one is aware that we have produced great philosophers and poets,
we have preached the gospel of humanity with impassioned zeal. America
fully appreciates Goethe and Kant, looks upon them as cornerstones of
elevated culture. Do you really believe that we have changed our
natures, that our souls can be satisfied with military drill and servile
obedience? We are soldiers because we have to be soldiers, because
otherwise Germany and German civilization would be swept away from the
face of the earth. It has cost us long and weary struggles to attain our
independence, and we know full well that, in order to preserve it, we
must not content ourselves with building schools and factories, we must
look to our garrisons and forts. We and all our soldiers have remained,
however, the same lovers of music and lovers of exalted thought. We have
retained our old devotion to all peaceable sciences and arts; as all the
world knows, we work in the foremost rank of all those who strive to
advance the exchange of commodities, who further useful technical
knowledge. But we have been forced to become a nation of soldiers in
order to be free. And we are bound to follow our Kaiser, because he
symbolizes and represents the unity of our nation. Today, knowing no
distinction of party, no difference of opinion, we rally around him,
willing to shed the last drop of our blood. For though it takes a great
deal to rouse us Germans, when once aroused our feelings run deep and
strong. Every one is filled with this passion, with the soldier's ardor.
But when the waters of the deluge shall have subsided, gladly will we
return to the plow and to the anvil.

It deeply distresses us to see two highly civilized nations, England and
France, joining the onslaught of autocratic Russia. That this could
happen will remain one of the anomalies of history. It is not our fault;
we firmly believed in the desirability of the great nations working
together, we peaceably came to terms with France and England in sundry
difficult African questions. There was no cause for war between Western
Europe and us, no reason why Western Europe should feel itself
constrained to further the power of the Czar.

The Czar, as an individual, is most certainly not the instigator of the
unspeakable horrors that are now inundating Europe. But he bears before
God and posterity the responsibility of having allowed himself to be
terrorized by an unscrupulous military clique.

Ever since the weight of the crown has pressed upon him, he has been the
tool of others. He did not desire the brutalities in Finland, he did not
approve of the iniquities of the Jewish pogroms, but his hand was too
weak to stop the fury of the reactionary party. Why would he not permit
Austria to pacify her southern frontier? It was inconceivable that
Austria should calmly see her heir apparent murdered. How could she? All
the nationalities under her rule realized the impossibility of tamely
allowing Servia's only too evident and successful intrigues to be
carried on under her very eyes. The Austrians could not allow their
venerable and sorely stricken monarch to be wounded and insulted any
longer. This reasonable and honorable sentiment on the part of Austria
has caused Russia to put itself forward as the patron of Servia, as the
enemy of European thought and civilization.

Russia has an important mission to fulfill in its own country and in
Asia. It would do better in its own interest to leave the rest of the
world in peace. But the die is cast, and all nations must decide whether
they wish to further us by sentiments and by deeds, or the government of
the Czar. This is the real significance of this appalling struggle, all
the rest is immaterial. Russia's attitude alone has forced us to go to
war with France and with their great ally.

The German Nation is serious and conscientious. Never would a German
Government dare to contemplate a war for the sake of dynastic interest,
or for the sake of glory. This would be against the entire bent of our
character. Firmly believing in the justice of our cause, all parties,
the Conservatives and the Clericals, the Liberals and the Socialists,
have joined hands. All disputes are forgotten, one duty exists for all,
the duty of defending our country and vanquishing the enemy.

Will not this calm, self-reliant and unanimous readiness to sacrifice
all, to die or to win, appeal to other nations and force them to
understand our real character and the situation in which we are placed?

The war has severed us from the rest of the world, all our cable
communications are destroyed. But the winds will carry the mighty voice
of justice even across the ocean. We trust in God, we have confidence in
the judgment of right-minded men. And through the roar of battle, we
call to you all. Do not believe the mischievous lies that our enemies
are spreading about! We do not know if victory will be ours, the Lord
alone knows. We have not chosen our path, we must continue doing our
duty, even to the very end. We bear the misery of war, the death of our
sons, believing in Germany, believing in duty.

And we know that Germany cannot be wiped from the face of the earth.

[05]

     "Athenwood," Newport, R.I.,

     Sept. 17, 1914.

     Today I have received from Germany a pamphlet entitled "Truth About
     Germany, Facts About the War." The correctness and completeness of
     its statements are vouched for by thirty-four persons, whose names
     are recorded therein as members of an Honorary Committee. I know
     personally seventeen of these thirty-four persons, and have known
     them for years, some of them intimately. With six of them I have
     labored as a colleague in university work. I have been introduced
     into their homes, have broken bread at their tables and have
     conversed with them long and often upon the problems of life and
     culture. They are among the greatest thinkers, moralists and
     philanthropists of the age. They are the salt of the earth! The
     great theologian Harnack, the sound and accomplished political
     scientist and economist von Schmoller, the distinguished
     philologian von Wilamowitz, the well-known historian Lamprecht, the
     profound statesman von Posadowsky, the brilliant diplomatist von
     Bülow, the great financier von Gwinner, the great promoter of trade
     and commerce Ballin, the great inventor Siemens, the brilliant
     preacher of the Gospel Dryander, the indispensable Director in the
     Ministry of Education Schmidt. Two of them are, in a sense, our own
     countrywomen, the Baroness Speck von Sternburg and Frau
     Staats-minister von Trott zu Solz. The latter is the granddaughter
     of our own John Jay. I have known her, her mother and her
     grandfather. No statement was ever issued which was vouched for by
     more solid, intelligent, and conscientious people. Its correctness,
     completeness and veracity cannot be doubted. As I read it the
     emotions which it arouses make both speech and sight difficult. I
     wish it might come into the hands of every man, woman, and child in
     the United States.

     (Signed) JOHN W. BURGESS,

     Ex-Dean Faculties of Political Science, Philosophy, Pure Science
     and Fine Arts, Columbia University; Roosevelt Professor of American
     History and Institutions at Friedrich Wilhelms University, Berlin,
     1906; Visiting American Professor at Austrian Universities,
     1914-15.

Under the head of "An Anti-British Pamphlet," The London Times of Aug.
23, 1914, noted as follows:

     The Vossischezeitung gives extracts from a brochure issued under
     the auspices of a committee of such prominent Germans as Prince
     Bülow, Herr Ballin, Dr. von Gwinner, and Field Marshal von der
     Goltz, for the purpose of "opening the eyes" of the United States
     regarding the causes of the present war. Copies of this pamphlet
     are being given to all Americans returning home from Germany. One
     chapter, headed "Neutrality by Grace of England," scoffs at the
     idea of England today being the defender of neutral States and
     declares that it was England who in 1911 was ready to land 160,000
     men at Antwerp to help the French against the Germans.

     As to who will ultimately win in the war, the pamphlet asks whether
     it will be the striving nation, the young strength, or the old
     peoples, France and England, with their flagging civilization in
     alliance with Muscovite retrogression.

HOW THE WAR CAME ABOUT.

Who is responsible for the war?--Not Germany! England's policy! Her
shifting of responsibility and promoting the struggle while alone
possessing power to avert it.

It is an old and common experience that after the outbreak of a war the
very parties and persons that wanted the war, either at once or later,
assert that the enemy wanted and began it. The German Empire especially
always had to suffer from such untruthful assertions, and the very first
days of the present terrible European war confirm again this old
experience. Again Russian, French, and British accounts represent the
German Empire as having wanted the war.

Only a few months ago influential men and newspapers of Great Britain as
well as of Paris could be heard to express the opinion that nobody in
Europe wanted war and that especially the German Emperor and his
Government had sincerely and effectively been working for peace.
Especially the English Government, in the course of the last two years,
asserted frequently and publicly, and was supported by The Westminster
Gazette and a number of influential English newspapers in the assertion,
that Great Britain and the German Empire during the Balkan crisis of the
last few years had always met on the same platform for the preservation
of peace. The late Secretary of State, von Kiderlen-Waechter, his
successor, Mr. von Jagow, and the Imperial Chancellor, von
Bethmann-Hollweg, likewise declared repeatedly in the Reichstag, how
great their satisfaction was that a close and confidential diplomatic
co-operation with Great Britain, especially in questions concerning the
Near East, had become a fact. And it has to be acknowledged today that
at that time the German and British interests in the Near East were
identical or at any rate ran in parallel lines.

The collapse of European Turkey in the war against the Balkan Alliance
created an entirely new situation. At first Bulgaria was victorious and
great, then it was beaten and humiliated by the others with the
intellectual help of Russia. There could be no doubt about Russia's
intentions: she was preparing for the total subjection of weakened
Turkey and for taking possession of the Dardanelles and Constantinople
in order to rule from this powerful position Turkey and the other Balkan
States. Great Britain and the German Empire, which only had economic
interests in Turkey, were bound to wish to strengthen Turkey besides
trying to prevent the Muscovite rule on the whole Balkan peninsula.

Servia had come out of the second Balkan war greatly strengthened and
with her territory very much increased. Russia had done everything to
strengthen this bitter enemy of our ally, Austria-Hungary. For a great
number of years Servian politicians and conspirators had planned to
undermine the southeastern provinces of Austria-Hungary and to separate
them from the Dual Monarchy. In Servia as well as in Russia prevailed
the opinion that, at the first attack, Austria-Hungary would fall to
pieces. In this case Servia was to receive South Austria and Russia was
to dictate the peace in Vienna. The Balkan war had ruined Turkey almost
entirely, had paralyzed Bulgaria, that was friendly, and had
strengthened the Balkan States that were hostile to Austria. At the same
time there began in Rumania a Russian and French propaganda, that
promised this country, if it should join the dual alliance, the
Hungarian Province of Siebenbuergen.

Thus it became evident in Germany and in Austria that at St. Petersburg,
first by diplomatic and political, then also by military, action a
comprehensive attack of Slavism under Russian guidance was being
prepared. The party of the Grand Dukes in St. Petersburg, the party of
the Russian officers, always ready for war, and the Pan-Slavists, the
brutal and unscrupulous representatives of the idea that the Russian
Czarism was destined to rule Europe--all these declared openly that
their aim was the destruction of Austria-Hungary. In Russia the army,
already of an immense size, was increased secretly but comprehensively
and as quick as possible; in Servia the same was done, and the Russian
Ambassador in Belgrade, Mr. von Hartwig, was, after the second Balkan
war, the principal promoter of the plan to form against Austria a new
Balkan alliance. In Bosnia, during all this time, the Servian propaganda
was at work with high treason, and in the end with revolver and the
bomb.

