The Threat Of German World-Politics
The Immediate Causes of The War On The Part of The United States
By Harry Pratt Judson
[Professor of International Law and Diplomacy President of the University of Chicago]
[The University of Chicago War Papers No. 1; January 1918]
The United States has been driven into war with Germany by the entry of that power into a policy of piracy on the high seas. Within the area of the Atlantic Ocean, some fifteen hundred miles long and six hundred miles wide, and within nearly all of the Mediterranean Sea notification has been duly given that vessels will be sunk by German submarines without regard to nationality and without regard to the purpose of their voyage.
The joint resolution adopted by Congress in April, 1917, declared a state of war to exist with Germany. Eighteen American ships had already been sunk by German attacks, and two hundred thirty-seven Americans had been killed. The attacks were not only on vessels of the United States. Piratical raids were uniformly aimed at everybody. One-third of the Norwegian commercial marine had been destroyed. In May, 1915, the "Lusitania," a passenger ship, was sunk without warning, without giving any chance for the safety of those on board.
More than one thousand persons were drowned. Over one hundred of these were Americans, many of them women and little children.
In these German attacks on neutral rights and safety there was no remote resemblance to the acts of the British navy. While it is true that American commerce with Germany was hindered and in a large measure prevented by the British naval blockade, at the same time not one American life had been lost, not one American ship had been destroyed. It was wholly a matter of property. Each claim on the British government resulting from the blockade could be settled by courts of law, and damages could be paid in money. The only immediate effect on American prosperity was perhaps that the profits of American business might be double rather than threefold what they had been before the war. Further, the question as to the unlawfulness of the British blockade at best was in doubt. Very likely a suit before a court of arbitration on that ground would have gone against the United States.
A government which does not protect the rights of its citizens on the high seas will presently have no rights left. If we permit Germany to forbid navigation within twenty miles of the coast of Spain, presently we may expect to have that navigation forbidden twenty miles from the coast of the United States.
In short, a government which peaceably submits to such outrages will have and will deserve to have the contempt of the world.
The lawless acts of the German navy under the specific orders of the German imperial government constituted war upon the United States. The joint resolution of Congress in April did not begin war, but recognized a state of war as already existing by the act of Germany.** [**War Information Series": How the War Came to America, pp. 22-23.]
THE DEEPER CAUSES OF THE WORLD-WAR
We now realize clearly that the world-war, however, has much deeper causes than the mere attempt to blockade the Entente Allies by a submarine campaign. This deeper cause in its essence is a world-wide piratical attack by Germany on nations which have what Germany wants. The word "piracy" is here used in a larger sense than its technical application in international and criminal law. In this larger sense it means seizing by force what belongs to another nation, whether by land or sea. We have learned that there is a scheme, the result of decades of careful and elaborate planning, for subjecting the entire world, sooner or later, to the domination of the German Empire. There is a scheme for seizing coveted lands and coveted dominion in every quarter of the globe. It is in this conflict for the liberty of the world that our country is now deeply concerned. Should the submarine policy itself be withdrawn, it would be idle for us to put a stop to hostilities. We must stay in the fight until these deeper causes of the Great War are destroyed, and until there are adequate securities against their early recurrence.
In reality, then, this war on the part of the United States is, in the first place, a war of self-defense and, in the second place, a war for the defense of all the other democracies of the world.
THE GERMAN EMPIRE AN ENEMY OF THE WORLD
The German Empire as now organized and as now administered is an enemy of the world by reason, first, of its controlling forces; by reason, secondly, of the far-reaching, piratical aims of those forces; by reason, thirdly, of the methods by which the imperial government of Germany seeks to attain these ends.
I. THE CONTROLLING FORCES IN GERMANY
The controlling forces in question are perhaps five:
I. The first is the virtually autocratic government of the empire. The constitution of the German Empire is such that the will of the king of Prussia finds easy expression and is only with great difficulty to be resisted. While nominally a constitutional monarch, virtually he is an autocrat.
