Directed at Sir Edward Grey, British Minister for Foreign Affairs, in
House of Commons, Aug. 27.
_Mr. Keir Hardie_ (Merthyr Tydvil, Lab.) asked the Secretary for Foreign
Affairs whether the suggestions for a peace settlement made by the
German Ambassador, ["White Paper," Page 66, Item No. 123,] together with
his invitation to the Foreign Secretary to put forward proposals of his
own which would be acceptable as a basis for neutrality, were submitted
to and considered by the Cabinet; and, if not, why proposals involving
such far-reaching possibilities were thus rejected.
_Sir E. Grey_ (Northumberland, Berwick)--These were personal suggestions
made by the Ambassador on Aug. 1, and without authority to alter the
conditions of neutrality proposed to us by the German Chancellor in No.
85 in the "White Paper"--Miscellaneous, No. 6, [1914.]
The Cabinet did, however, consider most carefully the next morning--that
is, Sunday, Aug. 2--the conditions on which we could remain neutral, and
came to the conclusion that respect for the neutrality of Belgium must
be one of these conditions. ["Hear, hear!"] The German Chancellor had
already been told on July 30 that we could not bargain that way.
On Monday, Aug. 3, I made a statement in the House accordingly. I had
seen the German Ambassador again at his own request on Monday, and he
urged me most strongly, though he said that he did not know the plans of
the German military authorities, not to make the neutrality of Belgium
one of our conditions when I spoke in the House. It was a day of great
pressure, for we had another Cabinet in the morning, and I had no time
to record the conversation, and therefore it does not appear in the
"White Paper"; but it was impossible to withdraw that condition [loud
cheers] without becoming a consenting party to the violation of the
treaty, and subsequently to a German attack on Belgium.
After I spoke in the House we made to the German Government the
communication described in No. 153 in the "White Paper" about the
neutrality of Belgium. Sir Edward Goschen's report of the reply to that
communication had not been received when the "White Paper" was printed
and laid. It will be laid before Parliament to complete the "White
Paper."
I have been asked why I did not refer to No. 123 in the "White Paper"
when I spoke in the House on Aug. 3. If I had referred to suggestions to
us as to conditions of neutrality I must have referred to No. 85, the
proposals made, not personally by the Ambassador, but officially by the
German Chancellor, which were so condemned by the Prime Minister
subsequently, and this would have made the case against the German
Government much stronger than I did make it in my speech. ["Hear,
hear!"] I deliberately refrained from doing that then.
Let me add this about personal suggestions made by the German
Ambassador, as distinct from communications made on behalf of his
Government. He worked for peace; but real authority at Berlin did not
rest with him and others like him, and that is one reason why our
efforts for peace failed. [Loud cheers.]
_Mr. Keir Hardie_--May I ask whether any attempt was made to open up
negotiations with Germany on the basis of suggestions here set forth by
the German Ambassador?
_Sir E. Grey_--The German Ambassador did not make any basis of
suggestions. It was the German Chancellor who made the basis of
suggestions. The German Ambassador, speaking on his own personal
initiative and without authority, asked whether we would formulate
conditions on which we would be neutral. We did go into that question,
and those conditions were stated to the House and made known to the
German Ambassador.
_Mr. Keir Hardie_ [who was received with cries of "Oh!" from all parts
of the House]--May I ask whether the German authorities at Berlin
repudiated the suggestions of their Ambassador in London, and whether
any effort at all [renewed cries of "Oh!" and "Order!"] was made to find
out how far the German Government would have agreed to the suggestions
put before them by their own Ambassador?
* * * * *