In Vienna and in Berlin the greatness and the purpose of the new danger
could not remain doubtful, especially as it was openly said in St.
Petersburg, in Belgrade, and elsewhere that the destruction of
Austria-Hungary was imminent. As soon as the Balkan troubles began
Austria-Hungary had been obliged to put a large part of her army in
readiness for war, because the Russians and Servians had mobilized on
their frontiers. The Germans felt that what was a danger for their ally
was also a danger for them and that they must do all in the power to
maintain Austria-Hungary in the position of a great power. They felt
that this could only be done by keeping perfect faith with their ally
and by great military strength, so that Russia might possibly be
deterred from war and peace be preserved, or else that, in case war was
forced upon them, they could wage it with honor and success. Now it was
clear in Berlin that in view of the Russian and Servian preparations,
Austria-Hungary, in case of a war, would be obliged to use a great part
of her forces against Servia and therefore would have to send against
Russia fewer troops than would have been possible under the conditions
formerly prevailing in Europe. Formerly even European Turkey could have
been counted upon for assistance, that after her recent defeat seemed
very doubtful. These reasons and considerations, which were solely of a
defensive nature, led to the great German military bills of the last two
years. Also Austria-Hungary was obliged to increase its defensive
strength.

Whoever considers carefully the course of events that has been briefly
sketched here will pronounce the assertion of our enemies, that Germany
wanted the war, ridiculous and absurd. On the contrary, it can be said
that Germany never before endeavored more eagerly to preserve peace than
during the last few years. Germany had plenty of opportunities to attack
and good opportunities to boot, for we knew for years that the army of
France was no more ready than that of Russia. But the Germans are not a
warlike nation and the German Emperor, with his Government, has always
shown how earnestly he meant his reiterated assertions that the
preservation of peace was his principal aim. He was actuated in this by
general considerations of humanity, justice, and culture, as well as by
the consideration of the German trade and commerce. This, especially the
transoceanic commerce of Germany, has increased from year to year. War,
however, means the ruin of commerce. Why expose Germany needlessly to
this terrible risk, especially as everything in Germany prospered and
her wealth increased? No, the German Army bills were merely meant to
protect us against, and prepare us for, the attacks of Muscovite
barbarism. But nobody in Germany has ever doubted for a moment that
France would attack us at the first Russian signal. Since the first days
of the Franco-Russian alliance things have become entirely reversed.
Then France wanted to win Russia for a war of revenge against Germany;
now, on the contrary, France thought herself obliged to place her power
and her existence at the disposal of the Russian lust of conquest.

In the Spring of 1914 the German press reported from St. Petersburg
detailed accounts of Russia's comprehensive preparations for war. They
were not denied in Russia, and Paris declared that Russia would be ready
in two or three years and then pursue a policy corresponding to her
power; France, too, would then be at the height of her power. If the
German Government had desired war, on the strength of these accounts,
which were true, it could have waged a preventive war at once and
easily. It did not do so, considering that a war is just only when it is
forced upon one by the enemy. Thus Spring went by with the atmosphere
at high tension. From St. Petersburg and Paris overbearing threats came
in increasing numbers to the effect that the power of the Dual Alliance
was now gigantic and that Germany and Austria soon would begin to feel
it. We remained quiet and watchful, endeavoring with perseverance and
with all our might to win over Great Britain to the policy of preserving
peace. Colonial and economic questions were being discussed by the
German and English Governments, and the cordiality between the two great
powers seemed only to be equaled by their mutual confidence.

Then on the 28th of June occurred that frightful assassination by
Servians of the successor to the Austro-Hungarian throne, Archduke
Francis Ferdinand. The Greater Servia propaganda of action had put aside
the man who was especially hated in Servia as the powerful exponent of
Austro-Hungarian unity and strength. This murder is the real cause of
the present European war. Austria-Hungary was able to prove to a
shuddering world, a few days after the murder, that it had been prepared
and planned systematically, yea, that the Servian Government had been
cognizant of the plan. The immense extent of the Servian revolutionary
organization in the provinces of Southern Austria, the warlike spirit of
the Servians and its instigation by Russia and France, imposed upon the
Vienna Government the duty to insist upon quiet and peace within and
without its borders. It addressed to the Servian Government a number of
demands which aimed at nothing but the suppression of the anti-Austrian
propaganda. Servia was on the point of accepting the demand, when there
arrived a dispatch from St. Petersburg, and Servia mobilized. Then
Austria, too, had to act. Thus arose the Austro-Servian war. But a few
days later the Russian Army was being mobilized, and the mobilization
was begun also in France. At the same time, as the German "White Book"
clearly proves, the diplomacy of Russia and France asserted its great
love of peace and tried to prolong the negotiations in order to gain
time, for, as is well known, the Russian mobilization proceeds slowly.
Germany was waiting, and again and again the German Emperor tried to win
the Czar over to the preservation of peace, for he considered him
sincere and thought him his personal friend. Emperor William was to be
cruelly disappointed. He finally saw himself obliged to proclaim a state
of war for Germany. But at that time the Russian and French armies were
already in a state of complete mobilization. At that time The London
Daily Graphic wrote the following article, which shows how an English
paper that was only slightly friendly to Germany judged of the situation
at that time:

     The Mobilization Mystery.

     A general mobilization has been ordered in Russia, and Germany has
     responded by proclaiming martial law throughout the empire. We are
     now enabled to measure exactly the narrow and slippery ledge which
     still stands between Europe and the abyss of Armageddon. Will the
     Russian order be acted upon in the provinces adjoining the German
     frontier? If it is, then the work of the peacemakers is at an end,
     for Germany is bound to reply with a mobilization of her own armed
     forces, and a rush to the frontiers on all sides must ensue. We
     confess that we are unable to understand the action of Russia in
     view of the resumption of the negotiations with Austria. It is not
     likely that these negotiations have been resumed unless both sides
     think that there is yet a chance of agreement, but if this is the
     case, why the mobilization which goes far beyond the limits of
     necessary precaution, and is, indeed, calculated to defeat the
     efforts of the diplomatists, however promising they may be? There
     may, of course, be a satisfactory explanation, but as the matter
     stands it is inexplicable, and is all the more regrettable because
     it is calculated--we feel sure unjustly--to cast doubts on the
     loyalty and straightforwardness of the Russian Government.

When Russia had let pass the time limit set by Germany, when France had
answered that she would act according to her own interests, then the
German Empire had to mobilize its army and go ahead. Before one German
soldier had crossed the German frontier a large number of French
aeroplanes came flying into our country across the neutral territory of
Belgium and Luxemburg without a word of warning on the part of the
Belgian Government. At the same time the German Government learned that
the French were about to enter Belgium. Then our Government, with great
reluctance, had to decide upon requesting the Belgian Government to
allow our troops to march through its territory. Belgium was to be
indemnified after the war, was to retain its sovereignty and integrity.
Belgium protested, at the same time allowing, by an agreement with
France, that the French troops might enter Belgium. After all this, and
not till France and Belgium itself had broken the neutrality, our troops
entered the neutral territory. Germany wanted nothing from Belgium, but
had to prevent that Belgian soil be used as a gate of entrance into
German territory.

Little has as yet been said of Great Britain. It was Germany's
conviction that the sincerity of Britain's love for peace could be
trusted. At any rate, Sir Edward Grey and Mr. Asquith asserted again and
again in the course of the last few years that England wished friendly
relations with Germany and never would lend its support to a
Franco-Russian attack on Germany. Now this attack had been made; Germany
was on the defensive against two powerful enemies. What would Great
Britain do about it? That was the question. Great Britain asked in
return for its neutrality that the German forces should not enter
Belgium. In other words, it asked that Germany should allow the French
and Belgian troops to form on Belgian territory for a march against our
frontier! This we could not allow. It would have been suicidal. The
German Government made Great Britain, in return for its neutrality, the
following offers: we would not attack the northern coast of France, we
would leave unmolested the maritime commerce of France and would
indemnify Belgium after the war and safeguard its sovereignty and
integrity. In spite of this Great Britain declared war on Germany and
sides today with those Continental powers that have united for our
destruction, in order that Muscovite barbarism may rule Europe. We know
that Germany did not deserve such treatment on the part of Great
Britain, and do not believe that Great Britain by this action did a
service to humanity and civilization.

Today we are facing hard facts. Germany has to fight for her existence.
She will fight knowing that the great powers beyond the ocean will do
her justice as soon as they know the truth.

REICHSTAG AND EMPEROR.

England, France, and Russia, unthreatened by Germany, go to war for
political reasons--Germany defends her independence and fights for her
very existence, for her future as a great power--How a peaceful people
were imbued with the spirit of war.

The last days of the month of July were days of anxiety and distress for
the German people. They hoped that they would be permitted to preserve
an honorable peace. A few months earlier, in 1913, when the centennial
of the war for independence from French oppression and the twenty-fifth
anniversary of Emperor William's ascent of the throne had been
celebrated, they had willingly taken upon their shoulders the great
sacrifice of the so-called "Wehrvorlage," which increased the peace
strength of the standing army enormously and cost 1,000,000,000 marks.
They considered it simply as an increase of their peace insurance
premium. Our diplomats worked hard for the maintenance of peace, for the
localization of the Austro-Servian war. So sure were the leading men of
the empire of the preservation of general peace that at the beginning of
the week which was to bring general mobilization they said to each other
joyfully: Next week our vacation time begins. But they were fearfully
disappointed. Russia's unexpected, treacherous mobilization compelled
Germany to draw the sword also. On the evening of the first day of
August the one word, Mobilization! was flashed by the electric spark all
over the country. There was no more anxiety and uncertainty. Cool, firm
resolution at once permeated the entire German folk. The Reichstag was
called together for an extra session.