In these days monarchy is by no means always equivalent to autocracy. In the British monarchy, for instance, it is true that the king succeeds by heredity in the limits of a certain family. However, this succession was determined by act of Parliament, and act of Parliament may set aside the royal family altogether, or any king within the royal family. The British ministers and the Cabinet in England are responsible, not to the king, but to the elective House of Commons. In other words, Parliament through a freely elected House of Commons actually governs the country. The king reigns, but he does not rule. The House of Commons is chosen by what we may call universal suffrage, and in itself has the power under certain customary conditions, not merely to enact new legislation, but even to change the fundamental laws of the country. In short, the British monarchy is a real representative democracy. It is a monarchy only in name.
In Prussia the monarchy is quite different. Here the king also succeeds by heredity and in a certain family, but that succession is independent of parliament or constitution. It is claimed by the king that he succeeds by divine right and not by the will of the people. The Prussian constitution was not made by the Prussian people. It is a grant from the king, who may at any time revoke it. The Prussian ministry is responsible, not to the Prussian parliament, but to the king, who appoints and removes his ministers without regard to parliament or to the popular will. The upper house of the Prussian legislature consists of members who succeed by heredity, and of others appointed by the king. The lower house of the Prussian parliament is, to be sure, elective, but elective by the people on the three-class system. The electorate is divided into three classes according to the amount of taxes paid. The first class, electing one-third of the members, contains approximately 4 per cent of the population. The second class, electing another third of the members, contains about 14 per cent of the population. The third class, also electing one-third of the members, contains about 82 per cent of the population.
In other words, in the Prussian government the king, the hereditary nobility, and the possessors of wealth govern the country. The masses are very nearly helpless.
In the German Empire the king of Prussia, by virtue of being king of Prussia, is German emperor. The ministers are responsible to the emperor, not to the parliament, the chancellor and other members of the ministry being appointed and removed without regard to the desire of parliament or to the popular will excepting in so far as the emperor sees fit. The upper house of the parliament, the Council of the Empire, consists of the delegates appointed by the governments of the 25 states in the federal empire. In this body of 61 delegates there are 17 Prussians; that is, they are virtually appointed by the king of Prussia; and 3 others whom the German emperor, that is, the king of Prussia, controls. These delegates must vote as directed by those who appoint them. Further, no change in the fundamental law of the empire can be made against the votes of 14 members of the Council. Thus the king of Prussia, or in other words the emperor, can prevent any constitutional amendment.
The lower house of parliament—the Reichstag—is elected by universal suffrage, the electors being not less than twenty-five years of age. However, the original apportionment was made in 1871 and there has been no change since. A deputy from Berlin represents on an average about 125,000 voters, while a deputy from the districts of East Prussia, which contain the Prussian landed aristocracy, represents only about 24,000 voters. Legislation is virtually determined by the Council of the Empire, and the Council of the Empire is controlled by the emperor and by the other hereditary princes.
The German Empire is far from being a democracy, whether direct or representative. The power to declare war is in the emperor with the assent of the Council, but when the emperor sees fit to consider the war a defensive one he may declare war without the consent of the Council. That is just what happened in 1914, when the Emperor declared war—and thus is wholly responsible for bringing on the great world-war in which we are now engaged.
2. Another of the controlling forces is the Prussian military caste, arrogant, exclusive, and determined on domination.
The Prussian nobility, at least by custom, has so managed affairs that it has a practical monopoly of appointments to office in the army. In the reserve, sons of great commercial magnates are allowed minor positions, but the control of the army is for the nobles. Their power in politics, especially in eastern Prussia, owing to semi-feudal conditions and to archaic election laws, is very great. Thus a mediaeval noble class, military and political in power, depending on the emperor for its prestige and in turn supporting the emperor as a God-given monarch, is one of the controlling forces in the German Empire, and a force sinister and baleful in the extreme. The members of this class believe implicitly in the divine right of the noble to flout the common man and of Prussianized Germany to flout the world. Arrogant, insolent, domineering, they go far to make and to keep Germany a bitter enemy to free democratic institutions through all the world.
