How the Nations Waged War A companion volume to "How the War Began" — Story, Setting & Ideas

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 nine p.m. It was accepted by that office, but apparently never dispatched.[3]

At about 9.30 p.m. Herr von Zimmermann, the Under-Secretary of State, came to see me. After expressing his deep regret that the very friendly official and personal relations between us were about to cease, he asked me casually whether a demand for passports was equivalent to a declaration of war. I said that such an authority on international law as he was known to be must know as well as or better than I what was usual in such cases. I added that there were many cases where diplomatic relations had been broken off, and, nevertheless, war had not ensued; but that in this case he would have seen from my instructions, of which I given Herr von Jagow a written summary, that his Majesty's Government expected an answer to a definite question by twelve o'clock that night, and that in default of a satisfactory answer they would be forced to take such steps as their engagements required. Herr von Zimmermann said that that was, in fact, a declaration of war, as the Imperial Government could not possibly give the assurance required either that night or any other night.

In the meantime, after Herr von Zimmermann left me, a flying sheet, issued by the _Berliner Tageblatt_, was circulated stating that Great Britain had declared war against Germany. The immediate result of this news was the assemblage of an exceedingly excited and unruly mob before his Majesty's Embassy. The small force of police which had been sent to guard the Embassy was soon overpowered, and the attitude of the mob became more threatening. We took no notice of this demonstration as long as it was confined to noise, but when the crash of glass and the landing of cobble-stones into the drawing-room where we were all sitting, warned us that the situation was getting unpleasant, I telephoned to the Foreign Office an account of what was happening. Herr von Jagow at once informed the Chief of Police, and an adequate force of mounted police, sent with great promptness, very soon cleared the street. From that moment on we were well guarded, and no more direct unpleasantness occurred.

After order had been restored Herr von Jagow came to see me and expressed his most heartfelt regrets at what had occurred. He said that the behaviour of his countrymen had made him feel more ashamed than he had words to express. It was an indelible stain on the reputation of Berlin. He said that the flying sheet circulated in the streets had not been authorized by the Government; in fact, the Chancellor had asked him by telephone whether he thought that such a statement should be issued, and he had replied, "Certainly not, until the morning." It was in consequence of his decision to that effect that only a small force of police had been sent to the neighbourhood of the Embassy, as he had thought that the presence of a large force would inevitably attract attention and perhaps lead to disturbances.

It was the "pestilential _Tageblatt_," which had somehow got hold of the news, and had upset his calculations. He had heard rumours that the mob had been excited to violence by gestures made and missiles thrown from the Embassy, but he felt sure that that was not true (I was able soon to assure him that the report had no foundation whatever), and even if it was, it was no excuse for the disgraceful scenes which had taken place. He feared that I would take home with me a sorry impression of Berlin manners in moments of excitement. In fact, no apology could have been more full and complete.

Another remarkable passage in the Dispatch is that in which Sir E. Goschen describes the Kaiser's indignation and his resolve to divest himself of his English titles:

On the following morning, August 5th, the Emperor sent one of his Majesty's aides-de-camp to me with the following message: "The Emperor has charged me to express to your Excellency his regret for the occurrences of last night, but to tell you at the same time that you will gather from those occurrences an idea of the feelings of his people respecting the action of Great Britain in joining with other nations against her old allies of Waterloo. His Majesty also begs that you will tell the King that he has been proud of the titles of British Field-Marshal and British Admiral, but that in consequence of what has occurred he must now at once divest himself of these titles."

This resolve was made known in a manner which indicated that the attitude of the English Government was keenly felt at Potsdam. "I would add," remarks the Ambassador, "that the above message lost none of its acerbity by the manner of its delivery."

The Dispatch continues:

On the other hand, I should like to state that I received all through this trying time nothing but courtesy at the hands of Herr von Jagow and the officials of the Imperial Foreign Office. At about eleven o'clock on the same morning Count Wedel handed me my passports--which I had earlier in the day demanded in writing--and told me that he had been instructed to confer with me as to the route which I should follow for my return to England. He said that he had understood that I preferred the route via the Hook of Holland to that via Copenhagen; they had therefore arranged that I should go by the former route, only I should have to wait till the following morning. I agreed to this, and he said that I might be quite assured that there would be no repetition of the disgraceful scenes of the preceding night, as full precautions would be taken. He added that they were doing all in their power to have a restaurant car attached to the train, but it was rather a difficult matter. He also brought me a charming letter from Herr von Jagow, couched in the most friendly terms. The day was passed in packing up such articles as time allowed.