Three days later, on the anniversary of the battles of Weissenburg and
Spichern, the representatives of the German people met. This session,
which lasted only a few hours, proved worthy of the great historical
moment marking the beginning of such a conflagration as the world had
never seen before. The railroad lines were under military control and
used almost exclusively for purposes of mobilization. In spite of all
such difficulties, more than 300 of the 397 Deputies managed to get to
Berlin in time. The rest sent word that they were unable to come. On the
evening of Aug. 3 the Imperial Chancellor called the leaders of all
parties, including the Socialists, to his house and explained to them in
a concise and impressive statement how frivolously Germany had been
driven to war. At the time of this meeting the unanimous acceptance of
all war measures by the Reichstag was already assured. In numerous
conferences the heads of the several departments explained the content
and meaning of the bills to be submitted to the Reichstag. The
participants of the conferences showed already what spirit would
characterize the next day. The session of the Reichstag filled the
entire German nation with pride and enthusiasm; the Reichstag maintained
the dignity of the German Empire and the German people.

In greater numbers than ever before the Deputies, high officers of the
army and navy and the Civil Government assembled on Aug. 4, first in
houses of worship to pray to God, and then in the Royal Castle of
Berlin. The military character of the ceremony at the opening of the
session showed under what auspices this memorable act took place. The
Kaiser entered the hall in the simple gray field uniform, without the
usual pomp, unaccompanied by chamberlains and court officials and pages
in glittering court dresses. Only State Ministers, Generals, and
Admirals followed him to the throne, from where he read his speech,
after covering his head with his helmet. His voice betrayed the strain
under which he was laboring. Repeatedly he was interrupted by
enthusiastic applause, and when he closed, a rousing cheer thundered
through the famous White Hall, something that had never before occurred
there since the erection of the old castle. Then came a surprise. The
Emperor laid down the manuscript of his speech and continued speaking.
From now on he knew only Germans, he said, no differences of party,
creed, religion or social position, and he requested the party leaders
to give him their hands as a pledge that they all would stand by him "in
Not und Tod"--in death and distress. This scene was entirely impromptu,
and thus so much more impressive and touching. And it was hardly over
when the Reichstag--an unheard of proceeding in such surroundings--began
to sing the German national hymn, "Heil Dir im Siegerkranz." The
magnificent hall, until then only the scene of pompous court
festivities, witnessed an outburst of patriotism such as was never seen
there before. To the accompaniment of loud cheers the Kaiser walked out,
after shaking the hands of the Imperial Chancellor and the Chief of the
General Staff, von Moltke.

One hour later the Reichstag met in its own house. The Emperor had
begged for quick and thorough work. He was not to be disappointed.
Without any formalities the presiding officers of the last session were
re-elected--in times of peace and party strife this would have been
impossible. This short curtain raiser being over, the first act of the
drama began. Before an overcrowded house the Chancellor described simply
and clearly the efforts of the Government for the preservation of peace.
He stated cold facts, showing unmistakably Russia's double dealing and
justifying Germany's beginning of a war which she did not want. The
Chancellor had begun in a quiet, subdued tone. Then he raised his voice
and when, in words that rang through the hall, he declared that the
entire nation was united, the Deputies and the spectators in the
galleries could sit still no longer. They rose, with them at first some
Socialists, then all of them, carried away by the impulse of the
moment; the members of the Federal Council, of the press, diplomats and
the crowds in the galleries joined them. The whole multitude cheered and
clapped its hands frantically. It reflected truly the spirit of the
whole nation. The Speaker, who under ordinary circumstances would have
suppressed the clapping of hands as unparliamentary and the
demonstrations of the galleries as undignified, let the patriotic
outburst go on to its end.

After a short intermission the business meeting began. Sixteen war
measures had been introduced, the most important of which was the one
asking for 5,000,000,000 marks to carry on the war. The leader of the
Social Democrats read a statement explaining why his party, despite its
opposition on principle to all army and navy appropriations, would vote
for the proposed bills. Without further debates all the bills were
passed, and shortly after 5 P.M. the Reichstag adjourned. At 7 P.M. the
Emperor received the presiding officers of the Reichstag to thank them
for their prompt and useful work. He signed the bills, which were
immediately published and thus became laws.

The resolute attitude and quick work of the Reichstag reflected the
unity and resolution of the entire nation. Sixty-seven millions of
Germans feel, think, and act with their elected representatives. No
party, no class, no creed is standing back; all are imbued with one
single thought: United Germany is unconquerable.

The entire German people are united as never before in their history.
Even 101 years ago, in 1813, the entire population cannot have been so
uniformly seized by the spirit of war as at the outbreak of this
struggle, which is the people's war in the truest sense of the word, and
which was predicted by Bismarck. All reigning Princes are going out to
fight with the army and have appointed their wives as regents. Instances
include the Kaiser's son-in-law, the Duke of Brunswick, who appointed
his consort, the only daughter of the Emperor, as regent. The Princes
call their people to arms, and they themselves all stand ready to
sacrifice all they have. This example from above carries the nation with
them. The Reichstag knew parties and factions no more, and neither does
the nation. The Emperor sounded the word which has become common
property from Königsberg to Constance, from Upper Silesia to the Belgian
frontier: "I know only Germans!" And yet how terribly is our nation
otherwise disrupted by party strife. Ill-advised persons across our
frontiers hoped that creed differences would make for disunion,
Frenchmen and Russians expected to weaken our empire with the aid of
Alsatians and Poles. This hope has been destroyed--we are a united
people, as united as was the Reichstag, the Socialists included. The
latter have for years voted against all army and navy appropriations,
have advocated international peace, and last year voted against the
bills increasing the army strength. In many foreign quarters strong
hopes were nourished that this party would help them. But those men did
not know our German people. Our civilization, our independence as a
nation was threatened, and in that moment party interest or creed
existed no more. The true German heart is beating only for the
Fatherland, east and west, north and south, Protestants, Catholics, and
Jews are "a united people of brethren in the hour of danger." When
Germany was so threatened by Russia, when the German "Peace Emperor" was
shamefully betrayed by the Czar of all the Russians, then there was but
one sacred party in existence: The party of Germans.

THE GERMAN MOBILIZATION.

The clockworks of mobilization; perfect order and quiet
everywhere--General acceptance by all classes and factions of the
necessities of a war not sought by Germany.

The German mobilization was the greatest movement of people that the
world has ever seen. Nearly four million men had to be transported from
every part of the empire to her borders. The manner in which the
population is distributed made this task extremely difficult. Berlin,
Rhenish Westphalia, Upper Silesia and Saxony especially had to send
their contingents in every direction, since the eastern provinces are
more thinly settled and had to have a stronger guard for the borders
immediately. The result was a hurrying to and fro of thousands and
hundreds of thousands of soldiers, besides a flood of civilians who had
to reach their homes as soon as possible. Countries where the population
is more regularly distributed have an easier task than Germany, with its
predominating urban population. The difficulties of the gigantic
undertaking were also increased by the necessity for transporting war
materials of every sort. In the west are chiefly industrial
undertakings, in the east mainly agricultural. Horse raising is mostly
confined to the provinces on the North Sea and the Baltic, but chiefly
to East Prussia, and this province, the furthest away from France, had
to send its best horses to the western border, as did also
Schleswig-Holstein and Hanover. Coal for our warships had to go in the
other direction. From the Rhenish mines it went to the North Sea, from
Upper Silesia to the Baltic. Ammunition and heavy projectiles were
transported from the central part of the empire to the borders. And
everywhere these operations had to be carried on with haste. One can
thus say that the German mobilization was the greatest movement of men
and materials that the world has ever seen.

And how was it carried on? No one could have wondered if there had been
hundreds of unforeseen incidents, if military trains had arrived at
their stations with great delays, if there had resulted in many places a
wild hugger-mugger from the tremendous problems on hand. But there was
not a trace of this. On the Monday evening of the first week of
mobilization a high officer of the General Staff said: "It had to go
well today, but how about tomorrow, the main day?" Tuesday evening saw
no reason for complaint, no delay, no requests for instructions. All had
moved with the regularity of clockwork. Regiments that had been ordered
to mobilize in the forenoon left in the evening for the field, fully
equipped. Not a man was lacking. There were no deserters, no shirkers,
no cowards. Instead, there were volunteers whose numbers far exceeded
the number that could be used. Every German wanted to do his duty.

The most noteworthy thing was the earnest quietness with which the
gigantic gathering proceeded. Not a city, not a village reported unrest
or even an untoward incident. The separation was hard for many a
soldier. Many a volunteer tore himself away from his dear ones with
bleeding heart, but with face beaming with the light of one who looks
forward to victory. Following the Kaiser's wish, those who remained
behind filled the churches and, kneeling, prayed to God for victory for
the just German cause. The folk-war, brought on by the wantonness of the
opponents, in itself brought peace and order, safety and discipline.
Never, probably, have the police had fewer excesses to deal with than in
the days of the mobilization, although great crowds gathered constantly
in every city.

The best criterion of the enthusiasm of the people is without doubt the
number of volunteers. More than 1,000,000 of these, a number greater
than that of the standing army, presented themselves within a few days.
They came from all classes. There were sons of the nobility, university
students, farmers, merchants, common laborers. No calling hung back.
Every young man sorrowed when he was rejected. No section of the
Fatherland was unrepresented, not even the Reichsland Alsace-Lorraine,
where, indeed, the number of volunteers was conspicuously great. When
the lists in various cities had to be closed, the young men who had not
been accepted turned away with tears in their eyes, and telegraphed from
regiment to regiment, hoping to find one where there were still
vacancies. Where the sons of the wealthy renounced the pleasures of
youth and the comforts of their homes to accept the hardships of war in
serving the Fatherland, the poor and the poorest appeared in like
degree. In families having four or five sons subject to military duty a
youngest son, not yet liable for service, volunteered. The year 1870,
truly a proud year in our history, saw nothing like this.

A thing that raised the national enthusiasm still higher was the
appearance of the troops in brand-new uniforms, complete from head to
foot. The first sight of these new uniforms of modest field gray,
faultlessly made, evoked everywhere the question: Where did they come
from? On the first day of mobilization dozens of cloth manufacturers
appeared at the War Ministry with offers of the new material. "We don't
need any," was the astonishing reply. Equal amazement was caused by the
faultless new boots and shoes of the troops, especially in view of the
recent famous "boot speech" of the French Senator Humbert.

Small arms, cannons, and ammunition are so plentiful that they have
merely to be unpacked. In view of all this, it is no wonder that the
regiments marching in were everywhere greeted with jubilation, and that
those marching out took leave of their garrisons with joyful songs. No
one thinks of death and destruction, every one of victory and a happy
reunion. German discipline, once so slandered, now celebrates its
triumph.