3. Still another of the controlling forces is found in those who direct the manufacturing and commercial life of the German Empire. They are determined to spread their enterprises throughout the world, not merely by ordinary competition, but by force wherever competition in itself is not sufficient. Years ago it was said repeatedly to a thoughtful American at that time visiting in Germany that Germany must shortly have a war with the United States, the reason being that the United States had begun to attempt to secure a share in the world-markets. This attempt, it was said, must be met with cannon, because those markets belonged to Germany.
4. The fourth great controlling force is the Pan-German organizations. These organizations have been actively at work in definite form since about 1894. Their aims cover the world, and have been expressed in a series of pamphlets, articles, and books with which Germany in the last two or three decades has been flooded. While ostensibly private organizations, it is very clear that their aims are essentially the aims of the other controlling forces in the Empire, and must be reckoned with by the rest of the world, therefore, not as the mere vaporings of irresponsible individuals, but as the deliberate plan which Germany as a whole is determined on carrying out.** [** Chéradame, chap. i.]
5. Another of the ruling influences in Germany is a strange philosophy of the state which seems generally accepted. There is no law of right but that of power, if the state is a party. In short, ethics, as commonly understood in the rest of the world, in Germany apparently applies, if at all, only as between individuals. The state is not bound by any standard but its own advantage. Laws, treaties, solemn governmental engagements, cease to be binding as soon as they cease to be advantageous. Chivalry, courtesy, humanity, are of no account at all if the state otherwise orders. To be sure, this is a code of ethics which is appropriate for pirates; but it is a code which is unquestionably German today. It differs from the ethical code of the German barbarians who overran Roman civilization fifteen centuries ago only that in our times it is explicitly stated as a system of thought and conduct. Such a philosophical formulation of principles was quite beyond the Goths, or the Vandals, or Attila's Huns. Their descendants have learned phrases, but not ethical action.
II. THE PREDATORY AIM OF GERMANY
As has been said, the essential aim of the controlling forces in Germany is to dominate the entire world, both politically and commercially, by force of arms wherever necessary, by intrigue everywhere else. This is essentially, in its larger sense, piratical. It merely means that other nations have things which Germany wants, and Germany means to get those things without regard to the method.
PRUSSIAN ROBBERY FROM HER NEIGHBORS
Prussia has been a predatory nation from the first. In 1864 the Prussian government succeeded in getting Austria to combine with it to attack Denmark and to take from it the provinces of Schleswig and Holstein. Whatever might be said of the German population of Holstein and of south Schleswig, there is no doubt that a large part of the province of Schleswig was Danish, and that the population of that province is Danish to this day. It was taken from Denmark merely because Prussia wanted it and had the power to get it. In 1866 Prussia succeeded in forcing on Austria a war over the disposition of the plunder of the War of 1864, and by means of this short war Prussia annexed by force of arms other independent German domains and drove Austria totally out of the organization of Germany as a whole. In 1870 Prussia succeeded in forcing on France a war which, while ostensibly declared by France, was in fact, as we now know by the admission of Bismarck, the result of a trick of his own, he and the military authorities dominant in Prussia being determined to bring the war about. As a result of this the provinces of Alsace and eastern Lorraine, thoroughly French in feeling and by nearly two centuries of life, were torn away from France merely because Prussia wanted them and had the power to get them. At the same time Prussia imposed on France an indemnity of one thousand million dollars. This again was an extortion purely piratical in character, and was made the basis of the future military organization and ambitions of the new German Empire.
As to the economic significance of Alsace-Lorraine, the following is a clear statement of the case:
When Moltke in 1870 insisted upon, and Bismarck against his better judgment assented to, the annexation of Alsace-Lorraine, the main thought in their minds was that of securing a strategic frontier. They secured, though they did not know it at the time, something far more valuable than that, something that has proved the base on which Germany has built up her towering fabric of prosperity and power, something without which Germany could not have begun this war or could not have waged it for six months. They secured the largest deposit of iron ore in Europe and the second largest in the world, surpassed in value and extent only by the Lake Superior deposit in Michigan, Wisconsin, and Minnesota. The soil of the lost provinces has made Germany's fortunes. She has derived from it her metallurgical ascendancy, the motive power for her industries, her wealth, and as a consequence her naval, military, and political power.
