網頁圖片
PDF
ePub 版
[graphic]

Olumbla

Prices in Canada plus duty

Columbia
Grafonola
Price $200

The Outlook

NOVEMBER 22, 1916

Offices, 381 Fourth Avenue, New York

"Ten Weeks Behind the Front in Germany" is the general title of a series of articles which will soon appear in The Outlook. The author, Mrs. H. H. Gallison, is of German birth, and lived many years in Germany before coming to this country. The articles describe her experiences and observations during a long visit to Germany in war time, written after her return to America. They give a sympathetic interpretation of the spirit of the German people and conditions in Germany by one who understands Germans and sympathizes with them, but who does not enter into argument over controversial subjects. They are intensely human and graphic, and are particularly illuminating as to the food question and as to German civil and domestic life under war conditions.-THE EDITORS.

THE WEEK

THE STORY OF THE WAR:
THE DEPORTATION OF THE BELGIANS

If it is true, as reported, that our Government has, through its diplomatic representatives in Berlin, entered even an unofficial protest against the deportation of Belgians. from their own country by Germany, it is a welcome sign that at last the Administration has seen the righteousness of protest by the greatest of neutral nations against outrages perpetrated on small and helpless nations. If, as some think, this is a forerunner of a new policy on President Wilson's part, it is to be cordially approved, provided that the words of protest are backed by evidence of an intention to enforce the protest if necessary. Later than the first report Secretary Lansing made public this statement:

The United States has not made an official protest to Germany, but has suggested to her what a bad effect on neutral opinion, particularly in the United States, such action might have. The instructions to Chargé Grew to discuss the matter with Chancellor von Bethmann Hollweg were sent at the suggestion of the Belgian Government. The American action was not meant in any sense to be a criticism of the German Government's policy. We do not know the full facts in the situation, and cannot form a judgment until we have heard them. Even if the communication of the American Government is not called a "protest," it has the effect of a protest just the same. Had a protest, backed by such evidence of intention, been made by our Government when

Belgium's neutrality was threatened at the outbreak of war, Americans might now have less to regret in the feeble conduct of their Government. The former crime against Belgium was not only a violation of international law but a distinct violation of a pledge which concerned this country; and the reason for protest by the United States was then even more obvious than it is now.

It has been reported that our representations to the German Government point out that the deportation of the Belgians is in defiance of humanity and international law and is producing an injurious effect on neutral opinion, and that the representations include a statement that, as the Belgian civilian population is largely being cared for by American assistance, the American people are especially concerned in this matter.

Washington despatches assert that our Government is in possession of knowledge that the non-combatant Belgians deported to Germany are forced to dig trenches and do other military work, and that King Albert's Government is appealing to the neutral world with the declaration that its citizens are being led into slavery. It is perfectly evident that to select able-bodied laborers in large numbers, to take them into Germany by force, and there to employ them in almost any kind of industrial labor would have the effect of releasing an equal number of German men for the fighting lines.

The Outlook has already reported with

strongest condemnation the action of Germany in deporting French women, girls, and young men from the neighborhood of Lille to other French territory held by the Germans, there to work under German direction. Now comes the pernicious action of Germany as regards Belgian workers. Having taken from Belgium money and supplies of many kinds and having left the Belgian people, for whom it is responsible, to be fed by Americans and other neutrals, Germany now proceeds to take from Belgium thousands of men and to make of them German serfs. One's indignation is doubly kindled at the hypocritical pretense by which this despicable action is defended by Germany. The German Governor-General of Belgium says: "At bottom it is a blessing. Nothing so demoralizes a man as long idleness." The Belgians are perfectly willing to work, but it is not surprising that they are not always willing to work under German direction and control. Cardinal Mercier, that noble representative of religion and humanity in Belgium, thus describes the scenes which have followed the beginning of deportation:

Suddenly parties of soldiers begin to enter by force these peaceful homes, tearing youth from parent, husband from wife, father from children. They bar with the bayonet the door through which wives and mothers wish to pass to say farewell to those departing.

They herd their captives in groups of tens and twenties and push them into cars. As soon as the train is filled the officer in charge brusquely waves the signal for departure. Thus thousands of Belgians are being reduced to slavery.

The deportation has been going on quietly for about a month, and reports state that within a single week in one limited section from eight hundred to twelve hundred men were being "rounded up" daily, and, as one writer says, "carried off pell-mell to unknown destinations like slave gangs." Comment upon the inhumanity and heartlessness of such conduct and upon the callousness of the Germans, who have now committed almost every conceivable outrage upon Belgian citizens and Belgian liberty, can only feebly characterize the wrong. The facts speak more eloquently than any words.