There was still another matter in which the troops gave their countrymen
cause for rejoicing. Not one drunken man was seen during these earnest
days in the city streets. The General Staff had, moreover, wisely
ordered that during the mobilization, when every one had money in his
pockets, alcoholic drinks were not to be sold at the railroad stations.
Despite this, the soldiers did not lack for refreshments on their
journey. Women and girls offered their services to the Red Cross, and
there was no station where coffee, tea, milk, and substantial food were
not at the disposal of the soldiers. They were not required to suffer
hunger or any other discomfort. The German anti-alcoholists are
rejoicing at this earnest tribute to their principles, which were at
first laughed at and then pitied, but triumphed in the days of the
mobilization.

The army is increased to many times its ordinary strength by the
mobilization. It draws from everywhere millions of soldiers, workmen,
horses, wagons, and other material. The entire railway service is at its
disposal. The mobilization of the fleet goes on more quietly and less
conspicuously, but not less orderly and smoothly. Indeed, it is, even in
peace times, practically mobilized as to its greatest and strongest
units. For this reason its transports are smaller than those of the
army; they are concentrated in a few harbors, and, therefore, do not
attract so much public attention. The naval transports, working
according to plans in connection with those of the army, have moved
their quotas of men and materials with the most punctual exactitude. The
naval reserve of fully trained officers and men is practically
inexhaustible. The faithful work of our shipbuilding concerns, carried
on uninterruptedly day and night under plans carefully prepared in time
of peace, has wrought for our navy a strong increase in powerful
warships.

As is known, the German fleet is built on the so-called
"assumption-of-risk" plan. That is, it is intended that it shall be so
strong that even the strongest sea power, in a conflict with the
Germans, risks forfeiting its former rôle as a world factor. This "risk"
idea has been hammered into the heart of every German seaman, and they
are all eager to win for the fleet such glory that it can be favorably
contrasted with the deeds of the old and the new armies.

Contrary to general expectation, the German fleet has taken the
offensive, and the first loss of the war was on the English side and in
English waters, the English cruiser Amphion running on to German mines
in the mouth of the Thames. In the Baltic and the Mediterranean also
German ships have taken the offensive against the enemies' coast, as is
shown by the bombardment by the Germans of the war harbor of Libau and
of fortified landing places on the Algerian coast.

Thus the fleet, confiding in the "risk" idea now proved to be true, and
in its earnest and courageous spirit, may look forward with confidence
to coming events.

But will not civilians have to hunger and thirst in these days? That is
an earnest question. The answer is, No. Even in Berlin, city of
millions, the milk supply did not fail for a day. Infants will not have
to bear the privations of war. All provisions are to be had at
reasonable prices. Empire, municipalities and merchants are working
successfully together to insure that there shall be a sufficient food
supply at not too great a cost. Not only is our great army mobilized,
but the whole folk is mobilized, and the distribution of labor, the food
question and the care of the sick and wounded are all being provided
for. The whole German folk has become a gigantic war camp, all are
mobilized to protect Kaiser, Folk and Fatherland, as the closing report
of the Reichstag put it. And all Germany pays the tribute of a salute to
the chiefs of the army and navy, who work with deeds, not words.

ARMY AND NAVY.

The German Army and Navy on the watch--Four million German men in the
field--Thousands of volunteers join the colors to fight for Germany's
existence, among them the flower of her scientific and artistic life.

There can be no greater contrast than that between the United States and
Germany in one of the most important questions of existence with which a
State is confronted. In its whole history the United States has never
had a foreign hostile force of invaders upon its territory, foreign
armies have never laid waste its fields. Until late in the last century,
however, Germany was the battlefield for the then most powerful nations
of Europe. The numerous German States and provinces, too, fought among
themselves, often on behalf of foreign powers. The European great powers
of that day were able, unhindered and unpunished, to take for themselves
piece after piece of German territory. In the United States, on the
other hand, it was years before the steadily increasing population
attained to the boundaries set for it by nature.

Our Bismarck was finally able, in the years from 1864 to 1871, to create
a great empire from the many small German States. As he himself often
remarked, however, this was possible only because his policies and
diplomacy rested upon and were supported by a well trained and powerful
army. How the German Empire came into being at that time is well known.
A war was necessary because of the fact that the then so powerful France
did not desire that North and South Germany should unite. She was not
able to prevent this union, was defeated and had to give back to us two
old German provinces which she had stolen from the Germans. The old
Field Marshal von Moltke said not long after the war of 1870-71 that the
Germans would still have to defend Alsace-Lorraine for fifty years more.
Perhaps he little realized how prophetic his words were, but he and
those who followed him, the German Emperors and the German War
Ministers, prepared themselves for this coming defensive struggle and
unremittingly devoted their attention to the German Army.

From 1887 on there had been no doubt that in the event of war with
France we should have to reckon also with Russia. This meant that the
army must be strong enough to be equal to the coming fight on two
borders--a tremendous demand upon the resources of a land when one
considers that a peaceful folk, devoted to agriculture, industry, and
trade, must live for decades in the constant expectation of being
obliged, be it tomorrow, be it in ten years, to fight for its life
against its two great military neighbors simultaneously. There are,
moreover, the great money expenditures, and also the burden of universal
military service, which, as is well known, requires every able-bodied
male German to serve a number of years with the colors, and later to
hold himself ready, first as a reservist, then as member of the
Landwehr, and finally as member of the Landsturm, to spring to arms at
the call of his supreme war lord, the German Emperor. A warlike,
militant nation would not long have endured such conditions, but would
have compelled a war and carried it through swiftly. As Bismarck said,
however, the German Army, since it is an army of the folk itself, is not
a weapon for frivolous aggression. Since the German Army, when it is
summoned to war, represents the whole German people, and since the whole
German people is peaceably disposed, it follows that the army can only
be a defensive organization. If war comes, millions of Germans must go
to the front, must leave their parents, their families, their children.
They must. And this "must" means not only the command of their Emperor,
but also the necessity to defend their own land. Did not this necessity
exist, these sons, husbands, and fathers would assuredly not go gladly
to the battlefield, and it is likewise certain that those who stayed at
home would not rejoice so enthusiastically to see them go as we Germans
have seen them rejoicing in these days. Again, then, let us repeat that
the German Army is a weapon which can be and is used only for defense
against foreign aggressions. When these aggressions come, the whole
German folk stands with its army, as it does now.

The German Army is divided into 25 corps in times of peace. In war times
reservists, members of the Landwehr, and occasionally also of the
Landsturm, are called to the colors. The result is that the German Army
on a war footing is a tremendously powerful organ.

Our opponents in foreign countries have for years consistently
endeavored to awaken the belief that the German soldier does his
obligatory service very unwillingly, that he does not get enough to eat
and is badly treated. These assertions are false, and anybody who has
seen in these weeks of mobilization how our soldiers, reservists, and
Landwehr men departed for the field or reported at the garrisons,
anybody who has seen their happy, enthusiastic and fresh faces knows
that mishandled men, men who have been drilled as machines, cannot
present such an appearance.

On the day the German mobilization was ordered we traveled with some
Americans from the western border to Berlin. These Americans said: "We
do not know much about your army, but judging by what we have seen in
these days there prevails in it and all its arrangements such system
that it must win. System must win every time." In this saying there is,
indeed, much of truth--order and system are the basis upon which the
mighty organization of our army is built.

Now a word concerning the German officer. He, too, has been much
maligned, he is often misunderstood by foreigners, and yet we believe
that the people of the United States in particular must be able to
understand the German officer. One of the greatest sons of free America,
George Washington, gave his countrymen the advice to select only
gentlemen as officers, and it is according to this principle that the
officers of the German Army and Navy are chosen. Their selection is
made, moreover, upon a democratic basis, in that the officers' corps of
the various regiments decide for themselves whether they will or will
not accept as a comrade the person whose name is proposed to them.

One sees that the German Army is not, as many say, a tremendous machine,
but rather a great, living organism, which draws its strength and
lifeblood from all classes of the whole German folk. The German Army can
develop its entire strength only in a war which the folk approve, that
is, when a defensive war has been forced upon them. That this is true
will have been realized by our friends in the United States before this
comes into their hands.

The German fleet is in like manner a weapon of defense. It was very
small up to the end of the last century, but has since then been
consistently built up according to the ground principles which Mr.
Roosevelt has so often in his powerful manner laid down for the American
fleet. The question has often been asked, what is there for the German
fleet to defend, since the German coastline is so short? The answer
is that the strength of a fleet must not be made to depend upon the
length of coastlines, but upon how many ships and how much merchandise
go out from and enter the harbors, how great oversea interests there
are, how large the colonies are and how they are situated, and, finally,
how strong the sea powers are with which Germany may have to carry on a
war and how they are situated. To meet all these requirements there is
but one remedy, namely, either that our fleet shall be strong enough to
prevent the strongest sea power from conducting war against us, or that,
if war does come, it shall be able so to battle against the mightiest
opponent that the latter shall be seriously weakened.

Germany, as especially the Americans know, has become a great merchant
marine nation, whose colonies are flourishing. Furthermore, since the
land's growing population has greatly increased its strength in the
course of the last years, the mistrust and jealousy of Great Britain
have in particular been directed steadily against the development of our
ocean commerce, and later of our navy. To the upbuilding of the German
Navy were ascribed all manner of plans--to attack Great Britain, to make
war on Japan, &c. It was even declared by the English press that Germany
intended to attack the United States as soon as its fleet was strong
enough. Today, when Great Britain has needlessly declared war upon us,
the Americans will perhaps believe that our fleet was never planned or
built for an attack on any one. Germany desired simply to protect its
coasts and its marine interests in the same manner in which it protects
its land boundaries. It is realized in the United States as well as here
that a fleet can be powerful only when it has a sufficient number of
vessels of all classes, and when it is thoroughly and unremittingly
schooled in times of peace. We have tried to attain this ideal in
Germany, and it may be remarked that the training of the personnel
requires greater efforts here, since the principle of universal service
is also applied to the fleet, with a resulting short term of service,
whereas all foreign fleets have a long term of enlistment.