The area covered by this deposit embraces the Longwy and Briey districts in France, now occupied by the German armies, and portions of German Lorraine, of Luxemburg, and of Belgium, also for the moment in German possession. If Germany could secure a peace based on her present military position the whole of this wealth of iron ore, estimated at some 5,000,000,000 tons, would pass under her control. As it is, rather more than half the deposit is supposed to lie on the French side of the border and rather less than half in German Lorraine and Luxemburg. That being so, it may be asked why Germany, when she had the chance in 1870, did not annex the entire ore-yielding area instead of allowing it to be divided between France and herself. The answer is that she would undoubtedly have done so had she realized the value of her treasure-trove. But forty-seven years ago metallurgists generally regarded phosphoric ores, which formed the greater part of the Lorraine strata, as worthless and unworkable. The Germans seized everything that in the then state of science was known to be profitable and relinquished the rest to the French. But less than five years later the mining industry was revolutionized by the discovery of a process for dephosphorizing ores. Instantly the value of the ferruginous districts annexed by the Germans was indefinitely multiplied. But at the same time the portions of the basin they had contemptuously allowed to remain in the possession of the French were redeemed at a stroke from comparative worthlessness to a rich productivity.
There are reckoned to be 2,800 million tons of iron ore in all Germany. Of these Lorraine alone is responsible for some 2,000 millions or five-sevenths of the Empire's total supply. When Germany hypothecated the Lorraine beds they were yielding about 500,000 tons of ore a year. In 1875 they still yielded less than three-quarters of a million. Then came Thomas's discovery of the dephosphorizing process and the figures shot up like a rocket until in the year before the war the Germans were extracting from Lorraine over 21,000,000 tons of ore, more than three-fifths of which was produced by the Thomas method. Up to 1903 Germany had no need to import from abroad a single ton of ore. Lorraine alone enabled her to maintain for thirty years an unprecedented industrial expansion. But whether the pace abnormally quickened some ten years before the war, or whether she had commenced to prepare for its outbreak, or whether the Lorraine ores began to deteriorate, Germany between 1903 and 1913 was buying ore abroad in increasing quantities. About one-third of her total consumption was imported from foreign countries in the year preceding the war. That supply has, of course, for the most part been cut off, and for the past three years Germany has depended almost entirely on the Lorraine mines for the iron and steel which are the basis of all modern warfare. She has got some from the occupied districts of France and Belgium and Luxemburg, but from three-fifths to four-fifths of her output during the war has come from Lorraine. Without the production of the provinces she snatched from France forty-seven years ago Germany would long since have exhausted her capacity for turning out the material of war. Liberate those provinces from her clutch—with their 21,000,000 tons of iron ore a year, their 19,000,000 tons of iron smeltings, their 19,000,000 tons of steel smeltings, and the useful coal fields of the Sarre valley—and a long step has been taken towards binding her down to peace....
The general outline of the issue that the war is shaping and will determine thus becomes clear. Suppose Germany were to win and were to annex the greater half of the ferruginous basin that lies on French soil. Territorially, it would be a very small acquisition. Economically, its value would be inestimable. It would mean that after the war Germany would be able to raise some 46,000,000 tons of iron ore a year while the French output would be reduced to a bare 4,000,000 tons. Suppose, on the other hand, that the Allied victory is as complete as we all intend it shall be and that Alsace-Lorraine is restored to France. The situation in that case would be almost precisely reversed. France would be in a position to extract about 43,000,000 tons of ore a year, and Germany would have to remain satisfied with a maximum yield of some 8,000,000 tons. No blow could more effectually cripple German industrialism, and with it Germany's capacity to organize another war, than the loss of the Lorraine ore beds; and nothing could so certainly and so speedily re-establish the economic equilibrium of France as to regain possession of them. In the fate of Alsace-Lorraine there is involved nothing less than the industrial primacy of Europe.** [**'Sydney Brooks, "The Real Problem of Alsace-Lorraine," North American Review, No. 744 (November, 1917), pp. 696, 697, and 699.]