The night passed quietly without any incident. In the morning a strong force of police was posted along the usual route to the Lehrter Station, while the Embassy was smuggled away in taxi-cabs to the station by side streets. We there suffered no molestation whatever, and avoided the treatment meted out by the crowd to my Russian and French colleagues. Count Wedel met us at the station to say good-bye on behalf of Herr von Jagow and to see that all the arrangements ordered for our comfort had been properly carried out. A retired colonel of the Guards accompanied the train to the Dutch frontier, and was exceedingly kind in his efforts to prevent the great crowds, which thronged the platforms at every station where we stopped, from insulting us; but beyond the yelling of patriotic songs and a few jeers and insulting gestures we had really nothing to complain of during our tedious journey to the Dutch frontier.

Before closing this long account of our last days in Berlin I should like to place on record and bring to your notice the quite admirable behaviour of my staff under the most trying circumstances possible. One and all, they worked night and day with scarcely any rest, and I cannot praise too highly the cheerful zeal with which counsellor, naval and military attachés, secretaries, and the two young attachés buckled to their work and kept their nerve with often a yelling mob outside, and inside, hundreds of British subjects clamouring for advice and assistance. I was proud to have such a staff to work with, and feel most grateful to them all for the invaluable assistance and support, often exposing them to considerable personal risk, which they so readily and cheerfully gave to me.

I should also like to mention the great assistance rendered to us all by my American colleague, Mr. Gerard, and his staff. Undeterred by the hooting and hisses with which he was often greeted by the mob on entering and leaving the Embassy, his Excellency came repeatedly to see me to ask how he could help us, and to make arrangements for the safety of stranded British subjects. He extricated many of these from extremely difficult situations at some personal risk to himself, and his calmness and _savoir-faire_ and his firmness in dealing with the Imperial authorities gave full assurance that the protection of British subjects and interests could not have been left in more efficient and able hands.

At the sitting of the House of Commons on August 26th, Mr. Keir Hardie exhibited a tendency to quibble and to show his own country in a wrong light. His interference on this occasion was, from his point of view, fruitless; but it had the advantage of enabling the Foreign Secretary to make an effective reply. In his statement, Sir Edward Grey dealt with a few points which, although not at all obscure, were all the better for emphasizing. The temper of the House is sufficiently well indicated by the cheers and interruptions recorded in the following report:

Mr. KEIR HARDIE (Lab., Merthyr Tydvil) inquired of the Foreign Secretary whether the suggestions for a peace settlement made by the German Ambassador, 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: These were personal suggestions made by the Ambassador on August 1st, and without authority, to alter the conditions of neutrality proposed to us by the German Chancellor in No. 85, in the White Paper.[4] The Cabinet did, however, consider most carefully the next morning--that is Sunday, August 2nd--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. The German Chancellor had already been told, on July 30th, that we could not bargain that away.

On Monday, August 3rd, I made a statement in the House, accordingly.[5] 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. 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.[6] 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.[7]

I have been asked why I did not refer to No. 123 in the White Paper when I spoke in the House on August 3rd.[8] 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.[9] This would have made the case against the German Government much stronger--(cheers)--than I did make it in my speech. 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 the 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 the conditions on which we would be neutral. We did go into that question, and the conditions were stated in the House and made known to the German Ambassador. (Cheers.)

Mr. KEIR HARDIE (who rose amidst cries of "Order," "Oh, oh!" and "Sit down"): May I ask whether the German authorities at Berlin repudiated these suggestions of their Ambassador in London, and whether any effort at all was made to find out how far the German Government would have agreed to the suggestions put forward by their Ambassador? (Cries of "Don't answer.")

Mr. T.M. HEALY (Ind. Nat., Cork, N.E.): Before the right hon. gentleman answers that, may I ask him if the Socialists in the Reichstag are asking any questions like this? (Loud and prolonged general cheers.)

Sir E. GREY, who was greeted with cries of "Don't answer," said: I should like to have no misunderstanding on this. (Loud cheers.) The German Ambassador did not make to us suggestions different to those which his Government made. He never suggested to us that the German Government would be able to agree to the condition of the neutrality of Belgium. On the contrary he did suggest to me that we should not put that condition forward because he was afraid his Government would not be able to accept it. (Cheers.)

Mr. PRINGLE (R., Lanarkshire, N.W.): Is my right hon. friend aware that Mr. Keir Hardie is constantly representing in the country that these proposals were actually made by the German Government to England? (Hear, hear.)