The nominal strength of the German fleet is regulated by statute, as is
also the term--twenty years--at the expiration of which old vessels must
automatically be replaced by new ones. This fleet strength is set at
forty-one line-of-battle ships, twenty armored cruisers and forty small
cruisers, besides 144 torpedo boats and seventy-two submarine vessels.
These figures, however, have not been reached. To offset this fact,
however, almost the whole German fleet has been kept together in home
waters. Great Britain's fleet is much stronger than ours, but despite
this the German fleet faces its great opponent with coolness and
assurance and with that courage and readiness to undertake great deeds
that mark those who know that their land has been unjustifiably
attacked. It is utterly incorrect to say, as has been said, that the
German naval officers are filled with hatred for other navies,
especially for the British. On the contrary, the relations between
German and English officers and men have always been good, almost as
good as those of the Germans with the American officers. It is not
personal hatred that inspires our officers and men with the lust for
battle, but their indignation over the unprovoked attack and the
realization that, if every one will do his best for the Fatherland in
this great hour, it will not be in vain even against the greatest naval
power. We, too, are confident of this, for strenuous and faithful effort
always has its reward, and this is especially true of our fleet
organization. The United States realizes this as well as we, for it,
too, has built up a strong and admirably trained fleet by prodigious
labor. As is the case with the German fleet, the American Navy also is
not built for aggression, but for defense.

Neutrality by the Grace of England.

Janus, a mighty god of the ancient Romans, was represented as having two
faces. He could smile and frown simultaneously.

This god Janus is the personification of neutrality according to English
ideas. Neutrality smiles when violated by England and frowns when
violated by other powers.

The United States got a taste of England's neutrality when, a century
ago, the English impressed thousands of American sailors, taking them
from American ships on the high seas, when they searched neutral ships
and confiscated the enemy's property on board of them, until Congress in
Washington voted for the declaration of war against England.

In the great civil war, 1861 to 1864, England had counted on the victory
of the Southern States; she recognized them as belligerents and supplied
them with warships. This was not considered by England a breach of
neutrality until the Minister of the United States declared, on Sept. 5,
1863, that unless England desisted war would result. England yielded.

But, according to the old German proverb, "A cat cannot resist catching
mice," she secretly permitted the fitting out of privateers (the
Alabama) for the Southern States and was finally forced to pay an
indemnity of $15,000,000. England gained, however, more than she lost by
this interpretation of neutrality, for by the aid of her privateers
American maritime trade passed into English hands and was lost to the
Americans.

May God's vengeance fall on Germany! She has violated Belgium's
neutrality! the English piously ejaculate. They call themselves God's
chosen people, the instrument of Providence for the benefit of the whole
universe. They look down upon all other peoples with open or silent
contempt, and claim for themselves various prerogatives, in particular
the supremacy of the sea, even in American waters, from Jamaica to
Halifax.

England's policy has always been to take all, to give back nothing, to
constantly demand more, to begrudge others everything. Only where the
New World is concerned has England, conscious of her own weakness,
become less grasping, since Benjamin Franklin "wrested the sceptre from
the tyrants," since the small colonies that fought so valiantly for
their liberty rose to form the greatest dominion of the white race.

In the Summer of 1911, during the Franco-German Morocco dispute, the
English were determined to assist their old enemies, the French, against
Germany, and stationed 160,000 troops along their coast ready for
embarkation. For the French coast? No, indeed! For transportation to
Antwerp, where the English were to unite with the French Army and
combine in the destruction of the German forces. But things did not
reach that stage. England was not ready. England and France were
resolved not to respect the neutrality of Belgium--the same England that
solemnly assures the world that she has never at any time or place
committed a breach of neutrality. England has observed neutrality only
when compatible with her own interests, which has not often been the
case. Her whole dissimulating policy is much more questionable than our
one breach of neutrality, committed in self-defense and accompanied by
the most solemn promises of indemnity and restitution.

England and France did not give up their plan of attacking Germany
through Belgium, and by this means won the approval of the Muscovites.
Three against one! It would have been a crime against the German people
if the German General Staff had not anticipated this intention. The
inalienable right of self-defense gives the individual, whose very
existence is at stake, the moral liberty to resort to weapons which
would be forbidden except in times of peril. As Belgium would,
nevertheless, not acquiesce in a friendly neutrality which would permit
the unobstructed passage of German troops through small portions of her
territory, although her integrity was guaranteed, the German General
Staff was obliged to force this passage in order to avoid the necessity
of meeting the enemy on the most unfavorable ground.

The Germans have not forgotten the tone in which the French and Belgian
press reported the frequent excursions of French Staff officers and
Generals for the purpose of making an exhaustive study of the territory
through which the armies are now moving, and who were received with open
arms in Belgium and treated like brothers. Belgium has become the vassal
of France.

In our place the Government of the United States would not have acted
differently. "Inter arma silent leges"--in the midst of arms the laws
are silent. Besides, England had interfered beforehand in Germany's plan
of campaign by declaring that she would not tolerate an attack upon the
northern coast of France.

The German troops, with their iron discipline, will respect the personal
liberty and property of the individual in Belgium, just as they did in
France in 1870.

The Belgians would have been wise if they had permitted the passage of
the German troops. They would have preserved their integrity, and,
besides that, would have fared well from the business point of view, for
the army would have proved a good customer and paid cash.

Germany has always been a good and just neighbor, to Belgium as well as
to the other small powers such as Holland, Denmark and Switzerland,
which England in her place would have swallowed up one and all long ago.

The development of industry on the lower Rhine has added to the
prosperity of Belgium and has made Antwerp one of the first ports on the
Continent, as well as one of the most important centres of exchange for
German-American trade.

Without Germany Belgium could never have acquired the Congo.

When England meditated taking possession of the Congo, claiming that
great rivers are nothing but arms of the sea and consequently belong to
the supreme maritime power, King Leopold turned to Germany for
protection and received it from Bismarck, who called the Congo
Conference of 1884-5 and obtained the recognition by the powers of the
independence of the Congo State.

The struggle of the German States in Europe has some points in common
with the struggle of the Independent States of North America (from 1778
to 1783), for it is directed chiefly against England's scheming
guardianship, and her practice of weakening the Continental powers by
sowing or fostering dissension among them.

While continually protesting her love of peace, England has carried on
no fewer than forty wars during the latter half of the nineteenth
century, including the great Boer war. She has long imperiled, and in
the end has succeeded in disturbing, the peace of Europe by her
invidious policy of isolating Germany. Germany, on the other hand, has
proved herself since 1871 to be the strongest and most reliable security
for the peace of Europe.

The policy of sowing dissension, practiced by England more industriously
than ever in recent years, cannot possibly meet with the approval of the
peace-loving citizens of the United States, and should be condemned on
merely humanitarian as well as commercial grounds.

England aims at being mistress of the Old World in order to occupy
either an equal, or a menacing, position toward the New World, as
circumstances may dictate. For this purpose she has encouraged this war.
The German Federated States of Europe are defending themselves with
might and main, and are counting in this struggle for existence on the
good-will of the United States of America, for whose citizens they
cherish the friendliest feelings, as they have proved at all times. All
Americans who have visited Germany will surely bear witness to that
effect.

THE ATTITUDES OF GERMANY'S ENEMIES.

Germany overrun by spies for years past.

It goes without saying that in time of war the respective participants
seek to gain for themselves every possible advantage, including as not
the least of these advantages that of having public opinion on their
side. It is equally understandable that Governments, for political or
military reasons, often endeavor to conceal their real intentions until
the decisive moment. In this matter, however, as in the conduct of war
itself, there exists the basic principle, acknowledged throughout the
civilized world, that no methods may be employed which could not be
employed by men of honor even when they are opponents. One cannot,
unfortunately, acquit Russia of the charge of employing improper
policies against Germany. It must, unfortunately, be said that even the
Czar himself did not, at the breaking out of hostilities against
Germany, show himself the gentleman upon a throne which he had formerly
been believed by every one to be.

The Russian Emperor addressed himself to Kaiser William in moving and
friendly expressions, in which, pledging his solemn word and appealing
to the grace of God, he besought the Kaiser, shortly before the outbreak
of the war, to intervene at Vienna. There exists between Austria-Hungary
and Germany an ancient and firm alliance, which makes it the duty of
both Governments to afford unconditional support to each other in the
moment that either one's vital interests come into question. There can
be no doubt that the existence of Austria-Hungary is threatened by the
Servian agitation. Despite this, the German Emperor, in offering his
final counsels respecting the treatment of Servia and the concessions to
be made to Russia, went, in his desire for peace, almost to the point
where Austria could have had doubts of Germany's fidelity to the
obligations of the alliance. Nevertheless, Russia at this very time not
only continued its mobilization against Austria, but also simultaneously
brought its troops into a state of preparedness for war against Germany.
It is impossible that this could have been done without the order of the
Czar. The conduct of the Russian Minister of Foreign Affairs, of the
Chief of the General Staff and of the War Minister was of a piece with
this attitude of the ruler. They assured the German Ambassador and the
German Military Attaché upon their word of honor that troops were not
being mobilized against Germany and that no attack upon Germany was
planned. The facts, however, have proved that the decision to make war
upon Germany had already been reached at that time.

The reason which impelled the Czar and his chief advisers to employ such
base tactics with the help of their word of honor and appeals to the
Supreme Being is plain. Russia requires a longer time for mobilization
than Germany. In order to offset this disadvantage, to deceive Germany
and to win a few days' start, the Russian Government stooped to a course
of conduct as to which there can be but one judgment among brave and
upright opponents. No one knew better than the Czar the German Emperor's
love of peace. This love of peace was reckoned upon in the whole
despicable game. Fortunately the plan was perceived on the German side
at the right time. Advices received by Germany's representative in St.
Petersburg concerning the actual Russian mobilization against Germany
moved him to add to the report given him upon the Russian word of honor
a statement of his own conviction that an attempt was obviously being
made to deceive him. We find also that the character of the Russian
operations had been rightly comprehended by so unimpeachable an organ as
the English Daily Graphic of Aug. 1, which said: "If the mobilization
order is also carried through in the provinces bordering on Germany, the
work of the preservers of peace is ended, for Germany will be compelled
to answer with the mobilization of her armed forces. We confess that we
are unable to understand this attitude of Russia in connection with the
renewal of the negotiations with Austria."

