REVENTLOW FURIOUS

Although it has since been cabled that the Imperial Government was

considering taking action against Prince Lichnowsky, and that Captain

Beerfelde, a member of the German General Staff, was under arrest for

having aided in the distribution of manifolded copies of the memorandum,

there was no general demand in the German press for the trial of the

Prince on a charge of high treason. The exceptions were a few extreme

Pan-German organs, led by Count zu Reventlow's Deutsche Tageszeitung. On

the other hand, a few of the Socialist and Liberal papers cautiously

remarked that, after all, although what the Prince said about the

responsibility for the war was altogether too pro-Entente, it might help

the movement in Germany for a negotiated peace.

Count zu Reventlow's article in the Deutsche Tageszeitung read, in part,

as follows:

"When a former Ambassador, and an experienced diplomat and official

besides, writes an article and gives it to some one else in these times,

there is, in our opinion, no excuse. It is a case of high treason and it

makes little difference if here one might perhaps admit the view of its

being high treason through negligence, because certainly no former

diplomat and official ought to allow himself to be so negligent, and

furthermore he must have known the great danger of his action, which, as

has been said, was exclusively meant to be to his personal interest.

Therefore, we cannot very well understand for what reasons the proper

steps have not been taken already against Prince Lichnowsky. We use the

characterization 'high treason' after due deliberation.

"Prince Lichnowsky should not have allowed a single piece of his article

to have left his hands, for he was very well able to judge that its

publication outside of the German Empire was bound to have the effect of

a treasonable act. The German cause will not be made any worse because a

former diplomat, completely enchanted by English ways and never in touch

with the essence of the English policy, places himself on the side of

the enemies of the German Empire."

The Kölnische Volkszeitung, the organ of the annexationist faction of

the Centre Party, concluded its editorial thus:

"One thing must be emphasized, Liebknecht, Dittmann, and other traitors

have been jailed because of their high treason. Lichnowsky wanted to

show to the whole world with his memorandum that Germany had sought,

wanted, and begun the war because some persons did not wish to have him,

Prince Lichnowsky, enjoy the success of the Anglo-German friendship.

And, in so doing, Lichnowsky furnished our enemies with weapons, worked

to our enemies' advantage. In time of war this is treason. The excuse

that the fourteen copies that he had prepared were only written for his

friends is ridiculous. Theodore Wolff of the Berliner Tageblatt is known

to be one of Lichnowsky's most intimate friends. Who knows who the

others may be! If a Social Democrat or an anarchist writes an inciting

pamphlet in the form of a memorandum and doesn't distribute it himself,

but has his friends do it, is he then exempt from punishment? If a

person commits high treason and does not circulate the document himself,

but lets others do it, or at least does not take precautions to see that

it is not distributed, does he go free? The German people will hardly

understand the decision of the Imperial Department of Justice as just

rendered in favor of Lichnowsky. Even at the last session of the

Prussian House of Lords Prince Lichnowsky sat beside his friend

Dernberg. Will he appear in the House of Lords again?"

Current History: A Monthly Magazine of the New York Times, May 1918 Vol. VIII, Part I, No. 2 · 第 392 / 400 题