Sasonow has requested the latter to enlighten me on the situation. The

Secretary of War has given me his word of honor that no order to

mobilize has as yet been issued. Though general preparations are being

made, no reserves were called and no horses mustered. If Austria crossed

the Servian frontier, such military districts as are directed toward

Austria, viz., Kiev, Odessa, Moscow, Kazan, are to be mobilized. Under

no circumstances those on the German frontier, Warsaw, Vilna, St.

Petersburg. Peace with Germany was desired very much. Upon my inquiry

into the object of mobilization against Austria he shrugged his

shoulders and referred to the diplomats. I told the Secretary that we

appreciated the friendly intentions, but considered mobilization even

against Austria as very menacing.

EXHIBIT 12.

Telegram of the Chancellor to the Imperial Ambassador at London on July

27th, 1914.

We know as yet nothing of a suggestion of Sir Edward Grey's to hold a

quadruple conference in London. It is impossible for us to place our

ally in his dispute with Servia before a European tribunal. Our

mediation must be limited to the danger of an Austro-Russian conflict.

EXHIBIT 13.

Telegram of the Chancellor to the Imperial Ambassador at London on July

25th, 1914.

The distinction made by Sir Edward Grey between an Austro-Servian and an

Austro-Russian conflict is perfectly correct. We do not wish to

interpose in the former any more than England, and as heretofore we take

the position that this question must be localized by virtue of all

powers refraining from intervention. It is therefore our hope that

Russia will refrain from any action in view of her responsibility and

the seriousness of the situation. We are prepared, in the event of an

Austro-Russian controversy, quite apart from our known duties as allies,

to intercede between Russia and Austria jointly with the other powers.

EXHIBIT 14.

Telegram of the Chancellor to the Imperial Ambassador at St. Petersburg

on July 28th, 1914.

We continue in our endeavor to induce Vienna to elucidate in St.

Petersburg the object and scope of the Austrian action in Servia in a

manner both convincing and satisfactory to Russia. The declaration of

war which has meanwhile ensued alters nothing in this matter.

EXHIBIT 15.

Telegram of the Chancellor to the Imperial Ambassador in London on July

27th, 1914.

We have at once started the mediation proposal in Vienna in the sense as

desired by Sir Edward Grey. We have communicated besides to Count

Berchtold the desire of M. Sasonow for a direct parley with Vienna.

EXHIBIT 16.

Telegram of the Imperial Ambassador at Vienna to the Chancellor on July

28th, 1914.

Count Berchtold requests me to express to Your Excellency his thanks for

the communication of the English mediation proposal. He states, however,

that after the opening of hostilities by Servia and the subsequent

declaration of war, the step appears belated.

EXHIBIT 17.

Telegram of the Chancellor to the Imperial Ambassador at Paris on July

29th, 1914.

News received here regarding French preparations of war multiplies from

hour to hour. I request that You call the attention of the French

Government to this and accentuate that such measures would call forth

counter-measures on our part. We should have to proclaim threatening

state of war (drohende Kriegsgefahr), and while this would not mean a

call for the reserves or mobilization, yet the tension would be

aggravated. We continue to hope for the preservation of peace.

EXHIBIT 18.

Telegram of the Military Attache at St. Petersburg to H. M. the Kaiser

on July 30th, 1914.

Prince Troubetzki said to me yesterday, after causing Your Majesty's

telegram to be delivered at once to Czar Nicolas: Thank God that a

telegram of Your Emperor has come. He has just told me the telegram has

made a deep impression upon the Czar but as the mobilization against

Austria had already been ordered and Sasonow had convinced His Majesty

that it was no longer possible to retreat, His Majesty was sorry he

could not change it any more. I then told him that the guilt for the

measureless consequences lay at the door of premature mobilization

against Austria-Hungary which after all was involved merely in a local

war with Servia, for Germany's answer was clear and the responsibility

rested upon Russia which ignored Austria-Hungary's assurance that it had

no intentions of territorial gain in Servia. Austria-Hungary mobilized

against Servia and not against Russia and there was no ground for an

immediate action on the part of Russia. I further added that in Germany

one could not understand any more Russia's phrase that "she could not

desert her brethren in Servia", after the horrible crime of Sarajevo. I

told him finally he need not wonder if Germany's army were to be

mobilized.

EXHIBIT 19.

Telegram of the Chancellor to the Imperial Ambassador at Rome on July

31st, 1914.

We have continued to negotiate between Russia and Austria-Hungary

through a direct exchange of telegrams between His Majesty the Kaiser

and His Majesty the Czar, as well as in conjunction with Sir Edward

Grey. Through the mobilization of Russia all our efforts have been

greatly handicapped if they have not become impossible. In spite of

pacifying assurances Russia is taking such far-reaching measures against

us that the situation is becoming continually more menacing.

EXHIBIT 20.

I. His Majesty to the Czar.

July 28th, 10.45 p.m.

I have heard with the greatest anxiety of the impression which is caused

by the action of Austria-Hungary against Servia. The inscrupulous

agitation which has been going on for years in Servia, has led to the

revolting crime of which Archduke Franz Ferdinand has become a victim.

The spirit which made the Servians murder their own King and his

consort, still dominates that country. Doubtless You will agree with me

that both of us, You as well as I, and all other sovereigns, have a

common interest to insist that all those who are responsible for this

horrible murder, shall suffer their deserved punishment.

On the other hand I by no means overlook the difficulty encountered by

You and Your Government to stem the tide of public opinion. In view of

the cordial friendship which has joined us both for a long time with

firm ties, I shall use my entire influence to induce Austria-Hungary to

obtain a frank and satisfactory understanding with Russia. I hope

confidently that You will support me in my efforts to overcome all

difficulties which may yet arise.

Your most sincere and devoted friend and cousin

signed: Wilhelm.

EXHIBIT 21.

II. The Czar to His Majesty.

Peterhof Palace, July 29th, 1 p.m.

I am glad that You are back in Germany. In this serious moment I ask You

earnestly to help me. An ignominious war has been declared against a

weak country and in Russia the indignation which I fully share is

tremendous. I fear that very soon I shall be unable to resist the

pressure exercised upon me and that I shall be forced to take measures

which will lead to war. To prevent a calamity as a European war would

be, I urge You in the name of our old friendship to do all in Your power

to restrain Your ally from going too far.

signed: Nicolas.

EXHIBIT 22.

III. His Majesty to the Czar.

July 29th, 6.30 p.m.

I have received Your telegram and I share Your desire for the

conservation of peace. However: I cannot--as I told You in my first

telegram--consider the action of Austria-Hungary as an "ignominious

war". Austria-Hungary knows from experience that the promises of Servia

as long as they are merely on paper are entirely unreliable.

According to my opinion the action of Austria-Hungary is to be

considered as an attempt to receive full guaranty that the promises of

Servia are effectively translated into deeds. In this opinion I am

strengthened by the explanation of the Austrian cabinet that

Austria-Hungary intended no territorial gain at the expense of Servia. I

am therefore of opinion that it is perfectly possible for Russia to

remain a spectator in the Austro-Servian war without drawing Europe into

the most terrible war it has ever seen. I believe that a direct

understanding is possible and desirable between Your Government and

Vienna, an understanding which--as I have already telegraphed You--my

Government endeavors to aid with all possible effort. Naturally military

measures by Russia, which might be construed as a menace by

Austria-Hungary, would accelerate a calamity which both of us desire to

avoid and would undermine my position as mediator which--upon Your

appeal to my friendship and aid--I willingly accepted.

signed: Wilhelm.

EXHIBIT 23.

IV. His Majesty to the Czar.

July 30th, 1 a.m.

My Ambassador has instructions to direct the attention of Your

Government to the dangers and serious consequences of a mobilization; I

have told You the same in my last telegram. Austria-Hungary has

mobilized only against Servia, and only a part of her army. If Russia,

as seems to be the case according to Your advice and that of Your

Government, mobilizes against Austria-Hungary, the part of the mediator

with which You have entrusted me in such friendly manner and which I

have accepted upon Your express desire, is threatened if not made

impossible. The entire weight of decision now rests upon Your shoulders,

You have to bear the responsibility for war or peace.

signed: Wilhelm.

EXHIBIT 23a.

V. The Czar to His Majesty.

Peterhof, July 30th, 1914, 1.20 p.m.

I thank You from my heart for Your quick reply. I am sending to-night

Tatisheft (Russian honorary aide to the Kaiser) with instructions. The

military measures now taking form were decided upon five days ago, and

for the reason of defence against the preparations of Austria. I hope

with all my heart that these measures will not influence in any manner

Your position as mediator which I appraise very highly. We need Your

strong pressure upon Austria so that an understanding can be arrived at

with us.

Nicolas.

EXHIBIT 24.

Telegram of the Chancellor to the Imperial Ambassador at St. Petersburg

on July 31st, 1914. Urgent.

In spite of negotiations still pending and although we have up to this

hour made no preparations for mobilization, Russia has mobilized her

entire army and navy, hence also against us. On account of these Russian

measures we have been forced, for the safety of the country, to proclaim

the threatening state of war, which does not yet imply mobilization.

Mobilization, however, is bound to follow if Russia does not stop every

measure of war against us and against Austria-Hungary within 12 hours

and notifies us definitely to this effect. Please to communicate this at

once to M. Sasonow and wire hour of communication.

EXHIBIT 25.

Telegram of the Chancellor to the Imperial Ambassador in Paris on July

31st, 1914. Urgent.