It is customary among civilized nations that a formal declaration of war
shall precede the beginning of hostilities, and all powers, with the
exception of some unimportant, scattered States, have obligated
themselves under international law to observe this custom. Neither
Russia nor France has observed this obligation. Without a declaration of
war Russian troops crossed the German border, opened fire on German
troops, and attempted to dynamite bridges and buildings. In like manner,
without a declaration of war, French aviators appeared above unfortified
cities in South Germany and sought, by throwing bombs, to destroy the
railways. French detachments crossed the German border and occupied
German villages. French aviators flew across neutral Holland and the
then neutral Belgium to carry out warlike plans against the lower Rhine
district of Germany. A considerable number of French officers, disguised
in German uniforms, tried to cross the Dutch-German frontier in an
automobile in order to destroy institutions in German territory. It is
plain that both France and Russia desired to compel Germany to make the
first step in declaring war, so that the appearance of having broken the
peace might, in the eyes of the world, rest upon Germany. The Russian
Government even attempted to disseminate through a foreign news agency
the report that Germany had declared war on Russia, and it refused,
contrary to the usage among civilized nations, to permit to be
telegraphed the report of the German Ambassador that Russia had rejected
the final German note concerning war and peace.

Germany for its part, in the hope that peace might yet be maintained,
subjected itself to the great disadvantage of delaying its mobilization
in the first decisive days in the face of the measures of its probable
enemy. When, however, the German Emperor realized that peace was no
longer possible, he declared war against France and Russia honorably,
before the beginning of hostilities, thus bringing into contrast the
moral courage to assume the responsibility for the beginning of the
conflict as against the moral cowardice of both opponents, whose fear of
public opinion was such that they did not dare openly to admit their
intentions to attack Germany.

Germany, moreover, cared in a humane and proper manner at the outbreak
of the war for those non-combatant subjects of hostile States--traveling
salesmen, travelers for pleasure, patients in health resorts, &c.--who
happened to be in the country at the time. In isolated cases, where the
excitement of the public grew disquieting, the authorities immediately
intervened to protect persons menaced. In Russia, however, in France
and especially in Belgium the opposite of decency and humanity
prevailed. Instead of referring feelings of national antipathy and of
national conflicting interests to the decision of the battlefield, the
French mishandled in the most brutal manner the German population and
German travelers in Paris and other cities, who neither could nor
wished to defend themselves, and who desired solely to leave the
hostile country at once. The mob threatened and mishandled Germans in
the streets, in the railway stations and in the trains, and the
authorities permitted it.

The occurrences in Belgium are infamous beyond all description. Germany
would have exposed itself to the danger of a military defeat if it had
still respected the neutrality of Belgium after it had been announced
that strong French detachments stood ready to march through that country
against the advancing German Army. The Belgium Government was assured
that its interests would be conscientiously guarded if it would permit
the German Army to march through its territory. Its answer to this
assurance was a declaration of war. In making this declaration it acted
perhaps not wisely but unquestionably within its formal rights. It was,
however, not right, but, on the contrary, a disgraceful breach of right,
that the eyes of wounded German soldiers in Belgium were gouged out, and
their ears and noses cut off; that surgeons and persons carrying the
wounded were shot at from houses.

Private dwellings of Germans in Antwerp were plundered, German women
were dragged naked through the streets by the mob and shot to death
before the eyes of the police and the militia. Captains of captured
German ships in Antwerp were told that the authorities could not
guarantee their lives, German tourists were robbed of their baggage,
insulted and mishandled, sick persons were driven from the German
hospital, children were thrown from the windows of German homes into the
streets and their limbs were broken. Trustworthy reports of all these
occurrences, from respectable and responsible men, are at hand. We
perceive with the deepest indignation that the cruelties of the Congo
have been outdone by the motherland. When it comes to pass that in time
of war among nations the laws of humanity respecting the helpless and
the unarmed, the women and children, are no longer observed, the world
is reverting to barbarism. Even in wartimes humanity and honor should
still remain the distinguishing marks of civilization. That French and
Russians, in their endeavors to spy upon Germany and destroy her
institutions, should disguise themselves in German uniforms is a sorry
testimony to the sense of honor possessed by our opponents. He who
ventures to conduct espionage in a hostile land, or secretly to plant
bombs, realizes that he risks the penalty of death, whether he be a
civilian or a member of the army. Up to the present, however, it has not
been customary to use a uniform, which should be respected even by the
enemy, to lessen the personal risk of the spy and to facilitate his
undertaking.

For a number of years there have been increasing indications that
France, Russia and England were systematically spying upon the military
institutions of Germany. In the eight years from 1906 to 1913; 113
persons were found guilty of attempted or accomplished espionage of a
grave nature. The methods employed by these spies included theft,
attacks upon military posts and the employment of German officers'
uniforms as disguises. The court proceedings threw a clear light upon
the organization and operations of espionage in Germany. This espionage
was directed from central points in foreign countries, often in the
small neighboring neutral States. Repeatedly it appeared that the
foreign embassies and consulates in Germany assisted in this work; it
was also discovered that Russia, France and England were exchanging
reports which they had received concerning Germany's means of defense.

This espionage system was supported with large funds. It endeavored
whenever possible to seduce military persons and officials to betray
their country, and, when this was not possible, it devoted its attention
to doubtful characters of every sort. It began its work with petty
requests of a harmless appearance, followed these with inducements to
violations of duty, and then proceeded with threats of exposure to
compel its victims to betray their country further. Exact instructions,
complete in the minutest detail, were given to the spies for the
carrying on of their work; they were equipped with photographic
apparatus, with skeleton keys, forged passes, &c.; they received fixed
monthly salaries, special bonuses for valuable information, and high
rewards for especially secret matters, such as army orders, descriptions
of weapons and plans of fortifications. Principal attention was paid to
our boundaries, railroads, bridges and important buildings on lines of
traffic, which were spied upon by specially trained men. With the
reports of these spies as their basis, our opponents have carefully
planned the destruction of the important German lines of communication.
The extraordinary watchfulness of the German military officials
immediately before the declaration of war and since then has been able
to render futile the whole system of foreign attempts against our means
of communication in every single instance, but a great number of such
attempts have been made. All these things prove beyond doubt that a war
against Germany has long been planned by our opponents.

LIES ABOUT GERMANY.

The machinations of England and France to put Germany in the
wrong--Lies on all sides.

Germany has now not only to battle against a world in arms, but it must
also defend itself against lies and slanders which have been piled up
around it like a hostile rampart. There is no cable at our disposal.
England has either cut the cables, or is in possession of them. No
German description of what has actually occurred can be sent by
telegraph; the wires are carrying into the world only the distortions of
our enemies. Germany is shut off as with a hedge from the outside world,
and the world is supplied solely with news given out by our enemies.
This language is strictly true; for the boldest, nay, the most impudent
imagination would be unable to invent anything to exceed the false and
absurd reports already printed by foreign newspapers.

In view of what we have experienced during this first week of the war we
can already calmly assert that when the editors of foreign newspapers
come later to compare their daily news of this week with the actual
occurrences as testified to by authentic history, they will all open
their eyes in astonishment and anger over all the lies which the
countries hostile to Germany have sent over the cables to bamboozle the
whole world. Much of all this has already become ridiculous; we must
laugh over it despite the solemnity of the crisis in which we are
living--for example, the bestowal of the cross of the Legion of Honor
upon the city of Liége by the French President because it victoriously
repulsed the attack of the Germans. Witness, too, the telegrams of
congratulation sent by the King of England and the Czar of Russia to the
Belgian King upon the victory of Liége! The joy over such "German
defeats" will prove just as brief as the jubilation over such "Belgian
victories." Such lies have short legs, and the truth will in any case
soon overtake them.

But there are other lies of a more serious character and of more
dangerous import--all such as misrepresent Germany's attitude and defame
German character. Such defamation is designed to disturb old friendships
and transform them into bitter estrangement; such defamation can also
attain its hostile purpose wherever people do not say daily to
themselves, "It is an enemy that reports such things about Germany; let
us be wise and suspend our judgment till we know actual results, till we
know what is surely the truth."

Let us select several facts as examples and as evidence--facts connected
with the preparation for this war, as well as with the conduct of it
thus far.

All the cables controlled by the English-French-Russian coalition
disseminate the lie about the ostensibly "preventive war" that Germany
wished and prepared for. The German "White Book" prints documents
proving the white purity of the German conscience as represented by
Kaiser, Chancellor, and people. It reveals also the profound grief of
the German Kaiser over the sly and insidious perfidy of the Czar, toward
whom he steadily maintained German fidelity even in hours of grave
danger. What Russia did was more than a mere attack, it was a
treacherous assault. The following facts prove this:

     The German mobilization was ordered on Aug. 1, whereas Russia began
     to mobilize fully four weeks earlier, or about the beginning of
     July. Papers found on several Russian harvest laborers arrested in
     the district of Konitz show that the Russian military authorities
     had already by the first of July--i.e., immediately after the
     tragedy at Serajevo--sent to the leaders of these men mustering-in
     orders, which were to be distributed immediately after a further
     word should be given. These confiscated papers prove that Russia
     hoped to be able to mobilize against Austria before Germany could
     get official information of Russia's measures. The Russian
     authorities purposely avoided the usual course of sending these
     orders through the Russian Consuls, and they assigned "military
     exercises" as the object of this call to the colors.

     July 25--Military exercises at Krasnoye-Selo were suddenly broken
     off and the troops returned at once to their garrisons. The
     manoeuvres had been called off. The military cadets were advanced
     at once to officers, instead of waiting, as usual, till Autumn.

     July 26--All ships and boats are forbidden to sail in the waters
     between Helsingfors and Yorkkele; and navigation between Sweden and
     Finland is closed.

     July 28--Partial mobilization; sixteen army corps to be increased
     to the strength of thirty-two corps. On the same day the Czar begs
     for friendly mediation; and on the same day the Russian Minister of
     Foreign Affairs and the Russian Minister of War give the German
     Military Attaché, upon their own initiative, their solemn word of
     honor that no mobilization has taken place.

     July 30--The Second and Third Russian Cavalry Divisions appear on
     the German frontier between Wirballen and Augustov. The Czar issues
     a ukase calling to the colors the reserves in twenty-three entire
     Governments and in eighty districts of other Governments; also the
     naval reserves in sixty-four districts, or twelve Russian and one
     Finnish Government; also the Cossacks on furlough in a number of
     districts; also the necessary reserve officers, physicians, horses
     and wagons.