THE BATTLES OF THE WEEK

The greatest military event of the week ending November 15 was the new drive of the British forces in the Somme sector. This

seems to have been a real surprise to the German generals. Heretofore the British advance towards Bapaume has been chiefly from the southwest. Now the British have attacked directly from the west along the little river known as the Ancre. The most important result up to date, in our judgment, is found in General Haig's bulletin of November 14, saying that five thousand prisoners had already passed through the collecting stations and more were coming in. Germany cannot lose five thousand prisoners at a time indefinitely without serious weakening. That she has already weakened the Somme line is quite evident, as the reports speak of the poor quality of her troops left to guard the points attacked last week. The British forces have taken the strongly fortified village of Beaucourt and two or three other villages only less important. They are now coming pretty close to the point where the direct attack upon Bapaume must begin. Berlin frankly admits its losses in the engagements on both sides of the river Ancre.

On the other hand, the news from the Balkans has been during our week in the main favorable to the Germans. Heavy engagements have been reported along the Transylvanian border of Rumania. General von Falkenhayn's progress seems to be considerable and to threaten a southward driving of the Rumanians which may ultimately endanger the capital of Rumania, Bucharest, and also, perhaps, make possible a union between General von Falkenhayn and General von Mackensen. Just how matters stand in the Dobrudja is not altogether clear. Apparently the bridge at Cernavoda was only partly destroyed by the Rumanians when they crossed the Danube in retreat, and there seems to be reason to believe that the Germans crossed the break by a pontoon bridge and have forces on the western side of the Danube. The reason for believing this is the report of engagements as having taken place to the west of the river.

It is also reported that Mackensen's forces in the Dobrudja have been attacked and driven back from the northward, but they are certainly still in possession of a line north of the railway which runs from Constanza (which town, by the way, has been bombarded by Russian ships) to the Cernavoda bridge. If the news of Mackensen's retreat because of attacks from the north is true, it must mean that Russia is now coming rapidly to the defense of Rumania and that

[blocks in formation]

either she has put forces across the Danube at the north of the Dobrudja peninsula or else that larger forces than have been supposed were present in the peninsula itself at the time of Mackensen's drive northward.

There has been no very important action on the Russian front in Galicia and Volhynia. In Macedonia the Servians have fought sharp and successful engagements and are now seriously threatening Monastir. It is said that the Bulgars were in one day driven back seven miles by combined Servian and French forces.

THE BRITISH REPLY TO
OUR "BLACKLIST" PROTEST

A note from Viscount Grey in reply to the American protest against what is commonly I called here the "blacklist" order of Great Britain was made public last week. It is an able, clear, and forceful exposition of the British position. It courteously declines to remove the restriction which affects certain American business firms. Great Britain has contended from the beginning that this order takes no action against such firms, and that they are injured only indirectly and as a consequence (for which Great Britain is not responsible) of a perfectly proper restriction placed by Great Britain on its own subjects. This view is expressed so strongly by Viscount Grey that press reports from Washington declare :

A

It can be stated authoritatively that as a result of this legal defense the United States will abandon its original contention that the blacklist is a violation of international law. new protest will be made, but it will be based on the argument that the blacklist methods constitute a serious breach of international comity.

Of course it is possible for a perfectly legal order to be enforced in such a way as to be oppressive to neutrals. It is also true that, even though Great Britain is acting within her legal rights, she might, as we have heretofore pointed out, make concessions as a matter of friendship with this country. If such concessions are asked, however, it is well to remember that it would not be fair for our Government to make urgent requests for such concessions through comity if it is not prepared to do the same thing in future under similar circumstances.

Viscount Grey, apart from the technical defense adduced, writes eloquently on the actual need for the restriction of the activities of those German business firms in neutral countries which, as he declares, have

621

acted as really part of the German military organization. He rejects the theory that this restriction is not justified by military necessity, and says very frankly and openly that the Allies still have a long and bitter struggle before them, and that this, "in justice to the principles for which they are fighting, imposes upon them the duty of employing every opportunity and every measure which they can legitimately use to overcome their opponents."

He adds that inconvenience caused to neutral nations in this way is not "to be compared for an instant to the suffering and loss occasioned to mankind by the prolongation of the war even for a week."