Russia has ordered mobilization of her entire army and fleet, therefore

also against us in spite of our still pending mediation. We have

therefore declared the threatening state of war which is bound to be

followed by mobilization unless Russia stops within 12 hours all

measures of war against us and Austria. Mobilization inevitably implies

war. Please ask French Government whether it intends to remain neutral

in a Russo-German war. Reply must be made in 18 hours. Wire at once hour

of inquiry. Utmost speed necessary.

EXHIBIT 26.

Telegram of the Chancellor to the Imperial Ambassador in St. Petersburg

on August 1st, 12.52 p.m. Urgent.

If the Russian Government gives no satisfactory reply to our demand,

Your Excellency will please transmit this afternoon 5 o'clock

(mid-European time) the following statement:

"Le Gouvernement Impérial s'est efforcé dès les débuts de la crise de la

mener à une solution pacifique. Se rendant à un désir que lui en avail

été exprimé par Sa Majesté l'Empereur de Russie, Sa Majesté l'Empereur

d'Allemagne d'accord avec l'Angleterre était appliqué à accomplir un

rôle médiateur auprès des Cabinets de Vienne et de St. Petersbourg,

lorsque la Russie, sans en attendre le résultat, procéda à la

mobilisation de la totalité de ses forces de terre et de mer.

"A la suite de cette mesure menaçante motivée par aucun préparatif

militaire de la part de l'Allemagne, l'Empire Allemand se trouva

vis-à-vis d'un danger grave et imminent. Si le Gouvernement Impérial eût

manqué de parer à ce péril il aurait compromis la securité et

l'existence même de l'Allemagne. Par conséquent le Gouvernement Allemand

se vit forcé de s'adresser au Gouvernement de Sa Majesté l'Empereur de

toutes les Russies en sistant sur la cessation des dits actes

militaires. La Russie ayant refusé de faire droit à cette demande et

ayant manifesté par ce refus, que son action était dirigée contre

l'Allemande, j'ai l'honneur d'ordre de mon Gouvernement de faire savoir

à Votre Excellence ce qui suit:

"Sa Majesté l'Empereur, mon auguste Souverain, an nom de l'Empire relève

le défi et Se considère en état de guerre avec la Russie."

Please wire urgent receipt and time of carrying out this instruction by

Russian time.

Please ask for Your passports and turn over protection and affairs to

the American Embassy.

EXHIBIT 27.

Telegram of the Imperial Ambassador in Paris to the Chancellor on August

1st 1.05 p. m.

Upon my repeated definite inquiry whether France would remain neutral in

the event of a Russo-German war, the Prime Minister declared that France

would do that which her interests dictated.

APPENDIX II

EXTRACTS FROM

SIR EDWARD GREY'S

CORRESPONDENCE

RESPECTING THE EUROPEAN

CRISIS

_For the complete Correspondence see White Paper Miscellaneous No. 6

(1914) (Cd. 7467), presented to both Houses of Parliament by Command of

His Majesty, August 1914_

No. 13.

_Note communicated by Russian Ambassador, July 25._

(Translation.)

M. Sazionof telegraphs to the Russian Chargé d'Affaires at Vienna on the

11th (24th) July, 1914:

"The communication made by Austria-Hungary to the Powers the day after

the presentation of the ultimatum at Belgrade leaves a period to the

Powers which is quite insufficient to enable them to take any steps

which might help to smooth away the difficulties that have arisen.

"In order to prevent the consequences, equally incalculable and fatal to

all the Powers, which may result from the course of action followed by

the Austro-Hungarian Government, it seems to us to be above all

essential that the period allowed for the Servian reply should be

extended. Austria-Hungary, having declared her readiness to inform the

Powers of the results of the enquiry upon which the Imperial and Royal

Government base their accusations, should equally allow them sufficient

time to study them.

"In this case, if the Powers were convinced that certain of the Austrian

demands were well founded, they would be in a position to offer advice

to the Servian Government.

"A refusal to prolong the term of the ultimatum would render nugatory

the proposals made by the Austro-Hungarian Government to the Powers, and

would be in contradiction to the very bases of international relations.

"Prince Kudachef is instructed to communicate the above to the Cabinet

at Vienna.

"M. Sazonof hopes that His Britannic Majesty's Government will adhere to

the point of view set forth above, and he trusts that Sir E. Grey will

see his way to furnish similar instructions to the British Ambassador at

Vienna."

No. 17.

_Sir G. Buchanan to Sir Edward Grey.--(Received July_ 25.)

(Telegraphic.) _St. Petersburgh, July_ 25, 1914.

I Saw the Minister for Foreign Affairs this morning....

The Minister for Foreign Affairs said that Servia was quite ready to do

as you had suggested and to punish those proved to be guilty, but that

no independent State could be expected to accept the political demands

which had been put forward. The Minister for Foreign Affairs thought,

from a conversation which he had with the Servian Minister yesterday,

that, in the event of the Austrians attacking Servia, the Servian

Government would abandon Belgrade, and withdraw their forces into the

interior, while they would at the same time appeal to the Powers to help

them. His Excellency was in favour of their making this appeal. He would

like to see the question placed on an international footing, as the

obligations taken by Servia in 1908, to which reference is made in the

Austrian ultimatum, were given not to Austria, but to the Powers.

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 was possible, in his opinion, that Servia might

propose to submit the question to arbitration.

On my expressing the earnest hope that Russia would not precipitate war

by mobilising until you had had time to use your influence in favour of

peace, his Excellency assured me that Russia had no aggressive

intentions, and she would take no action until it was forced on her.

Austria's action was in reality directed against Russia. She aimed at

overthrowing the present _status quo_ in the Balkans, and establishing

her own hegemony there. He did not believe that Germany really wanted

war, but her attitude was decided by ours. If we took our stand firmly

with France and Russia there would be no war. If we failed them now,

rivers of blood would flow, and we would in the end be dragged into war.

I said that England could play the role of mediator at Berlin and Vienna

to better purpose as friend who, if her counsels of moderation were

disregarded, might one day be converted into an ally, than if she were

to declare herself Russia's ally at once. His Excellency said that

unfortunately Germany was convinced that she could count upon our

neutrality.

I said all I could to impress prudence on the Minister for Foreign

Affairs, and warned him that if Russia mobilised, Germany would not be

content with mere mobilisation, or give Russia time to carry out hers,

but would probably declare war at once. His Excellency replied that

Russia could not allow Austria to crush Servia and become the

predominant Power in the Balkans, and, if she feels secure of the

support of France, she will face all the risks of war. He assured me

once more that he did not wish to precipitate a conflict, but that

unless Germany could restrain Austria I could regard the situation as

desperate.

No. 18.

_Sir H. Rumbold to Sir Edward Grey.--(Received July 25.)_

(Telegraphic.) _Berlin, July 25, 1914._

Your telegram of the 24th July acted on.

Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs says that on receipt of a

telegram at 10 this morning from German Ambassador at London, he

immediately instructed German Ambassador at Vienna to pass on to

Austrian Minister for Foreign Affairs your suggestion for an extension

of time limit, and to speak to his Excellency about it. Unfortunately it

appeared from press that Count Berchtold is at Ischl, and Secretary of

State thought that in these circumstances there would be delay and

difficulty in getting time limit extended. Secretary of State said that

he did not know what Austria-Hungary had ready on the spot, but he

admitted quite freely that Austro-Hungarian Government wished to give

the Servians a lesson, and that they meant to take military action. He

also admitted that Servian Government could not swallow certain of the

Austro-Hungarian demands.

Secretary of State said that a reassuring feature of situation was that

Count Berchtold had sent for Russian representative at Vienna and had

told him that Austria-Hungary had no intention of seizing Servian

territory. This step should, in his opinion, exercise a calming

influence at St. Petersburgh. I asked whether it was not to be feared

that, in taking military action against Servia, Austria would

dangerously excite public opinion in Russia. He said he thought not. He

remained of opinion that crisis could be localised. I said that

telegrams from Russia in this morning's papers did not look very

reassuring, but he maintained his optimistic view with regard to Russia.

He said that he had given the Russian Government to understand that last

thing Germany wanted was a general war, and he would do all in his power

to prevent such a calamity. If the relations between Austria and Russia

became threatening, he was quite ready to fall in with your suggestion

as to the four Powers working in favour of moderation at Vienna and St.

Petersburgh.

Secretary of State confessed privately that he thought the note left

much to be desired as a diplomatic document. He repeated very earnestly

that, though he had been accused of knowing all about the contents of

that note, he had in fact had no such knowledge.

No. 41.

_Sir M. de Bunsen to Sir Edward Grey.--(Received July 27.)_

(Telegraphic.) _Vienna, July_ 27, 1914.

I have had conversations with all my colleagues representing the Great

Powers. The impression left on my mind is that the Austro-Hungarian note

was so drawn up as to make war inevitable; that the Austro-Hungarian

Government are fully resolved to have war with Servia; that they

consider their position as a Great Power to be at stake; and that until

punishment has been administered to Servia it is unlikely that they will

listen to proposals of mediation. This country has gone wild with joy at

the prospect of war with Servia, and its postponement or prevention

would undoubtedly be a great disappointment.

I propose, subject to any special directions you desire to send me, to

express to the Austrian Minister for Foreign Affairs the hope of His

Majesty's Government that it may yet be possible to avoid war, and to

ask his Excellency whether he cannot suggest a way out even now.