     July 31--General mobilization of the whole Russian Army and Navy.
     The German steamer Eitel Friedrich, which keeps up a regular
     service between Stettin and St. Petersburg, is stopped by a Russian
     torpedo boat and brought into Revel, where the crew were made
     prisoners. The Russians blow up the railway bridge on Austrian
     territory between Szozakowa and Granica.

     Night of Aug. 1--Russian patrols attack the German railway bridge
     near Eichenried and try to surprise the German railway station at
     Miloslaw. A Russian column crosses the German frontier at
     Schwidden, and two squadrons of Cossacks ride against Johannisburg.

     Aug. 1--(At last) Germany's mobilization.

And France?

     July 27--The Fourteenth Army Corps breaks off its manoeuvres.

     July 31--General mobilization.

     Aug. 2--French troops attack German frontier posts, cross the
     frontier, and occupy German towns. Bomb-throwing aviators come into
     Baden and Bavaria; also, after violating Belgium's neutrality by
     crossing Belgian territory, they enter the Rhine Province and try
     to destroy bridges.

     Only after all this is the German Ambassador at Paris instructed to
     demand his passports.

And England?

In London war must already have been decided upon by July 31; the
English Admiralty had even before that date advised Lloyd's against
insuring German ships. On the same day the German Government gave
emphatic support in Vienna to the English mediatory proposal of Sir
Edward Grey. But the entire English fleet had already been assembled.

Of course, English public opinion was and still is divided. As late as
Aug. 1 The Daily Graphic wrote in reference to the Russian mobilization
order: "Will the Russian order also be carried out in the provinces on
the German frontier? If so, then the labor of the peace-preservers is at
an end, for Germany is compelled to answer with the mobilization of its
armed forces. We confess that we are not able to understand this
attitude of Russia, in view of the resumption of negotiations at
Vienna."

And a leaflet distributed in the streets of London said that "a war for
Russia is a war against civilization."

So much as to the preparations for the war--and now we take up the
conduct of the war itself.

By glancing at the foreign press during this one week we have been able
to collect the following specimen pieces of news:

     London--The British Admiralty reports that the English fleet had
     driven back the German fleet to the Dutch coast.

There is not one word of truth in this. The Admiralty itself appears
later to have recovered its senses; at least, it denied a Reuter story
about a "great English naval victory near the Dogger Bank." But the
English manufactories of lies are already so actively at work that
members of Parliament have protested in the House itself against the
"lying reports of the English press."

     Paris--From Paris the assertion was made and disseminated
     throughout the world that "the landing of English troops in Belgium
     has begun; they were enthusiastically received by the population.
     The landing proceeded rapidly and in the best order, as the
     agreement between the two General Staffs guaranteed the perfect
     carrying out of the disembarkment plans."

Not a single word of this is true. At present not one English soldier
has been landed.

In a similar way the Baltic Sea has become the scene of invented
"battles"--of "German defeats," of course; the Russian Baltic Fleet sank
a German war vessel in a battle that never occurred.

And, "The Russian vanguard has crossed the German frontier without
meeting with opposition." As a matter of fact there is not a single
Russian soldier on German soil. All inroads have been repulsed, and the
German offensive has everywhere been successful.

A Dutch newspaper prints the following report from France:

     Belfort--Many hundreds of Alsatians are joining the French Army
     with great enthusiasm, also many Italian Swiss. A large number of
     Alsace-Lorrainers are waiting near the frontier with a view of
     crossing it at a favorable opportunity to fight on the French side.

Such absurdity in the face of the unbroken unanimity of the entire
German people and despite the manifest enthusiasm of the
Alsace-Lorrainers for the German cause!

Equally stupid and made up for incurably credulous readers is an
official report of the French War Ministry--not a private rumor, be it
noted, but an official communication. It says:

     A young Frenchman reports under oath that he was arrested, along
     with several other Frenchmen, at the railway station in Lörrach
     while on the homeward journey from Baden; and they were led through
     the whole city under a military escort. One of the Frenchmen
     shouted, "Hurrah for France," and was at once shot down. Three
     others who protested against this suffered the same fate; and so
     did a fifth man who thereupon had called the Germans murderers. The
     rest of the Frenchmen, proceeding to Switzerland by rail, heard
     shots fired in the adjoining compartment; they discovered that two
     Italians had been shot by Germans because one had protested against
     the opening of the window, and another had jostled a German.

Does such stuff call for any refutation at all?

A typical example of how it is sought to work upon public opinion by
means of systematic lying is afforded by the capture of Liége.

The fact is that this Belgian stronghold, along with its forts, which
contained a garrison of 20,000 men, was taken by storm on Aug. 7 by the
German troops, who fought with unparalleled bravery, and that 3,000 to
4,000 Belgian prisoners of war are already on their way to Germany.

Yet on Aug. 9--two days after the fall of Liége--a dispatch was still
sent to the Dutch press, saying: "The Liége forts are still in Belgian
hands."

And on Aug. 8, thirty-six hours after the fall of Liége--a dispatch was
sent from Paris to the newspapers of Rome, saying:

     The Germans lost 20,000 men at Liége and asked for an armistice of
     twenty-four hours. Liége has not yet fallen. The English landed
     100,000 men at Antwerp, who were received with jubilation by the
     population. President Poincaré, upon the proposal of Doumergue, the
     Minister of War, conferred on the City of Liége the cross of the
     Legion of Honor.

Another newspaper reported as follows: "The King of England sent a
congratulatory dispatch to the King of Belgium upon his victory at
Liége; seven German regiments were slain."

At Paris itself a note of the French War Ministry--published on the
evening of Aug. 7, Liége having fallen in the early morning of that
day--mentions the resistance of Liége and says that the forts are still
holding out; that the Germans who had entered the city on Thursday by
passing between the forts had evacuated it on Friday; and that the
Belgian division that went to the assistance of the city had therefore
not even made an attack. The official note concludes from all this that
the resistance of the Belgians was seriously disturbing the plan of the
Germans, who were building hopes upon a rapid success.

And four full days after the capture of Liége the French Minister at
Berne reported officially: "Liége has not yet been taken; the German
troops were repulsed."

At Copenhagen the following dispatches were published: "The English and
French troops had effected a junction with the Belgian Army and had
entered Liége and made many German prisoners, among them a nephew of the
German Kaiser."

Similarly at Stockholm: "The Germans had suffered a severe repulse."

Again a dispatch from Paris to Rome: "The Germans had been driven back
behind the Moselle and were begging for an armistice; the French had
passed Namur and were pressing forward in forced marches, while 500,000
English were falling upon the German flank."

Still another official report from Paris: "Liége is becoming the grave
of the 150,000 Germans who are breaking their heads against its walls;
the Belgians had taken 3,000 prisoners, who were in a terrible
condition; but for their good fortune of falling into captivity they
would have starved to death."

In contrast to all this let us take the unvarnished truth as in the
reported simple words of the German Quartermaster General:

     We are now able to report upon Liége Without doing any harm.... We
     had only a weak force at Liége four days ago, for it is not
     possible to prepare for such a bold undertaking by collecting large
     masses of men. That we attained the desired end in spite of this is
     due to the excellent preparation, the valor of our troops, their
     energetic leadership, and the help of God. The courage of the enemy
     was broken, and his troops fought badly. The difficulties against
     us lay in the exceedingly unfavorable topography of the
     surroundings, which consisted of hills and woods, and in the
     treacherous participation of the entire population in the fighting,
     not even excluding women. The people fired upon our troops from
     ambush, from villages and forests--fired upon our physicians who
     were treating the wounded, and upon the wounded themselves. Hard
     and bitter fighting occurred; whole villages had to be destroyed in
     order to break the resistance, before our brave troops penetrated
     the girdle of forts and took possession of the city. It is true
     that a part of the forts still held out, but they no longer fired.
     The Kaiser did not want to waste a drop of blood in storming the
     forts, which no longer hindered the carrying out of our plans. We
     were able to await the arrival of heavy artillery to level the
     forts one after the other at our leisure, and without the sacrifice
     of a single life--in case their garrisons should not surrender
     sooner.... So far as can be judged at present the Belgians had more
     men for the defense of the city than we had for storming it. Every
     expert can measure from this fact the greatness of our achievement;
     it is without a parallel....

     (Signed) VON STEIN,

     Quartermaster General.

It is not the German people alone that will have cause to remember
Liége; the whole world will do well to learn from the case of Liége that
an organized manufactory of lies is trying to deceive the public opinion
of all the nations. Glorious victories are converted into "defeats with
heavy losses," and the strong moral discipline of the German troops is
slanderously described in the reports of the imaginative, phrase-loving
French as cruelty--just as in 1870 the Prussian Uhlans were described as
thrusting through with their lances all the French babies and pinning
them fast to the walls.

How far the "grande nation" has already degenerated, and how far the
Belgian population, akin to the French both in blood and in sentiments,
imitate the French in their Balkan brutality, is illustrated by two
examples. One of these, in the form of a German official warning, says:
"The reports at hand about the fighting around Liége show that the
population of the country took part in the battle. Our troops were fired
upon from ambush. Physicians were shot at while following their
profession. Cruelties were practiced by the population on wounded
soldiers. There is also news at hand showing that German patrols in the
vicinity of Metz were fired at from ambush from the French side. It may
be that these occurrences are due to the composition of the population
in those industrial regions, but it may also be that France and Belgium
are preparing for a guerrilla warfare upon our troops. If the latter
alternative should prove true, and this proof be strengthened through
repetitions of these occurrences, then our opponents will have
themselves to thank if this war be carried on with unrelenting severity
even against the guilty population. The German troops, who are
accustomed to preserve discipline and to wage war only against the armed
forces of the hostile State, cannot be blamed if, in just self-defense,
they give no quarter. The hope of influencing the result of the war by
turning loose the passions of the populace will be frustrated by the
unshaken energy of our leaders and our troops. Before neutral foreign
countries, however, it must be demonstrated, even at the beginning of
this war, that it was not the German troops who caused the war to take
on such forms."