GERMAN CENTRAL EUROPE
The aims of the Pan-German policy are based on the control of a great Central-European dominion by Germany itself. This Central-European dominion comprises in the first place the Germanization of Austria-Hungary, first by a customs union and then by such close bonds as in the case of the North-German Zollverein, forming an intermediate step to actual Prussian political domination.
The Austro-Hungarian monarchy is a curious aggregation of territories and races united under the Hapsburg emperor. The history of this empire in the main consists of the gradual accession of the House of Hapsburg to the sovereignty over one after the other of the various elements, as duke, count, king, or what not. The union, therefore, is essentially personal in the emperor. The title of the emperor of Austria as such dates only from 1806, when the mediaeval Roman Empire was dissolved, and the head of the House of Hapsburg assumed the new title of "Emperor of Austria." Since 1867 the monarchy has been dual in character, and the head of the House of Hapsburg reigns as emperor of Austria and king of Hungary. Each of these two portions of the joint monarchy has its own parliament and its own ministry, and there is a common ministry for war, finance, and foreign affairs. The democratic basis of the two parliaments is not substantial, and the emperor and king is able to rule without parliament or in spite of parliament whenever it seems best.
The race elements in the dual monarchy are numerous. In Austria there is a total population of approximately 28 millions; 10 millions of these are Germans, the remaining 18 millions being Slavs and Italians. In Hungary the population is approximately 20 millions. Perhaps 10 millions are Magyars, 2 millions Germans, and 8 millions Slavs and Latins. And further, in the dual monarchy the imperial provinces of Bosnia and Herzegovina have a population of almost 2 millions, nearly all Serbian-Slavs.
Thus it will be seen that both in Austria and in Hungary the ruling class is a minority which imposes its will on the majority by force and by legal subtleties.** [** The Austrian parliament is cunningly juggled in the membership of its lower house. At the sitting in May, 1917—the first meeting since the war broke out—a rabid Pan-German was elected to the presidency by a vote of 215 to 195—215 Germans to 19s non-Germans in a nation in which Germans are in a minority by a ratio of 10 to 18. The election law puts about an average of 42,889 Germans in a parliamentary district, while it takes about 65,479 Slavs to elect one deputy.] Of the total population in the dual monarchy of about 50 millions there are approximately 12 millions of Germans and 10 millions of Magyars, or 22 millions of the ruling classes. The remaining 28 millions include Slavs and Latins. The Slavs comprise the Cěko-Slovaks in Bohemia, Moravia, and eastern Silesia, the Poles in central and western Galicia, and the South-Slavs, including Croats, Serbs, and Slovenes. The Latins include Italians in the South Tyrol and in Trieste and vicinity and Roumanians in Transylvania and Bukowina. The Cěks, or Bohemians, are a highly cultivated people, with a history rich in literature, the arts, and free government. The freedom of the Bohemian kingdom historically is as old as that of Hungary, and the desire of the Cěks has long been that the emperor of Austria should be crowned as "King of Bohemia," the ancient kingdom thus forming a third element in the monarchy, on a par with Austria and Hungary. The Galician Poles are a fragment of the ancient Polish kingdom, and represent a part of the plunder of that kingdom taken by the House of Hapsburg late in the eighteenth century. The Roumanians and the South-Slavs are a remnant forced across the Austrian line from the old independent Serbian and Roumanian kingdoms, which were destroyed by the Turks in the late Middle Ages.
GERMAN AIMS IN THE BALKAN PENINSULA AND IN TURKEY
The next element in this Central-European dominion to be controlled by Germany lies in the Balkan Peninsula. It is quite essential that through Austria-Hungary Germany should be dominant from Austria to the Aegean Sea. This involves control of Serbia and such alliances with the other Balkan states as might easily be effected through the German princelings on their thrones, or by German intermarriage, as in the case of Greece.