No. 43.

_Sir E. Goschen to Sir Edward Grey.--(Received July 27.)_

(Telegraphic.) _Berlin, July_ 27, 1914.

Your telegram of 26th July.

Secretary of State says that conference you suggest would practically

amount to a court of arbitration and could not, in his opinion, be

called together except at the request of Austria and Russia. He could

not therefore fall in with your suggestion, desirous though he was to

co-operate for the maintenance of peace. I said I was sure that your

idea had nothing to do with arbitration, but meant that representatives

of the four nations not directly interested should discuss and suggest

means for avoiding a dangerous situation. He maintained, however, that

such a conference as you proposed was not practicable. He added that

news he had just received from St. Petersburgh showed that there was an

intention on the part of M. de Sazonof to exchange views with Count

Berchtold. He thought that this method of procedure might lead to a

satisfactory result, and that it would be best, before doing anything

else, to await outcome of the exchange of views between the Austrian and

Russian Governments.

In the course of a short conversation Secretary of State said that as

yet Austria was only partially mobilising, but that if Russia mobilised

against Germany latter would have to follow suit. I asked him what he

meant by "mobilising against Germany." He said that if Russia only

mobilised in south, Germany would not mobilise, but if she mobilised in

north, Germany would have to do so too, and Russian system of

mobilisation was so complicated that it might be difficult exactly to

locate her mobilisation. Germany would therefore have to be very careful

not to be taken by surprise.

Finally, Secretary of State said that news from St. Petersburgh had

caused him to take more hopeful view of the general situation.

No. 56.

_Sir M. de Bunsen to Sir Edward Grey.--(Received July 28.)_

(Telegraphic.) _Vienna, July_ 27, 1914.

The Russian Ambassador had to-day a long and earnest conversation with

Baron Macchio, the Under-secretary of State for Foreign Affairs. He told

him that, having just come back from St. Petersburgh, he was well

acquainted with the views of the Russian Government and the state of

Russian public opinion. He could assure him that if actual war broke out

with Servia it would be impossible to localise it, for Russia was not

prepared to give way again, as she had done on previous occasions, and

especially during the annexation crisis of 1909. He earnestly hoped that

something would be done before Servia was actually invaded. Baron

Macchio replied that this would now be difficult, as a skirmish had

already taken place on the Danube, in which the Servians had been the

aggressors. The Russian Ambassador said that he would do all he could to

keep the Servians quiet pending any discussions that might yet take

place, and he told me that he would advise his Government to induce the

Servian Government to avoid any conflict as long as possible, and to

fall back before an Austrian advance. Time so gained should suffice to

enable a settlement to be reached. He had just heard of a satisfactory

conversation which the Russian Minister for Foreign Affairs had

yesterday with the Austrian Ambassador at St. Petersburgh. The former

had agreed that much of the Austro-Hungarian note to Servia had been

perfectly reasonable, and in fact they had practically reached an

understanding as to the guarantees which Servia might reasonably be

asked to give to Austria-Hungary for her future good behaviour. The

Russian Ambassador urged that the Austrian Ambassador at St. Petersburgh

should be furnished with full powers to continue discussion with the

Russian Minister for Foreign Affairs, who was very willing to advise

Servia to yield all that could be fairly asked of her as an independent

Power. Baron Macchio promised to submit this suggestion to the Minister

for Foreign Affairs.

No. 62.

_Sir M. de Bunsen to Sir Edward Grey.--(Received July 28.)_

(Telegraphic.) _Vienna, July 28_, 1914.

I spoke to Minister for Foreign Affairs to-day in the sense of your

telegram of 27th July to Berlin. I avoided the word "mediation," but

said that, as mentioned in your speech,[187] which he had just read to

me, you had hopes that conversations in London between the four Powers

less interested might yet lead to an arrangement which Austro-Hungarian

Government would accept as satisfactory and as rendering actual

hostilities unnecessary. I added that you had regarded Servian reply as

having gone far to meet just demands of Austria-Hungary; that you

thought it constituted a fair basis of discussion during which warlike

operations might remain in abeyance, and that Austrian Ambassador in

Berlin was speaking in this sense. Minister for Foreign Affairs said

quietly, but firmly, that no discussion could be accepted on basis of

Servian note; that war would be declared to-day, and that well-known

pacific character of Emperor, as well as, he might add, his own, might

be accepted as a guarantee that war was both just and inevitable. This

was a matter that must be settled directly between the two parties

immediately concerned. I said that you would hear with regret that

hostilities could not now be arrested, as you feared that they might

lead to complications threatening the peace of Europe.

In taking leave of his Excellency, I begged him to believe that, if in

the course of present grave crisis our point of view should sometimes

differ from his, this would arise, not from want of sympathy with the

many just complaints which Austria-Hungary had against Servia, but from

the fact that, whereas Austria-Hungary put first her quarrel with

Servia, you were anxious in the first instance for peace of Europe. I

trusted this larger aspect of the question would appeal with equal force

to his Excellency. He said he had it also in mind, but thought that

Russia ought not to oppose operations like those impending, which did

not aim at territorial aggrandisement and which could no longer be

postponed.

[Footnote 187: "Hansard," Vol. 65, No. 107, Columns 931, 932, 933.]

No. 85.

_Sir E. Goschen to Sir Edward Grey.--(Received July 29.)_

(Telegraphic.) _Berlin, July_ 29, 1914.

I was asked to call upon the Chancellor to-night. His Excellency had

just returned from Potsdam.

He said that should Austria be attacked by Russia a European

conflagration might, he feared, become inevitable, owing to Germany's

obligations as Austria's ally, in spite of his continued efforts to

maintain peace. He then proceeded to make the following strong bid for

British neutrality. He said that it was clear, so far as he was able to

judge the main principle which governed British policy, that Great

Britain would never stand by and allow France to be crushed in any

conflict there might be. That, however, was not the object at which

Germany aimed. Provided that neutrality of Great Britain were certain,

every assurance would be given to the British Government that the

Imperial Government aimed at no territorial acquisitions at the expense

of France should they prove victorious in any war that might ensue.

I questioned his Excellency about the French colonies, and he said that

he was unable to give a similar undertaking in that respect. As regards

Holland, however, his Excellency said that, so long as Germany's

adversaries respected the integrity and neutrality of the Netherlands,

Germany was ready to give His Majesty's Government an assurance that she

would do likewise. It depended upon the action of France what operations

Germany might be forced to enter upon in Belgium, but when the war was

over, Belgian integrity would be respected if she had not sided against

Germany.

His Excellency ended by saying that ever since he had been Chancellor

the object of his policy had been, as you were aware, to bring about an

understanding with England; he trusted that these assurances might form

the basis of that understanding which he so much desired. He had in mind

a general neutrality agreement between England and Germany, though it

was of course at the present moment too early to discuss details, and an

assurance of British neutrality in the conflict which present crisis

might possibly produce, would enable him to look forward to realisation

of his desire.

In reply to his Excellency's enquiry how I thought his request would

appeal to you, I said that I did not think it probable that at this

stage of events you would care to bind yourself to any course of action

and that I was of opinion that you would desire to retain full liberty.

Our conversation upon this subject having come to an end, I communicated

the contents of your telegram of to-day to his Excellency, who expressed

his best thanks to you.

No. 87.

_Sir Edward Grey to Sir F. Bertie_.

Sir, _Foreign Office, July_ 29, 1914.

After telling M. Cambon to-day how grave the situation seemed to be, I

told him that I meant to tell the German Ambassador to-day that he must

not be misled by the friendly tone of our conversations into any sense

of false security that we should stand aside if all the efforts to

preserve the peace, which we were now making in common with Germany,

failed. But I went on to say to M. Cambon that I thought it necessary to

tell him also that public opinion here approached the present difficulty

from a quite different point of view from that taken during the

difficulty as to Morocco a few years ago. In the case of Morocco the

dispute was one in which France was primarily interested, and in which

it appeared that Germany, in an attempt to crush France, was fastening a

quarrel on France on a question that was the subject of a special

agreement between France and us. In the present case the dispute between

Austria and Servia was not one in which we felt called to take a hand.

Even if the question became one between Austria and Russia we should not

feel called upon to take a hand in it. It would then be a question of

the supremacy of Teuton or Slav--a struggle for supremacy in the

Balkans; and our idea had always been to avoid being drawn into a war

over a Balkan question. 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. France would then have been drawn into

a quarrel which was not hers, but in which, owing to her alliance, her

honour and interest obliged her to engage. We were free from

engagements, and we should have to decide what British interests

required us to do. I thought it necessary to say that, because, as he

knew, we were taking all precautions with regard to our fleet, and I was

about to warn Prince Lichnowsky not to count on our standing aside, but

it would not be fair that I should let M. Cambon be misled into

supposing that this meant that we had decided what to do in a

contingency that I still hoped might not arise.

M. Cambon said that I had explained the situation very clearly. He

understood it to be that in a Balkan quarrel, and in a struggle for

supremacy between Teuton and Slav we should not feel called to

intervene; should other issues be raised, and Germany and France become

involved, so that the question became one of the hegemony of Europe, we

should then decide what it was necessary for us to do. He seemed quite

prepared for this announcement, and made no criticism upon it.

He said French opinion was calm, but decided. He anticipated a demand

from Germany that France would be neutral while Germany attacked Russia.

This assurance France, of course, could not give; she was bound to help

Russia if Russia was attacked.