Sir. E. GREY: That was one of the reasons why I thought it very desirable to answer very explicitly. (General cheers.)

Mr. KEIR HARDIE: On a point of personal explanation I entirely repudiate the statement made by Mr. Pringle.

Mr. PRINGLE: I have to say in answer to that personal imputation that my authority is a letter written by Mr. Hardie in the _Ardrossan and Saltcoats Herald_ last Saturday. (Cheers.)

Mr. KEIR HARDIE: Those who cheer have not seen the letter. (Cries of "Sit down.")

Mr. KING (R., Somerset, N.) asked the Foreign Secretary whether he intended to lay upon the table copies of the German memorandum and the official statements of other foreign Governments showing the different explanations of the origin of the war which had been published by the various Governments concerned in the European war.

Sir E. GREY: I have received no official explanation of the nature referred to, except such as appear in our White Paper recently published.

Mr. KING also asked whether Sir E. Grey was aware that the German Government had presented gratis to certain American citizens copies of a pamphlet, written in English, called "Germany's Reasons for War with Russia"; and whether, with a view of permitting an answer to this publication, he would obtain a copy and place it in the Library.

Sir E. GREY replied that he had given instructions for a copy of the document in question to be placed in the Library at the disposal of members.

On page 147 of this volume appears a reference to the German White Book, which was issued at Berlin on August 3rd. This White Book was intended to show that war with Russia was inevitable, and it was brought down to August 1st. In other words, while it dealt more or less adequately with the situation as between Russia and Germany, it threw no light on the ultimate causes which led to war with this country. The Memorandum of this German White Book has already been summarized (p. 147-8) and two telegrams--one from the Kaiser to the Tsar on July 31st, and the Tsar's reply of the same date--have been quoted on p. 148-9. The _Manchester Guardian_ of August 24th contained translations of telegrams which had been exchanged previously by the two Emperors on the preceding days, _i.e._, from July 28th to July 30th, as follows:

The Kaiser to the Tsar.

_July 28th, 10.45 p.m._

I HEAR with the utmost disquietude of the impression created in your realm by Austria-Hungary's proceedings against Servia. The unscrupulous agitation which has for years been carried on in Servia has led to the appalling crime of which the Grand Duke Franz Ferdinand was the victim. The spirit which animated the murder of their own king and queen is still supreme in that country. Doubtless you will agree with me that we two, that you as well as I, and all sovereigns have a common interest in insisting that all those morally responsible for the hideous deed should receive the punishment they deserve.

On the other hand, I am far from overlooking the difficulties you and your government may find in opposing the tendency of public opinion. Remembering the hearty friendship which for long has bound us two securely together, I am throwing the whole of my influence into the scale to induce Austria-Hungary to seek for an open and satisfactory understanding with Russia. I confidently hope for your assistance in my endeavours to put aside all the difficulties that may arise.

Your sincerely devoted friend and cousin,

The Tsar to the Kaiser.

Peterhof Palace, _July 29th, 1.0 p.m._

I REJOICE that you are back in Germany. I beg you earnestly to help me at this grave moment. A shameful war has been declared on a weak country, and there is immense indignation in Russia, which I fully share. I foresee that I shall very soon be unable to hold out longer against the pressure exercised upon me, and shall be compelled to adopt measures which will lead to war. To obviate such a misfortune as a European war, I implore you, in the name of our old friendship, to do all in your power to restrain your ally from going too far.

The Kaiser to the Tsar.

_July 29th, 6.30 p.m._

I HAVE received your telegram, and share your wish for the maintenance of peace. But I cannot, as I said in my first telegram to you, regard Austria-Hungary's action as a "shameful war." Austria-Hungary knows by experience that Servia's promises are wholly unreliable if merely written on paper. In my view Austria-Hungary's action is to be regarded as an attempt to secure guarantees that Servia's promises shall be really translated into action. I am strengthened in this view by the declaration of the Austrian Cabinet that Austria-Hungary aims at no territorial acquisitions at Servia's expense. I think, therefore, that it is entirely possible for Russia to maintain the rôle of a spectator of the Austro-Servian war without dragging Europe into the most awful war it has ever experienced. I believe that a direct understanding between your government and Vienna is possible and desirable, and, as I already telegraphed to you, my government has done all in its power to further such an understanding. Military measures on Russia's part, which Austria-Hungary could view as a threat, would naturally hasten a misfortune which we both wish to avoid, and would undermine the position of mediator which I have readily assumed in response to your appeal to my friendship and help.

The Kaiser to the Tsar.

_July 30th, 1.0 a.m._