The next step involves the Germanization of Turkey. In the guise of an an alliance there would be a real political and economic control of that empire, which might then be exploited by German capital. Thus Germany, if this plan for a Central-European state should be carried out, would be dominant from the Baltic Sea to the Persian Gulf.** [** Chéradame, chap. v.]
GERMAN AIMS OUTSIDE CENTRAL EUROPE
Central Europe as thus organized is the essential basis of the Pan-German plan for the domination of the rest of Europe. It was believed by the Pan-Germanists that it would be easy for Germany to crush Russia, annex Poland and the Baltic provinces, and very likely the large wheat section of the southeast, thus greatly extending German economic influence and putting an end for all time to the power of Russia in Europe. Again, in the west, if there should be objection to the German domination in Central Europe, Germany could easily crush France, annex the valuable mining and industrial region of the north, annex the Channel ports, seize Belgium, and ultimately intimidate Holland into absorption in the German Empire. This would secure for Germany the valuable ports of the North Sea, which could be made the base of her future naval supremacy, and at the same time would annex to the German Empire the large colonies of Holland and of Belgium, great areas in Africa and Asia and the Asiatic islands which Germany has long coveted. It is obvious that if this plan is carried out the next step will be the destruction of the British Empire. A base of operations in the Channel ports would make it not very difficult a few years later to throw a great army into the Island, and either seize it outright or reduce it to impotence by the exaction of an enormous indemnity.** [** See Appendix C.]
GERMAN AIMS IN ASIA AND AFRICA
Meanwhile, subsequent plans for the overthrow of the British Empire in India and for dominance on the China coast are all carefully worked out and on record. The seizure of Egypt would readily follow the control of Turkey, and thus in the long run Africa would become German almost as a whole. The maps found by the Boer conquerors of German Southwest Africa indicated Africa as German from the northern boundaries of the Belgian Congo colonies clear to the Cape, leaving only the little Boer republic as a German suzerainty.** [** See Appendix A.]
GERMAN AIMS IN AMERICA
The plans for Pan-German domination in the Americas are just as well known and just as obvious in their intent. The German colony in southern Brazil was expected to be a base, if need be, of military operations, and through naval and military force and through alliances it was believed that by the middle of the twentieth century at the latest Germany would control practically all the valuable parts of South America. The result as to the Panama Canal and Central America needs no comment, and the Zimmermann note makes very plain the intent of Germany, hoping to combine with Mexico and Japan to dismember the United States, and to extort from it so enormous an indemnity as to make it simply a vassal state of the world-wide German Empire. These are not the dreams of visionaries. They are actual plans, worked out in great detail, on record, and proved beyond the possibility of doubt as the ultimate aims of the controlling forces in Germany against which the United States is now at war.** [** See Appendix A.]
III. GERMAN METHODS
The methods which are to be used and which actually have been used to secure these ends are planned with a total disregard of all the binding rules of law. The violation of treaties in the attack on Belgium and in the German policy with regard to the United States is perfectly well known. The treaty of guaranty signed by Prussia and by Austria was intended to secure Belgium from attack. Regardless of that treaty Belgium was promptly invaded when Germany went to war with France in 1914.** [** See Appendix E.] Treaties between Prussia and the United States made in 1787 and 1799 and in 1828, repeatedly held to be still binding by the governments of both countries, explicitly recognize the validity of commercial dealings between a neutral power and a belligerent in all matters of commerce, including contraband. And yet in violation of that treaty Germany proposes to destroy that commerce without warning and without regard to the innocent persons on the ship to be sunk.** ** [** See Appendix D.] The lawless bombardment of crowded cities which are not besieged, whereby civilians, men, women, and children, lose their lives, is another method which is contrary to all the aims and hopes of the nations parties to the Hague Conventions.
