Herr von Stumm, Under Secretary for Foreign Affairs, replying to a
question as to who was responsible for Prince Lichnowsky's appointment
in London, said that the appointment was made by the Kaiser, in
agreement with the responsible Imperial Chancellor. While in London the
Prince had devoted himself zealously to his task. His views, it was
true, had frequently not agreed with those of the German Foreign Office.
That was especially the case regarding his strong optimism in reference
to German-English relations. When his hopes aiming at a German-English
understanding were destroyed by the war, the Prince returned to Germany
greatly excited, and even then did not restrain his criticism of
Germany's policy.
Herr von Stumm continued:
"His excitement increased owing to attacks against him in the German
press. All these circumstances must be taken into consideration when
gauging the value of his memorandum. It was unjustifiable to draw
conclusions from it regarding the Ambassador's activity in London and
blame the Government for it. Regarding the German White Book, the Under
Secretary admitted that it was not very voluminous, but it had to be
compiled quickly, so as to present to the Reichstag at the opening a
clear picture of the question of guilt. The Blue Books of other States,
it was true, were much more voluminous. The German White Book, however,
differed from them in so far to its advantage as it contained no
falsification. A new edition of the German White Book is in
preparation."
Dr. Payer then discussed the revelations of Dr. Mühlon, at present in
Switzerland. Dr. Mühlon, an ex-Director of Krupps, had made a statement
according to which he had a conference with two exalted personages in
the latter half of July, 1914, from which it appeared that it was not
the intention of the German Government to maintain peace. The Vice
Chancellor alleged that Dr. Mühlon was suffering from neurasthenia at
the time, and that no importance could be attached to his revelations,
since the two gentlemen referred to had denied making the statements
attributed to them.
In the subsequent discussion disapproval of Prince Lichnowsky's attitude
was expressed, but some speakers urged the need for the reorganization
of Germany's diplomatic service.
According to the report of the debate published by the Neues Wiener
Journal, Herr von Payer himself acknowledged that prior to the war
German diplomacy had made some bad blunders, and that reform was
urgently needed. Herr Müller (Progressive) sharply criticised Herr von
Flotow, who was German Ambassador in Rome at the beginning of the war,
and charged him with having declared to the Marquis di San Giuliano,
then Italian Foreign Minister, that there existed for Italy no casus
foederis. Prince Bülow also came in for severe criticism.
A bill indicting Prince Lichnowsky for treason has been introduced into
the Reichstag and is still pending at this writing. A dispatch from
Geneva on April 21 stated that he was virtually a prisoner in his
château in Silesia. According to the Düsseldorfer Tageblatt the Prince
was under police surveillance because of the discovery of a plan for his
escape to Switzerland.