I am, &c.

E. GREY.

No. 89.

_Sir Edward Grey to Sir E. Goschen_.

Sir, _Foreign Office, July_ 29, 1914.

After speaking to the German Ambassador this afternoon about the

European situation, I said that I wished to say to him, in a quite

private and friendly way, something that was on my mind. The situation

was very grave. While it was restricted to the issues at present

actually involved we had no thought of interfering in it. But if Germany

became involved in it, and then France, the issue might be so great that

it would involve all European interests; and I did not wish him to be

misled by the friendly tone of our conversation--which I hoped would

continue--into thinking that we should stand aside.

He said that he quite understood this, but he asked whether I meant that

we should, under certain circumstances, intervene?

I replied that I did not wish to say that, or to use anything that was

like a threat or an attempt to apply pressure by saying that, if things

became worse, we should intervene. There would be no question of our

intervening if Germany was not involved, or even if France was not

involved. But we knew very well that, if the issue did become such that

we thought British interests required us to intervene, we must intervene

at once, and the decision would have to be very rapid, just as the

decisions of other Powers had to be. I hoped that the friendly tone of

our conversations would continue as at present, and that I should be

able to keep as closely in touch with the German Government in working

for peace. But if we failed in our efforts to keep the peace, and if the

issue spread so that it involved practically every European interest, I

did not wish to be open to any reproach from him that the friendly tone

of all our conversations had misled him or his Government into supposing

that we should not take action, and to the reproach that, if they had

not been so misled, the course of things might have been different.

The German Ambassador took no exception to what I had said; indeed, he

told me that it accorded with what he had already given in Berlin as his

view of the situation.

I am, &c.

E. GREY.

No. 98.

_Sir E. Goschen to Sir Edward Grey.--(Received July 30.)_

(Telegraphic.) _Berlin, July_ 30, 1914.

Secretary of State informs me that immediately on receipt of Prince

Lichnowsky's telegram recording his last conversation with you he asked

Austro-Hungarian Government whether they would be willing to accept

mediation on basis of occupation by Austrian troops of Belgrade or some

other point and issue their conditions from there. He has up till now

received no reply, but he fears Russian mobilisation against Austria

will have increased difficulties, as Austria-Hungary, who has as yet

only mobilised against Servia, will probably find it necessary also

against Russia. Secretary of State says if you can succeed in getting

Russia to agree to above basis for an arrangement and in persuading her

in the meantime to take no steps which might be regarded as an act of

aggression against Austria he still sees some chance that European peace

may be preserved.

He begged me to impress on you difficulty of Germany's position in view

of Russian mobilisation and military measures which he hears are being

taken in France. Beyond recall of officers on leave--a measure which had

been officially taken after, and not before, visit of French Ambassador

yesterday--Imperial Government had done nothing special in way of

military preparations. Something, however, would have soon to be done,

for it might be too late, and when they mobilised they would have to

mobilise on three sides. He regretted this, as he knew France did not

desire war, but it would be a military necessity.

His Excellency added that telegram received from Prince Lichnowsky last

night contains matter which he had heard with regret, but not exactly

with surprise, and at all events he thoroughly appreciated frankness and

loyalty with which you had spoken.

He also told me that this telegram had only reached Berlin very late

last night; had it been received earlier Chancellor would, of course,

not have spoken to me in way he had done.

No. 101.

_Sir Edward Grey to Sir E. Goschen_.

(Telegraphic.) _Foreign Office, July_ 30, 1914.

Your telegram of 29th July.[188]

His Majesty's Government cannot for a moment entertain the Chancellor's

proposal that they should bind themselves to neutrality on such terms.

What he asks us in effect is to engage to stand by while French colonies

are taken and France is beaten so long as Germany does not take French

territory as distinct from the colonies.

From the material point of view such a proposal is unacceptable, for

France, without further territory in Europe being taken from her, could

be so crushed as to lose her position as a Great Power, and become

subordinate to German policy.

Altogether, apart from that, it would be a disgrace for us to make this

bargain with Germany at the expense of France, a disgrace from which the

good name of this country would never recover.

The Chancellor also in effect asks us to bargain away whatever

obligation or interest we have as regards the neutrality of Belgium. We

could not entertain that bargain either.

Having said so much, it is unnecessary to examine whether the prospect

of a future general neutrality agreement between England and Germany

offered positive advantages sufficient to compensate us for tying our

hands now. We must preserve our full freedom to act as circumstances may

seem to us to require in any such unfavourable and regrettable

development of the present crisis as the Chancellor contemplates.

You should speak to the Chancellor in the above sense, and add most

earnestly that the one way of maintaining the good relations between

England and Germany is that they should continue to work together to

preserve the peace of Europe; if we succeed in this object, the mutual

relations of Germany and England will, I believe, be _ipso facto_

improved and strengthened. For that object His Majesty's Government will

work in that way with all sincerity and good-will.

And I will say this: If the peace of Europe can be preserved, and the

present crisis safely passed, my own endeavour will be to promote some

arrangement to which Germany could be a party, by which she could be

assured that no aggressive or hostile policy would be pursued against

her or her allies by France, Russia, and ourselves, jointly or

separately. I have desired this and worked for it, as far as I could,

through the last Balkan crisis, and, Germany having a corresponding

object, our relations sensibly improved. The idea has hitherto been too

Utopian to form the subject of definite proposals, but if this present

crisis, so much more acute than any that Europe has gone through for

generations, be safely passed, I am hopeful that the relief and reaction

which will follow may make possible some more definite rapprochement

between the Powers than has been possible hitherto.

[Footnote 188: See No. 85.]

Enclosure 1 in No. 105.

_Sir Edward Grey to M. Cambon_.

My dear Ambassador, _Foreign Office, November 22_, 1912.

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.

No. 119.

_Sir Edward Grey to Sir F. Bertie_.

Sir, _Foreign Office, July_ 31, 1914.

M. Cambon referred to-day to a telegram that had been shown to Sir

Arthur Nicolson this morning from the French Ambassador in Berlin,

saying that it was the uncertainty with regard to whether we would

intervene which was the encouraging element in Berlin, and that, it we

would only declare definitely on the side of Russia and France, it would

decide the German attitude in favour of peace.

I said that it was quite wrong to suppose that we had left Germany under

the impression that we would not intervene. I had refused overtures to

promise that we should remain neutral. I had not only definitely

declined to say that we would remain neutral, I had even gone so far

this morning as to say to the German Ambassador that, if France and

Germany became involved in war, we should be drawn into it. That, of

course, was not the same thing as taking an engagement to France, and I

told M. Cambon of it only to show that we had not left Germany under the

impression that we would stand aside.

M. Cambon then asked me for my reply to what he had said yesterday.

I said that we had come to the conclusion, in the Cabinet to-day, that

we could not give any pledge at the present time. Though we should have

to put our policy before Parliament, we could not pledge Parliament in

advance. 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. Further developments might alter this situation and cause the

Government and Parliament to take the view that intervention was

justified. The preservation of the neutrality of Belgium might be, I

would not say a decisive, but an important factor, in determining our

attitude. Whether we proposed to Parliament to intervene or not to

intervene in a war, Parliament would wish to know how we stood with

regard to the neutrality of Belgium, and it might be that I should ask

both France and Germany whether each was prepared to undertake an

engagement that she would not be the first to violate the neutrality of

Belgium.

M. Cambon repeated his question whether we would help France if Germany

made an attack on her.

I said that I could only adhere to the answer that, as far as things had

gone at present, we could not take any engagement.

M. Cambon urged that Germany had from the beginning rejected proposals

that might have made for peace. It could not be to England's interest

that France should be crushed by Germany. We should then be in a very

diminished position with regard to Germany. In 1870 we had made a great

mistake in allowing an enormous increase of German strength, and we

should now be repeating the mistake. He asked me whether I could not

submit his question to the Cabinet again.

I said that the Cabinet would certainly be summoned as soon as there was

some new development, but at the present moment the only answer I could

give was that we could not undertake any definite engagement.

I am, &c.

E. GREY.

No. 122.

_Sir E. Goschen to Sir Edward Grey.--(Received August 1.)_

(Telegraphic.) _Berlin, July_ 31, 1914.

Neutrality of Belgium, referred to in your telegram of 31st July to Sir

F. Bertie.

I have seen Secretary of State, who informs me that he must consult the

Emperor and the Chancellor before he could possibly answer. I gathered

from what he said that he thought any reply they might give could not

but disclose a certain amount of their plan of campaign in the event of

war ensuing, and he was therefore very doubtful whether they would

return any answer at all. His Excellency, nevertheless, took note of

your request.

It appears from what he said that German Government consider that

certain hostile acts have already been committed by Belgium. As an

instance of this, he alleged that a consignment of corn for Germany had

been placed under an embargo already.

I hope to see his Excellency to-morrow again to discuss the matter

further, but the prospect of obtaining a definite answer seems to me

remote.

In speaking to me to-day the Chancellor made it clear that Germany would

in any case desire to know the reply returned to you by the French

Government.

No. 123.

_Sir Edward Grey to Sir E. Goschen_.

Sir, _Foreign Office, August_ 1, 1914.

I told the German Ambassador to-day that the reply[189] of the German

Government with regard to the neutrality of Belgium was a matter of very

great regret, because the neutrality of Belgium affected feeling in this

country. If Germany could see her way to give the same assurance as that

which had been given by France it would materially contribute to relieve

anxiety and tension here. On the other hand, if there were a violation

of the neutrality of Belgium by one combatant while the other respected

it, it would be extremely difficult to restrain public feeling in this

country. I said that we had been discussing this question at a Cabinet

meeting, and as I was authorised to tell him this I gave him a

memorandum of it.