The details of the cruelties, here only hinted at, on the Belgian and
French side, are supplied and proved by an eye-witness, a German
physician, who reports:

     We have experienced from the Belgian population, from men, women,
     and half-grown boys, such things as we had hitherto seen only in
     wars with negroes. The Belgian civilian population shoots in blind
     hatred from every house, from every thick bush, at everything that
     is German. We had on the very first day many dead and wounded,
     caused by the civilian population. Women take part as well as men.
     One German had his throat cut at night while in bed. Five wounded
     Germans were put into a house bearing the flag of the Red Cross; by
     the next morning they had all been stabbed to death. In a village
     near Verviers we found the body of one of our soldiers with his
     hands bound behind his back and his eyes punched out. An automobile
     column which set out from Liége halted in a village; a young woman
     came up, suddenly drew a revolver, and shot a chauffeur dead. At
     Emmenich, an hour by foot from Aachen, a sanitary automobile column
     was attacked by the populace on a large scale and fired at from the
     houses. The red cross on our sleeves and on our automobiles gives
     us physicians no protection at all.

GERMANY AND THE FOREIGNER.

Respect for the foreigner--Russians willing to remain in
Germany--Ill-treatment of Germans in Belgium and France.

Enemies on all sides! With dishonorable weapons against us, and with
documentary lies for the rest of the world! Let us calmly allow them to
continue lying and slandering as they have begun--it will result finally
in injuring themselves. The world will very soon see through this
impudent, unabashed game; and it will finally side with the people which
keeps to the truth, Only the weakling lies and swindles; the strong man
loves and honors truth. Let us act like the strong man in this struggle!

Respect for the foreigner, protection for his person and property have
at all times been considered sacred among civilized people. Germany can
without exaggeration claim to have upheld this respect and this
protection in these fateful days. Except for a few insignificant
incidents which took place in several large cities, where the natural
excitement of the people and the legitimate defense against an insolent
system of spying led to the molesting and arrest of foreigners--mostly
Russians--the measures taken against the citizens of hostile nations did
not exceed what was absolutely necessary to the safety of the country.
The Imperial Government and likewise the Federated States have refrained
from expelling "en masse" Frenchmen, Russians, Belgians and Englishmen.
It was, of course, unavoidable to take measures for the detention of
such persons as seemed suspicious and for the internation of strangers
liable to be called to take arms against Germany. This took place in
cities, e.g., Berlin, where these men were taken away as "prisoners of
war," as soon as the "state of war" had been proclaimed, and placed in
special rooms or camps. Lodgings and food are such as seem requisite and
the treatment of these prisoners is according to their own opinion very
kind. The Russian agricultural laborers constitute a special group of
foreigners in Germany: There are about 40,000 to 50,000 of them, men and
women.

From various parts of the country it is unanimously announced that these
people are very glad not to be obliged to return to Russia. They are
glad to remain in Germany, and willingly continue their work of
gathering the rich German grain, potato and hay crops. Should there be
any difficulties, these workmen would also have to be internated. No
measures at all have been taken against women and children belonging to
hostile States. They are left free to move about as they wish. Should
they remain in Germany they can be sure that they will be subject to no
other inconvenience except such as the general state of war inflicts
upon Germans. The authorities will protect their persons, and their
private property is respected. Nobody will touch it--as nobody has
touched it so far.

If the German people and the German Government consider the respect they
owe the foreigner as a sacred law, even though the foreigner belongs to
the enemy, this respect is enhanced by affection and gratitude in the
case of foreigners whose countries are friendly or neutral.
Thousands and thousands of Americans, Swiss, Dutch, Italians and
Scandinavians are still living in German countries. They may be sure
that they can live as freely here as any German citizen. Should it be
possible for them to return home, the best wishes will accompany them.
The property they leave here will be protected. This is guaranteed by
the authorities and by influential private persons. Should they stay in
Germany, however, the German people will express their sense of
gratitude for any friendly help they may lend, by increased respect and
protection.

A strong contrast is noticeable between Germany's attitude toward
foreigners and the facts revealed just now as to the treatment meted out
in inimical countries not only to Germans but to other foreigners.
Truly, in England there has been some effort to act according to the
usages of civilized nations when engaged in warfare. Germans and
Austrians have been insulted and molested; there has been some
occasional destruction of property in stores; but as far as can be
judged these were excesses of an uncontrollable mob. A general expulsion
has not been ordered, and it is to be hoped that the Germans living in
the United Kingdom and in its colonies will not suffer too heavy
damages, in person or in property. Russia, France and Belgium, on the
other hand, have by the ill-treatment and plundering of foreigners
living in their countries struck themselves out of the list of civilized
nations. Innumerable reports from expelled or fugitive people prove
this, and official reports confirm them. Also the press of neutral,
neighboring countries, such as Switzerland, Holland, and Italy, is full
of similar complaints. Owing to the scarcity of news from Russia, the
facts known so far only concern Petersburg, where German and Austrian
men and women, residents or transients, were beaten and stoned in the
streets. Here were also some cruel mutilations and murders. The
beautiful building of the German Embassy in Petersburg was attacked by
the mob. And the police watched all these misdeeds with crossed arms or
even assisted. Probably what took place in Petersburg also occurred in
other Russian cities; we shall soon know.

There are a great many complaints against the French and the Belgians.
On the evening of Aug. 1 the mobilization was announced, and the next
morning the official order was posted on the walls, that within
twenty-four hours from the beginning of that day all Germans and
Austrians, irrespective of sex, age or profession, would have to leave
France. Those who remained and could not reach the boundary would be
taken to the southwestern part of the country and imprisoned. There were
few trains for Belgium or Switzerland. Thousands and thousands who had
to abandon their property rushed to the stations with wife and children,
fought for room in the overcrowded trains, surrounded by a howling mob,
and even then were punched and slapped by policemen. During the trip
there was nothing but misery. Men and women fell ill, children died. The
refugees had to cross the Belgian boundary, walking a distance of six or
seven kilometers in the middle of the night, dead tired, their luggage
stolen--sometimes, it is said, by officials. In Belgium the same tragedy
occurred as in France. And then came the salvation. The cordial,
hospitable reception by the Germans in Holland and Switzerland is
unanimously praised and appreciated.

The reports of brutal acts from Paris, Antwerp, Brussels, would be
incredible were they not confirmed hundredfold. The most brutal and
insulting threats of death were flung by processions of people going
through the streets to all those who looked like foreigners. They were
severely ill-treated. Houses and stores were upset, furniture and the
like were thrown into the streets, employers and working people were
dragged out, women were stripped and pushed through the streets,
children were thrown out of windows. Knives, swords, sticks and
revolvers were used. One could fill books with the details, but they are
all equally cruel. Not only Germans and Austrians were expelled
and ill-treated, but citizens of neutral States shared this awful lot.
Thousands of Italians were expelled, as well as numerous Rumanians. The
press in both countries complains bitterly and asks what has become of
those who remained in France and were imprisoned in the south--but
nobody knows.

History will place this ill-treatment and oppression of foreigners on
record. The responsibility rests, not with an uncontrollable mob, but
with the Government and the authorities of the two countries who have
always boasted of their culture.

COMMERCE AND TRADE RELATIONS
BETWEEN GERMANY AND UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

Germany's financial rise since 1870--Export and import with the United
States of America--The present firm condition of German finance.

Politicians and commercial men must base their plans upon facts, as they
are and not as they wish they were, otherwise they fail. France has
closed its eyes not only to the great intellectual and moral assists of
Germany but also to its commercial resources.

France has repeatedly declared that Germany could not effect a serious
political opposition, because a war would result in the ruin of its
commercial and financial strength. This we heard in the Morocco crisis,
also in the Balkan wars. Germany's love of peace which was tested in the
above-mentioned cases strengthened the French in their error. He,
however, who has taken the trouble to visit Germany and the Germans in
their places of employment--and especially Americans in recent years
have done this, however, also many Englishmen, who in vain have
protested against the war with Germany--he can testify to the
astonishing commercial advancement which Germany has made since its
political union by Bismarck.

A few facts and statistics may recall this to memory. The population of
Germany has since 1870, immigrants excluded, increased from 40,000,000
to 67,000,000, round numbers. Incomes and wages in particular have
approximately doubled during the last generation; savings deposits have
increased sixfold. Although, only a generation ago, commerce and trade
employed only about two-fifths of the population, now more than
three-fifths are engaged in this field of work, and Germany, as a result
of its agricultural economy and increased intense farming, is today the
third largest agricultural country of the world. In the coal and iron
industries Germany is second only to America. In one generation its coal
production increased two and a half fold, its raw iron production almost
fourfold. During the same period of time the capital of the German banks
increased fourfold and their reserve fund eightfold. Characteristic of
Germany is the fact that hand in hand with this active private
initiative is a strong feeling for the great universal interests and for
organic co-operation of private and State resources. This feeling
explains the perfect working of our State activities, in particular our
railways, 95 per cent. of which are owned by the Government and which
yield an essentially higher revenue than those in England or France; it
explains further the willing assumption of the great financial burdens
which general insurance imposes upon those engaged in private
enterprises and which today is proving a blessing to almost the entire
laboring force of Germany, to an extent which has not yet been realized
by any other country.

What economic value to the world has a nation which for more than forty
years has concentrated all its energy in peaceful industry? Does any one
deny that Germany's great technical and commercial advancement has been
a blessing in respect to the development of the world? Has not the
commercial advancement in Germany had the effect of awakening new
productive powers in all parts of the world and of adding new
territories which engage in the exchange of goods with the civilized
nations of the world? Since the founding of the new German
Empire, German foreign trade has increased from 5-1/2 to approximately
20 billion marks. Germany has become the best customer of a great number
of countries. Not only has the German consumption of provisions and
luxuries increased in an unusual degree, also that of meat, tropical
fruits, sugar, tobacco and colonial products, but above all else that of
raw materials, such as coal, iron, copper and other metals, cotton,
petroleum, wood, skins, &c. Germany furnishes a market for articles of
manufacture also, for American machinery, English wool, French luxury
articles, &c. One is absolutely wrong in the belief that the competition
of German industry in the world market has been detrimental to other
commercial nations. Legitimate competition increases the business of all
concerned.

The United States of America has reaped especial profit from Germany's
flourishing commercial condition. Germany purchases more from the United
States of America than from any other country of the world. Germany buys