As an instance of the kind of thing aimed at in the so-called "blacklist " order, Viscount Grey declares that German business houses in neutral countries have not only aided in espionage, but have even acted as bases of supply for German cruisers and as paymasters of miscreants employed to destroy munition factories.

THE GERMAN CHANCELLOR
DEFENDS THE FATHERLAND

On November 9 Dr. von Bethmann Hollweg, the German Chancellor, made an important address to members of the German Reichstag. It was a rejoinder to the recent speech of Viscount Grey, the British Foreign Secretary. Lord Grey had said that the origin of the war must influence peace conditions, and that, if it could be proved that the war had been forced on Germany, then Germany would be entitled to ask for guarantees against future attacks.

Herr von Bethmann Hollweg began by asserting that in 1915 England and France promised to Russia domination of the Bosphorus, Constantinople, and the west shore of the Dardanelles, Asia Minor to be divided among the Entente Powers, and that to these plans was added the disposal of AlsaceLorraine to France. Though silence had been maintained with respect to the plans, the Chancellor affirmed that the history of international relations was now clear. He thus particularized:

What made France join with Russia? AlsaceLorraine.

What did Russia want? Constantinople. Why did England join them? Because Germany had become too strong for her.

So much as prelude. The Chancellor admitted that on July 30 a Berlin newspaper

issued a special edition with the report that the German Emperor had ordered mobilization, but said that the sale of this special edition was prohibited immediately by the police, that the Foreign Secretary informed the Russian Ambassador at once by telephone that the news was false, that the Russian Ambassador sent a warning to his capital as soon as the special edition was issued, but immediately. followed this by a contradiction; and that the following day, when Russian mobilization had been ordered, the Czar telegraphed to the Emperor that it was impossible to stop military preparations, "made necessary by AustroHungarian mobilization." There was no word about German mobilization, said the Chan→ cellor, and added that a partial Austro-Hungarian mobilization could have been no excuse for a general Russian movement, that only after this occurred did Austria-Hungary order a general mobilization, that after the news of the general Russian mobilization Germany did not mobilize at once, but at first only proclaimed a state of threatened danger of war; that this was communicated to the Russian Government, and only then was it added that mobilization must follow if Russia did not stop all war measures against Germany and Austria-Hungary within twelve hours, and that Russia gave no answer. Thus, in German opinion, the Russian mobilization was an aggressive and not a defensive measure.

THE GERMAN CHANCELLOR'S
IDEAS ABOUT PEACE

Whatever one may think of this, it is uninteresting compared with the Chancellor's reply to that part of Lord Grey's speech concerning an international league to preserve peace. The Chancellor affirmed in words which must have had his Emperor's approval:

We never concealed our doubts as to whether peace could be permanently guaranteed by international organizations, such as arbitration courts. I shall not discuss the theoretical aspects of the problem in this place. But from the standpoint of matters of fact we now, and in peace, must define our position with regard to this question.

If at and after the end of the war the world will only become fully conscious of the horrifying destruction of life and property, then through the who's of humanity there will ring out a cry for peaceful arrangements and understandings which, as far as they are within human power, will prevent the return of such a monstrous catastrophe.

Germany will honestly co-operate in the ex

amination of every endeavor to find a practical solution, and will collaborate for its possible realization. This all the more if the war, as we expect and trust, shall create political conditions that do full justice to the free development of all nations, of small as well as great nations. Then the principle of justice and free development, not only on the continent, but also on the seas, must be made valid. This, to be sure, Lord Grey did not mention.

The Chancellor then pointed out that Lord Grey's ideas regarding international guarantees of peace seemed to possess a peculiar character, in that they took into consideration only British wants, and that neutrals who during the war had to accept in silence British domination of the seas were to form a union after the war, when England hoped she would have conquered Germany, in order to guarantee that the British plans should prevail under the new conditions. Referring to the British plans of 1915 the Chancellor declared:

Such a policy of brute force cannot be the basis of an efficient international league of peace. . . . The first condition for the evaluation of international relations by way of arbitration and peaceful compromise of conflicting interests ought to be that no more aggressive coalitions be formed.

Germany is at all times ready to join the league of nations—yes, even to place herself at the head of such a league-to keep in check the disturbers of peace.

This speech of the Chancellor's does not sound like the Germany which marched triumphantly over prostrate Belgium, which declared that necessity knew no law, which promised to occupy Paris and crush France. Concerning this we comment in an editorial on another page.

[merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small]
« 上一頁繼續 »