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. All I could say was that

our attitude would be determined largely by public opinion here, and

that the neutrality of Belgium would appeal very strongly to Public

opinion here. I did not think that we could give a promise of neutrality

on that condition alone.

The Ambassador pressed me as to whether I could not formulate conditions

on which we would remain neutral. He even suggested that the integrity

of France and her colonies might be guaranteed.

I said that I felt obliged to refuse definitely any promise to remain

neutral on similar terms, and I could only say that we must keep our

hands free.

I am, &c.

E. GREY.

[Footnote 189: See No. 122.]

No. 133.

_Sir Edward Grey to Sir E. Goschen_.

(Telegraphic.) _Foreign Office, August_ 1, 1914.

M. De Etter came to-day to communicate the contents of a telegram from

M. Sazonof, dated the 31st July, which are as follows:--

"The Austro-Hungarian Ambassador declared the readiness of his

Government to discuss the substance of the Austrian ultimatum to Servia.

M. Sazonof replied by expressing his satisfaction, and said it was

desirable that the discussions should take place in London with the

participation of the Great Powers.

"M. Sazonof hoped that the British Government would assume the direction

of these discussions. The whole of Europe would be thankful to them. It

would be very important that Austria should meanwhile put a stop

provisionally to her military action on Servian territory."

(The above has been communicated to the six Powers.)

No. 134.

_Sir F. Bertie to Sir Edward Grey.--(Received August 1.)_

(Telegraphic.) _Paris, August_ 1, 1914.

President of the Republic has informed me that German Government were

trying to saddle Russia with the responsibility; that it was only after

a decree of general mobilisation had been issued in Austria that the

Emperor of Russia ordered a general mobilisation; that, although the

measures which the German Government have already taken are in effect a

general mobilisation, they are not so designated; that a French general

mobilisation will become necessary in self-defence, and that France is

already forty-eight hours behind Germany as regards German military

preparations; that the French troops have orders not to go nearer to the

German frontier than a distance of 10 kilom. so as to avoid any grounds

for accusations of provocation to Germany, whereas the German troops, on

the other hand, are actually on the French frontier and have made

incursions on it; that, notwithstanding mobilisations, the Emperor of

Russia has expressed himself ready to continue his conversations with

the German Ambassador with a view to preserving the peace; that French

Government, whose wishes are markedly pacific, sincerely desire the

preservation of peace and do not quite despair, even now, of its being

possible to avoid war.

No. 148.

_Sir Edward Grey to Sir F. Bertie_.

(Telegraphic.) _Foreign Office, August_ 2, 1914.

After the Cabinet this morning I gave M. Cambon the following

memorandum:--

"I am authorised 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.

"This assurance is of course subject to the policy of His Majesty's

Government receiving the support of Parliament, and must not be taken as

binding His Majesty's Government to take any action until the above

contingency of action by the German fleet takes place."

I pointed out that we had very large questions and most difficult issues

to consider, and that Government felt that they could not bind

themselves to declare war upon Germany necessarily if war broke out

between France and Germany to-morrow, but it was essential to the French

Government, whose fleet had long been concentrated in the Mediterranean,

to know how to make their dispositions with their north coast entirely

undefended. We therefore thought it necessary to give them this

assurance. It did not bind us to go to war with Germany unless the

German fleet took the action indicated, but it did give a security to

France that would enable her to settle the disposition of her own

Mediterranean fleet.

M. Cambon asked me about the violation of Luxemburg. I told him the

doctrine on that point laid down by Lord Derby and Lord Clarendon in

1867. He asked me what we should say about the violation of the

neutrality of Belgium. I said that was a much more important matter; we

were considering what statement we should make in Parliament

to-morrow--in effect, whether we should declare violation of Belgian

neutrality to be a _casus belli_. I told him what had been said to the

German Ambassador on this point.

No. 153.

_Sir Edward Grey to Sir E. Goschen_.

(Telegraphic.) _Foreign Office, August_ 4, 1914.

The King of the Belgians has made an appeal to His Majesty the King for

diplomatic intervention on behalf of Belgium in the following terms:--

"Remembering the numerous proofs of your Majesty's friendship and that

of your predecessor, and the friendly attitude of England in 1870 and

the proof of friendship you have just given us again, I make a supreme

appeal to the diplomatic intervention of your Majesty's Government to

safeguard the integrity of Belgium."

His Majesty's Government are also informed that the German Government

has delivered to the Belgian Government a note proposing friendly

neutrality entailing free passage through Belgian territory, and

promising to maintain the independence and integrity of the kingdom and

its possessions at the conclusion of peace, threatening in case of

refusal to treat Belgium as an enemy. An answer was requested within

twelve hours.

We also understand that Belgium has categorically refused this as a

flagrant violation of the law of nations.

His Majesty's Government are bound to protest against this violation of

a treaty to which Germany is a party in common with themselves, and must

request an assurance that the demand made upon Belgium will not be

proceeded with and that her neutrality will be respected by Germany. You

should ask for an immediate reply.

APPENDIX III

Extract from the Dispatch from His Majesty's Ambassador at Berlin

respecting the Rupture of Diplomatic Relations with the German

Government.

(Cd. 7445.)

_Sir E. Goschen to Sir Edward Grey_.

Sir, _London, August_ 8, 1914.

In accordance with the instructions contained in your telegram of the

4th instant I called upon the Secretary of State that afternoon and

enquired, in the name of His Majesty's Government, whether the Imperial

Government would refrain from violating Belgian neutrality. Herr von

Jagow at once replied that he was sorry to say that his answer must be

"No," as, in consequence of the German troops having crossed the

frontier that morning, Belgian neutrality had been already violated.

Herr von Jagow again went into the reasons why the Imperial Government

had been obliged to take this step, namely, that they had to advance

into France by the quickest and easiest way, so as to be able to get

well ahead with their operations and endeavour to strike some decisive

blow as early as possible. It was a matter of life and death for them,

as if they had gone by the more southern route they could not have

hoped, in view of the paucity of roads and the strength of the

fortresses, to have got through without formidable opposition entailing

great loss of time. This loss of time would have meant time gained by

the Russians for bringing up their troops to the German frontier.

Rapidity of action was the great German asset, while that of Russia was

an inexhaustible supply of troops. I pointed out to Herr von Jagow that

this _fait accompli_ of the violation of the Belgian frontier rendered,

as he would readily understand, the situation exceedingly grave, and I

asked him whether there was not still time to draw back and avoid

possible consequences, which both he and I would deplore. He replied

that, for the reasons he had given me, it was now impossible for them to

draw back.

During the afternoon I received your further telegram of the same date,

and, in compliance with the instructions therein contained, I again

proceeded to the Imperial Foreign Office and informed the Secretary of

State that unless the Imperial Government could give the assurance by 12

o'clock that night that they would proceed no further with their

violation of the Belgian frontier and stop their advance, I had been

instructed to demand my passports and inform the Imperial Government

that His Majesty's Government would have to take all steps in their

power to uphold the neutrality of Belgium and the observance of a treaty

to which Germany was as much a party as themselves.

Herr von Jagow replied that to his great regret he could give no other

answer than that which he had given me earlier in the day, namely, that

the safety of the Empire rendered it absolutely necessary that the

Imperial troops should advance through Belgium. I gave his Excellency a

written summary of your telegram and, pointing out that you had

mentioned 12 o'clock as the time when His Majesty's Government would

expect an answer, asked him whether, in view of the terrible

consequences which would necessarily ensue, it were not possible even at

the last moment that their answer should be reconsidered. He replied

that if the time given were even twenty-four hours or more, his answer

must be the same. I said that in that case I should have to demand my

passports. This interview took place at about 7 o'clock. In a short

conversation which ensued Herr von Jagow expressed his poignant regret

at the crumbling of his entire policy and that of the Chancellor, which

had been to make friends with Great Britain and then, through Great

Britain, to get closer to France. I said that this sudden end to my work

in Berlin was to me also a matter of deep regret and disappointment, but

that he must understand that under the circumstances and in view of our

engagements, His Majesty's Government could not possibly have acted

otherwise than they had done.

I then said that I should like to go and see the Chancellor, as it might

be, perhaps, the last time I should have an opportunity of seeing him.

He begged me to do so. I found the Chancellor very agitated. His

Excellency at once began a harangue, which lasted for about 20 minutes.

He said that the step taken by His Majesty's Government was terrible to

a degree; just for a word--"neutrality," a word which in war time had so

often been disregarded--just for a scrap of paper Great Britain was

going to make war on a kindred nation who desired nothing better than to

be friends with her. All his efforts in that direction had been rendered

useless by this last terrible step, and the policy to which, as I knew,

he had devoted himself since his accession to office had tumbled down

like a house of cards. What we had done was unthinkable; it was like

striking a man from behind while he was fighting for his life against

two assailants. He held Great Britain responsible for all the terrible

events that might happen. I protested strongly against that statement,

and said that, in the same way as he and Herr von Jagow wished me to

understand that for strategical reasons it was a matter of life and

death to Germany to advance through Belgium and violate the latter's

neutrality, so I would wish him to understand that it was, so to speak,

a matter of "life and death" for the honour of Great Britain that she

should keep her solemn engagement to do her utmost to defend Belgium's

neutrality if attacked. That solemn compact simply had to be kept, or

what confidence could anyone have in engagements given by Great Britain

in the future? The Chancellor said, "But at what price will that compact

have been kept. Has the British Government thought of that?" I hinted to

his Excellency as plainly as I could that fear of consequences could

hardly be regarded as an excuse for breaking solemn engagements, but his

Excellency was so excited, so evidently overcome by the news of our

action, and so little disposed to hear reason that I refrained from

adding fuel to the flame by further argument. As I was leaving he said

that the blow of Great Britain joining Germany's enemies was all the

greater that almost up to the last moment he and his Government had been

working with us and supporting our efforts to maintain peace between

Austria and Russia. I said that this was part of the tragedy which saw

the two nations fall apart just at the moment when the relations between

them had been more friendly and cordial than they had been for years.

Unfortunately, notwithstanding our efforts to maintain peace between

Russia and Austria, the war had spread and had brought us face to face

with a situation which, if we held to our engagements, we could not

possibly avoid, and which unfortunately entailed our separation from our

late fellow-workers. He would readily understand that no one regretted

this more than I.

After this somewhat painful interview I returned to the embassy and drew

up a telegraphic report of what had passed. This telegram was handed in

at the Central Telegraph Office a little before 9 P.M. It was accepted

by that office, but apparently never despatched.[190]

[Footnote 190: This telegram never reached the Foreign Office.]

APPENDIX IV

THE CRIME OF SERAJEVO

SELECTIONS FROM THE AUSTRIAN _dossier_ OF THE CRIME

The following document is contained in the German Version of the German

White Book (pp. 28-31); and though it adds little to our knowledge of

the Austrian case against Servia, it deserves to be reprinted, as it is

omitted altogether in the official version in English of the German

White Book. The authorship of the document is uncertain. It has the

appearance of an extract from a German newspaper.

Aus dem österreich-ungarischen Material.

Wien, 27. Juli. Das in der österreichisch-ungarischen Zirkularnote an

die auswärtigen Botschaften in Angelegenheit des serbischen Konflikts

erwähnte Dossier wird heute veröffentlicht.

In diesem Memoire wird darauf hingewiesen, dass die von Serbien

ausgegangene Bewegung, die sich zum Ziele gesetzt hat, die südlichen

Teile Oesterreich-Ungarns von der Monarchie loszureiszen, um sie mit

Serbien zu einer staatlichen Einheit zu verbinden, weit zurückgreist.

Diese in ihren Endzielen stets gleichbleibende und nur in ihren Mitteln

und an Intensität wechselnde Propaganda erreichte zur Zeit der

Unnerionskrise ihren Höhepunft und trat damals ossen mit ihren Tendenzen

hervor. Während einerjeits die gesamte serbische Bresse zum Kampfe gegen

die Monarchie ausrief, bildeten sich--von anderen Propagandamitteln

abgesehen--Ussoziationen, die diese Kämpfe vorbereiteten, unter denen

die Harodna Odbrana an Bedeutung hervorragte. Aus einem revolutionären

Komitee hervorgegangen, fonstituierte sich diese vom Belgrader

Auswärtigen Amte völlig abhängige Organisation unter Leitung von

Staatsmännern und Offizieren, darunter dem General Tantovic und dem

ehemaligen Minister Ivanovic. Auch Major Oja Jantovic und Milan

Pribicevic gehören zu diesen Gründern. Dieser Berein hatte sich die

Bildung und Ausrüstung von Freischaren für den bevorstehenden Krieg

gegen die öfterreichisch-ungarische Monarchie zum Ziele gesetzt. In

einer dem Memoire angefügten Anlage wird ein Auszug aus dem vom

Zentralausschusse der Narodna Odbrana herausgegebenen Vereinsorgane

gleichen Namens veröffentlicht, worin in mehreren Artikeln die Tätigfelt

und Ziele dieses Vereins ausführlich dargelegt werden. Es heißt darin,

daß zu der Hauptaufgabe der Narodna Odbrana die Verbindung mit ihren

nahen und ferneren Brüdern jenseits der Grenze und unseren übrigen

Freunden in der Welt gehören.

_Oesterreich ist als erster und größter Feind bezeichnet_. Wie die

Narodna Odbrana die Notwendigkeit des Kampfes mit Oesterreich predigt,

predigt sie eine heilige Wahrheit unserer nationalen Lage. Das

Schlußkapitel enthält einen Apell an die Regierung und das Volk

Serbiens, sich mit allen Mitteln für den Kampf vorzubereiten, den die

Annexion vorangezeigt hat.

Das Memoire schildert nach einer Aussage eines von der Narodna Odbrana

angeworbenen Komitatschis die damalige Tätigkeit der Narodna Odbrana,

die eine von zwei Hauptleuten, darunter Jankovic, geleitete _Schule zur

Ausbildung von Banden_ unterhielt, Schulen, welche von General Jankovic

und von Hauptmann Milan Pribicevic regelmäßig inspiziert wurden. Weiter

wurden die Komitatschis im _Schießen und Bombenwerfen, im Minenlegen,

Sprengen von Eisenbahnbrücken_ usw. unterrichtet. Nach der feierlichen

Erklärung der Serbischen Regierung vom Jahre 1909 schien auch das Ende

dieser Organisation gekommen zu sein. Diese Erwartungen haben sich aber

nicht nur nicht erfüllt, sondern die Propaganda wurde durch die

serbische Presse fortgesetzt. Das Memoire führt als Beispiel die Art und

Weise an, wie das Attentat gegen den bosnischen Landeschef Varesanin

publizistisch verwertet wurde, indem der Attentäter als serbischer

Nationalheld gefeiert und seine Tat verherrlicht wurde. Diese Blätter

wurden nicht nur in Serbien verbreitet, sondern auch auf

wohlorganisierten Schleichwegen in die Monarchie hineingeschmuggelt.

Unter der gleichen Leitung wie bei ihrer Gründung wurde die Narodna

Odbrana neuerlich der zentralpunkt einer Agitation welcher der

_Schützenbund mit 762 Vereinen, ein Sokolbund mit 3500 Mitgliedern, und

verschiedene andere Vereine angehörten_.

Im Kleide eines Kulturvereins auftretend, dem nur die geistige und die

füörperliche Entwickelung der Bevölkerung Serbiens sowie deren

materielle Kräftigung am Herzen liegt, enthullt die Narodna Oobrana ihr

wahres reorganisiertes Programm in vorzitiertem Auszug aus ihrem

Vereinsorgan, in welchem "die heilige Wahrheit" gepredigt wird, dass es

eine unerlässliche Notwendigkeit ist, gegen Oesterreich, seinen ersten

grössten Feind, diesen Ausrottungskampf mit Gewehr und Kanone zu führen,

und das Volk mit allen Mitteln auf den Kampf vorzubereiten, zur

Befreiung der unterworfenen Gebiete, in denen viele Millionen

unterjochter Brüder schmachten. Die in dem Memoire zitierten Aufrufe und

Reden ähnlichen Charakters beleuchten die vielseitige auswärtige

Tätigkeit der Narodna Oobrana und ihrer affilierten Vereine, die in

Vortragsreifen, in der Teilnahme an Festen von bosnischen Vereinen, bei

denen offen Mitglieder für die erwähnte serbische Vereinigung geworben

wurden, besteht. Gegenwärtig ist noch die Untersuchung darüber im Zuge,

dass die Sokolvereine Serbiens analoge Vereinigungen der Monarchie

bestimmten, sich mit ihnen in einem bisher geheim gehaltenen Verbande zu

vereinigen. Durch Vertrauensmänner und Missionäre wurde die Aufwiegelung

in die Kreise Erwachsener und der urteilslosen Jugend gebracht. So

wurden von Milan Pribicewitsch ehmalige honvedoffiziere und ein

Gendarmerieleutnant zum Verlassen des Heeresdienstes in der Monarchie

unter bedenklichen Umständen verleitet. In den Schulen der

Lehrerbildungsanstalten wurde eine weitgehende Agitation entwickelt. Der

gewünschte Krieg gegen die Monarchie wurde militärisch auch insofern

vorbereitet, als serbische Emissäre im Falle des Ausbruchs der

Feindseligkeiten mit der Zerstörung von Transportmitteln usw., der

Anfachung von Revolten und Paniken betraut wurden. Alles dies wird in

einer besonderen Beilage belegt.

Das Memoire schildert ferner den Zusammenhang zwischen dieser Tätigkeit

der Narodna Oobrana und den affilierten Organisationen mit den

Attentaten gegen den Königlichen Kommissär in Agram Cuvaj im Juli 1912,

dem Attentat von Dojcic in Agram 1913 gegen Sterlecz und dem

missglückten Attentat Schäfers am 20. Mai im Aramer Theater. Es

verbreitet sich hierauf über den Zusammenhang des Attentats auf den

Thronfolger und dessen Gemahlin, über die Art, wie sich die Jungen schon

in der Schule an dem Gedanken der Narodna Dobrana vergifteten und wie

sich die Attentäter mit Hilfe von Pribicewic und Dacic die Werkzeuge zu

dem Attentat verschafften, wobei insbesondere die Rolle des Majors

Tankofte dargelegt wird, der die Mordwassën lieferte, wie auch die Rolle

eines gewissen Ciganovic, eines gewesenen Komitatschi und jetzigen

Beamten der serbischen Eisenbahndirektion Belgrad, der schon 1909 als

Zögling der Bandenschule der damaligen Narodna Odbrana austauchte.

Ferner wird die Art dargelegt, wie Bomben und Waffen unbemerkt nach

Bosnien eingeschmuggelt wurden, die keinen Zweifel darüber lässt, dass

dies ein wohl voerberiteter und für die geheimnisvollen Zwecke der

Narodna oft begangener Schleichweg war.

Eine Beilage enthält einen Auszug aus den Akten des Kreisgerichts in

Serajewo über die Untersuchung des Attentats gegen den Erzherzog Franz

Ferdinand und dessen Gemahlin. Danach sind Princip, Cabrinovic, Grabez,

Crupilovic und Papovic geständig, in Gemeinschaft mit dem flüchtigen

Mehmedbasic ein Komplott zur Erwordung des Erzherzogs gebildet und ihm

zu diesen Zweck aufgelauert zu haben. Cabrinovic ist geständig, die

Bombe geworfen und Gabrilo Princip das Attentat mit der Browningpistole

ausgeführt zu haben. Beide Täter gaben zu, bei der Verübung der Tat die

Absicht des Mordes gehabt zu haben. Die weiteren Teile der Anlage

enthalten weitere Angaben der Beschuldigten vor dem Untersuchungsrichter

über Entstehung des Komplotts, Herkunft der Bomben, welche fabrikmässig

hergestellt wurden, für millitärische Zwecke bestimmt waren und ihrer

Originalpackung nach aus dem serbischen Waffenlager aus Kragujevac

stammten. Endlich gibt die Beilage Auskunft über den Transport der drei

Attentäter und der Waffen von Serbien nach Bosnien. Aus dem weiteren

Zeugenprotokoll ergibt sich, dass ein Angehöriger der Monarchie einige

Tage vor dem Attentat dem österreichisch-ungarischen Konsulat in Belgrad

Meldung von der Vermutung erstatten wollte, dass ein Plan zur Verübung

des Attentats gegen den Erzherzog während dessen Anwesenheit in Bosnien

bestehe. Dieser Mann soll nun durch Belgrader Polizeiorgane, welche ihn

unmittelbar vor Betreten des Konsulats aus nichtigen Gründen

verhafteten, an der Erstattung der Meldung verhindert worden sein.

Weiter gehe aus dem Zeugenprotokoll hervor, dass die betreffenden

Polizeiorgane von dem geplanten Attentat Kenntnis gehabt hätten. Da

diese Angaben noch nicht nachgeprüft sind, kann über deren

Stichhaltigkeit vorläufig noch kein Urteil gefällt werden. In der

Beilage zum Memoire heisst es: Vor dem Empfangssaal des serbischen

Kriegsministeriums befinden sich an der Wand vier allegorische Bilder,

von denen drei Darstellungen serbischer Kriegserfolge sind, während das

vierte die Verwirklichung der monarchiefeindlichen Tendenzen Serbiens

versinnbildlicht. Ueber einer Landschaft, die teils Gebirge (Bosnien),

teils Ebene (Südungarn) darstellt, geht die Zora, die Morgenröte der

serbischen Hoffnungen, auf. Im Vordergrunde steht eine bewaffnete

Frauengestalt, auf deren Schilde die Namen aller "noch zu befreienden

Provinzen": Bosnien, Herzegowina, Wojwodina, Gyrmien, Dalmatien usw.

stehen.

APPENDIX V

Extract from the Dispatch from His Majesty's Ambassador at Vienna

respecting the Rupture of Diplomatic Relations with the Austro-Hungarian

Government.

(Cd. 7596)

_Sir M. de Bunsen to Sir Edward Grey_.

_London, September_ 1, 1914.

Sir,

The rapidity of the march of events during the days which led up to the

outbreak of the European war made it difficult, at the time, to do more

than record their progress by telegraph. I propose now to add a few

comments.

The delivery at Belgrade on the 23rd July of the Austrian note to Servia

was preceded by a period of absolute silence at the Ballplatz. Except

Herr von Tchinsky, who must have been aware of the tenour, if not of the

actual words of the note, none of my colleagues were allowed to see

through the veil. On the 22nd and 23rd July, M. Dumaine, French

Ambassador, had long interviews with Baron Macchio, one of the

Under-Secretaries of State for Foreign Affairs, by whom he was left

under the impression that the words of warning he had been instructed to

speak to the Austro-Hungarian Government had not been unavailing, and

that the note which was being drawn up would be found to contain nothing

with which a self-respecting State need hesitate to comply. At the

second of these interviews he was not even informed that the note was at

that very moment being presented at Belgrade, or that it would be

published in Vienna on the following morning. Count Forgach, the other

Under-Secretary of State, had indeed been good enough to confide to me

on the same day the true character of the note, and the fact of its

presentation about the time we were speaking.

So little had the Russian Ambassador been made aware of what was

preparing that he actually left Vienna on a fortnight's leave of absence

about the 20th July. He had only been absent a few days when events

compelled him to return. It might have been supposed that Duc Avarna,

Ambassador of the allied Italian Kingdom, which was bound to be so

closely affected by fresh complications in the Balkans, would have been

taken fully into the confidence of Count Berchtold during this critical

time. In point of fact his Excellency was left completely in the dark.

As for myself, no indication was given me by Count Berchtold of the

impending storm, and it was from a private source that I received on the

15th July the forecast of what was about to happen which I telegraphed

to you the following day. It is true that during all this time the "Neue

Freie Presse" and other leading Viennese newspapers were using language

which pointed unmistakably to war with Servia. The official

"Fremdenblatt", however, was more cautious, and till the note was

published, the prevailing opinion among my colleagues was that Austria

would shrink from courses calculated to involve her in grave European

complications.

On the 24th July the note was published in the newspapers. By common

consent it was at once styled an ultimatum. Its integral acceptance by

Servia was neither expected nor desired, and when, on the following

afternoon, it was at first rumoured in Vienna that it had been

unconditionally accepted, there was a moment of keen disappointment. The

mistake was quickly corrected, and as soon as it was known later in the

evening that the Servian reply had been rejected and that Baron Giesl

had broken off relations at Belgrade, Vienna burst into a frenzy of

delight, vast crowds parading the streets and singing patriotic songs

till the small hours of the morning.

The demonstrations were perfectly orderly, consisting for the most part

of organised processions through the principal streets ending up at the

Ministry of War. One or two attempts to make hostile manifestations

against the Russian Embassy were frustrated by the strong guard of

police which held the approaches to the principal embassies during those

days. The demeanour of the people at Vienna, and, as I was informed, in

many other principal cities of the Monarchy, showed plainly the

popularity of the idea of war with Servia, and there can be no doubt

that the small body of Austrian and Hungarian statesmen by whom this

momentous step was adopted gauged rightly the sense, and it may even be

said the determination, of the people, except presumably in portions of

the provinces inhabited by the Slav races. There had been much

disappointment in many quarters at the avoidance of war with Servia

during the annexation crisis in 1908 and again in connection with the

recent Balkan war. Count Berchtold's peace policy had met with little

sympathy in the Delegation. Now the flood-gates were opened, and the

entire people and press clamoured impatiently for immediate and condign

punishment of the hated Servian race. The country certainly believed

that it had before it only the alternative of subduing Servia or of

submitting sooner or later to mutilation at her hands. But a peaceful

solution should first have been attempted. Few seemed to reflect that

the forcible intervention of a Great Power in the Balkans must

inevitably call other Great Powers into the field. So just was the cause

of Austria held to be, that it seemed to her people inconceivable that

any country should place itself in her path, or that questions of mere

policy or prestige should be regarded anywhere as superseding the

necessity which had arisen to exact summary vengeance for the crime of

Serajevo. The conviction had been expressed to me by the German

Ambassador on the 24th July that Russia would stand aside. This feeling,

which was also held at the Ballplatz, influenced no doubt the course of

events, and it is deplorable that no effort should have been made to

secure by means of diplomatic negotiations the acquiescence of Russia

and Europe as a whole in some peaceful compromise of the Servian

question by which Austrian fears of Servian aggression and intrigue

might have been removed for the future. Instead of adopting this course

the Austro-Hungarian Government resolved upon war. The inevitable

consequence ensued. Russia replied to a partial Austrian mobilisation

and declaration of war against Servia by a partial Russian mobilisation

against Austria. Austria met this move by completing her own

mobilisation, and Russia again responded with results which have passed

into history. The fate of the proposals put forward by His Majesty's

Government for the preservation of peace is recorded in the White Paper

on the European Crisis[191]. On the 28th July I saw Count Berchtold and

urged as strongly as I could that the scheme of mediation mentioned in

your speech in the House of Commons on the previous day should be

accepted as offering an honourable and peaceful settlement of the

question at issue. His Excellency himself read to me a telegraphic

report of the speech, but added that matters had gone too far; Austria

was that day declaring war on Servia, and she could never accept the

conference which you had suggested should take place between the less

interested Powers on the basis of the Servian reply. This was a matter

which must be settled directly between the two parties immediately

concerned. I said His Majesty's Government would hear with regret that

hostilities could not be arrested, as you feared they would lead to

European complications. I disclaimed any British lack of sympathy with

Austria in the matter of her legitimate grievances against Servia, and

pointed out that, whereas Austria seemed to be making these the starting

point of her policy, His Majesty's Government were bound to look at the

question primarily from the point of view of the maintenance of the

peace of Europe. In this way the two countries might easily drift apart.

His Excellency said that he too was keeping the European aspect of the

question in sight. He thought, however, that Russia would have no right

to intervene after receiving his assurance that Austria sought no

territorial aggrandisement. His Excellency remarked to me in the course

of his conversation that, though he had been glad to co-operate towards

bringing about the settlement which had resulted from the ambassadorial

conferences in London during the Balkan crisis, he had never had much

belief in the permanency of that settlement, which was necessarily of a

highly artificial character, inasmuch as the interests which it sought

to harmonise were in themselves profoundly divergent. His Excellency

maintained a most friendly demeanour throughout the interview, but left

no doubt in my mind as to the determination of the Austro-Hungarian

Government to proceed with the invasion of Servia.

The German Government claim to have persevered to the end in the

endeavour to support at Vienna your successive proposals in the interest

of peace. Herr von Tchirsky abstained from inviting my co-operation or

that of the French and Russian Ambassadors in carrying out his

instructions to that effect, and I had no means of knowing what response

he was receiving from the Austro-Hungarian Government. I was, however,

kept fully informed by M. Schebeko, the Russian Ambassador, of his own

direct negotiations with Count Berchtold. M. Schebeko endeavoured on the

28th July to persuade the Austro-Hungarian Government to furnish Count

Szápáry with full powers to continue at St. Petersburgh the hopeful

conversations which had there been taking place between the latter and

M. Sazonof. Count Berchtold refused at the time, but two days later

(30th July), though in the meantime Russia had partially mobilised

against Austria, he received M. Schebeko again, in a perfectly friendly

manner, and gave his consent to the continuance of the conversations at

St. Petersburgh. From now onwards the tension between Russia and Germany

was much greater than between Russia and Austria. As between the latter

an arrangement seemed almost in sight, and on the 1st August I was

informed by M. Schebeko that Count Szápáry had at last conceded the main

point at issue by announcing to M. Sazonof that Austria would consent to

submit to mediation the points in the note to Servia which seemed

incompatible with the maintenance of Servian independence. M. Sazonof,

M. Schebeko added, had accepted this proposal on condition that Austria

would refrain from the actual invasion of Servia. Austria, in fact, had

finally yielded, and that she herself had at this point good hopes of a

peaceful issue is shown by the communication made to you on the 1st

August by Count Mensdorff, to the effect that Austria had neither

"banged the door" on compromise nor cut off the conversations.[192] M.

Schebeko to the end was working hard for peace. He was holding the most

conciliatory language to Count Berchtold, and he informed me that the

latter, as well as Count Forgach, had responded in the same spirit.

Certainly it was too much for Russia to expect that Austria would hold

back her armies, but this matter could probably have been settled by

negotiation, and M. Schebeko repeatedly told me he was prepared to

accept any reasonable compromise.

Unfortunately these conversations at St. Petersburgh and Vienna were cut

short by the transfer of the dispute to the more dangerous ground of a

direct conflict between Germany and Russia. Germany intervened on the

31st July by means of her double ultimatums to St. Petersburgh and

Paris. The ultimatums were of a kind to which only one answer is

possible, and Germany declared war on Russia on the 1st August, and on

France on the 3rd August. A few days' delay might in all probability

have saved Europe from one of the greatest calamities in history.

Russia still abstained from attacking Austria, and M. Schebeko had been

instructed to remain at his post till war should actually be declared

against her by the Austro-Hungarian Government. This only happened on

the 6th August when Count Berchtold informed the foreign missions at

Vienna that "the Austro-Hungarian Ambassador at St. Petersburgh had been

instructed to notify the Russian Government that, in view of the

menacing attitude of Russia in the Austro-Servian conflict and the fact

that Russia had commenced hostilities against Germany, Austria-Hungary

considered herself also at war with Russia."

M. Schebeko left quietly in a special train provided by the

Austro-Hungarian Government on the 7th September. He had urgently

requested to be conveyed to the Roumanian frontier, so that he might be

able to proceed to his own country, but was taken instead to the Swiss

frontier, and ten days later I found him at Berne.

M. Dumaine, French Ambassador, stayed on till the 12th August. On the

previous day he had been instructed to demand his passport on the ground

that Austrian troops were being employed against France. This point was

not fully cleared up when I left Vienna. On the 9th August, M. Dumaine

had received from Count Berchtold the categorical declaration that no

Austrian troops were being moved to Alsace. The next day this statement

was supplemented by a further one, in writing, giving Count Berchtold's

assurance that not only had no Austrian troops been moved actually to

the French frontier, but that none were moving from Austria in a

westerly direction into Germany in such a way that they might replace

German troops employed at the front. These two statements were made by

Count Berchtold in reply to precise questions put to him by M. Dumaine,

under instructions from his Government. The French Ambassador's

departure was not attended by any hostile demonstration, but his

Excellency before leaving had been justly offended by a harangue made by

the Chief Burgomaster of Vienna to the crowd assembled before the steps

of the town hall, in which he assured the people that Paris was in the

throes of a revolution, and that the President of the Republic had been

assassinated.

The British declaration of war on Germany was made known in Vienna by

special editions of the newspapers about midday on the 5th August. An

abstract of your speeches in the House of Commons, and also of the

German Chancellor's speech in the Reichstag of the 4th April, appeared

the same day, as well as the text of the German ultimatum to Belgium.

Otherwise few details of the great events of these days transpired. The

"Neue Freie Presse" was violently insulting towards England. The

"Fremdenblatt" was not offensive, but little or nothing was said in the

columns of any Vienna paper to explain that the violation of Belgian

neutrality had left His Majesty's Government no alternative but to take

part in the war.

The declaration of Italian neutrality was bitterly felt in Vienna, but

scarcely mentioned in the newspapers.

On the 5th August I had the honour to receive your instruction of the

previous day preparing me for the immediate outbreak of war with

Germany, but adding that, Austria being understood to be not yet at that

date at war with Russia and France, you did not desire me to ask for my

passport or to make any particular communication to the Austro-Hungarian

Government. You stated at the same time that His Majesty's Government of

course expected Austria not to commit any act of war against us without

the notice required by diplomatic usage.

On Thursday morning, the 13th August, I had the honour to receive your

telegram of the 12th, stating that you had been compelled to inform

Count Mensdorff, at the request of the French Government, that a

complete rupture had occurred between France and Austria, on the ground

that Austria had declared war on Russia who was already fighting on the

side of France, and that Austria had sent troops to the German frontier

under conditions that were a direct menace to France. The rupture having

been brought about with France in this way, I was to ask for my

passport, and your telegram stated, in conclusion, that you had informed

Count Mensdorff that a state of war would exist between the two

countries from midnight of the 12th August.

After seeing Mr. Penfield, the United States Ambassador, who accepted

immediately in the most friendly spirit my request that his Excellency

would take charge provisionally of British interests in Austria-Hungary

during the unfortunate interruption of relations, I proceeded, with Mr.

Theo Russell, Counsellor of His Majesty's Embassy, to the Ballplatz.

Count Berchtold received me at midday. I delivered my message, for which

his Excellency did not seem to be unprepared, although he told me that a

long telegram from Count Mensdorff had just come in but had not yet been

brought to him. His Excellency received my communication with the

courtesy which never leaves him. He deplored the unhappy complications

which were drawing such good friends as Austria and England into war. In

point of fact, he added, Austria did not consider herself then at war

with France, though diplomatic relations with that country had been

broken off. I explained in a few words how circumstances had forced this

unwelcome conflict upon us. We both avoided useless argument...

[Footnote 191: "Miscellaneous, No. 6 (1914)."]

[Footnote 192: See No. 137, "Miscellaneous, No. 6 (1914)."]

APPENDIX VI

EXTRACTS FROM

THE RUSSIAN ORANGE BOOK

_Recueil de Documents Diplomatiques_:

_Négociations ayant précédé la guerre_

_10/23 Juillet--24 Juillet/6 Août 1914_

PREFATORY NOTE TO APPENDIX VI

This important collection of documents, which has only reached us since

the publication of our first edition, confirms the conclusion, which we

had deduced from other evidence in our fifth chapter (_supra_, pp.

66-107), that Germany consistently placed obstacles in the way of any

proposals for a peaceful settlement, and this in spite of the

willingness of all the other Powers, including Austria-Hungary and

Russia, to continue discussion of the Servian question. That the crisis

took Russia by surprise seems evident from the fact that her ambassadors

accredited to France, Berlin, and Vienna were not at their posts when

friction began with Russia. (_Infra_, Nos. 4, 7, 8.)

The Russian evidence shows that, on July 29, Germany threatened to

mobilize if Russia did not desist from military preparations. This

threat was viewed by M. Sazonof as an additional reason for taking all

precautions; 'since we cannot accede to Germany's desire, the only

course open to us is to accelerate our own preparations and to assume

that war is probably inevitable.' (_Infra_, No. 58.) The reader will

also notice the curious fact that on July 30 the decree mobilizing the

German army and navy was published, only to be immediately withdrawn;

and that the German Government explained that the publication had been

premature and accidental. (_Infra_, Nos. 61, 62.) We know from the

British White Book (_Correspondence_, No. 99, Sir F. Bertie to Sir E.

Grey, July 30) that, on July 30, Germany showed signs of weakening in

her attitude to Russia.

Why We Are at War (2nd Edition, revised) · 第 7 / 8 章