Moreover, we find the world covered by a network of German intrigue. When immigrants come to the United States, make their homes here, and become naturalized citizens, we expect them to give their absolute and unquestioned loyalty to the country of their choice. They take an oath of allegiance distinctly forswearing allegiance to the country of origin. This principle of a transfer of allegiance has been recognized, not merely in the legislation of the United States, but in treaties between the United States and other countries, with the North-German Union, the predecessor of the German Empire, for instance, in 1868. In 1913 the German parliament, however, passed an act providing that Germans who become naturalized in another country need not lose their German national character.** [** See Appendix F.] They may file their desire to retain that national character with the proper German officers, and with the consent of the German consul they may be regarded as still remaining in all respects Germans. After that they may then go through the process of naturalization, and in so doing distinctly perjure themselves. It was believed that by that method there would be in other countries a body of Germans ostensibly of those countries who yet would be primarily loyal to the country of origin, and could be counted on to influence the country of their home politically in favor of Germany, and in case of war could be counted on actually to join the German armies. Indeed, it was believed confidently that in case of war between Germany and the United States there would be a German insurrection in the central western states. These beliefs I think are entirely erroneous. Very few naturalized Germans in my opinion are not primarily loyal to the country to which they have sworn allegiance. Germany totally misunderstands the psychology of almost every other nation. But in this act of 1913, which was to take effect January 1, 1914, we can see plainly the intent, not of the Pan-German Union alone, but of the German government, to implant a source of treachery in other countries.
I need not dwell on the elaborate conspiracies carried on in this country under the direction of the imperial ambassadors both from Austria and from Germany in violation of the courtesy of a guest and in violation of the laws of the United States.
We are dealing, therefore, with a vast, world-wide conspiracy which has for its end the subversion in the long run of the liberty of practically every free nation, and which means, if the conspiracy succeeds, the overthrow of the independence of the United States. In other words, we are engaged in a great battle for the liberty of all free countries.
Anything short of a complete victory over the Teutonic powers will result in a mere truce, to be followed by a renewal of war within a few years. Every nation would have to arm and to keep armed. International relations would be on the one hand a series of German intrigues to divide the present Allies so as to renew the attack under more favorable auspices, and on the other hand endless attempts to frustrate such conspiracies. The whole world would be full of plots and counterplots, suspicion and fear, with the inevitable result of another bloody struggle. Assurance of a peace relatively permanent cannot depend on treaties; no treaty obligation would bind Germany or Austria-Hungary under their present ruling forces. The only safety for the world can be found in a complete victory over the Teutonic empires and in establishing as a guaranty a state of things which would make it exceedingly difficult for them to make another assault on civilization with reasonable hope of success.
WHAT GERMANY EXPECTS TO GET BY CONQUEST
Ernest Haeckel in Das monistische Jahrhundert, No. 31-32 (November 16, 1914), p. 657:
In my view the following fruits of victory are highly desirable for the future of Germany, and at the same time for the future of federated Continental Europe: (1) Liberation from the tyranny of England. (2) As a necessary means to this end, Invasion of the British pirate state by the German navy and army, occupation of London. (3) Division of Belgium: the largest part, as far west as Antwerp and Ostend, a state in the German Empire; the northern part to Holland; the eastern part to Luxemburg—also, thus enlarged, a state in the German Empire. (4) Germany obtains a great part of the British colonies as well as the Congo state. (5) France must cede a portion of her neighboring northeastern provinces. (6) Russia is to be made powerless by restoring the kingdom of Poland and connecting this with Austria-Hungary. (7) The German Baltic provinces revert to the German Empire. (8) Finland becomes an independent Kingdom and is to be connected with Sweden Petition to the Imperial Chancellor, voted June 20, 1915, at a meeting of professors, diplomatists, and higher officials in active service, held in the Künstlerhaus at Berlin. It was handed in with the signatures of 352 professors of universities and of special schools of the same rank, 158 school teachers and clergymen, superior administrative officers, mayors, and city councilmen, 148 judges and advocates, 40 members of the Reichstag, 182 representatives of industry, commerce, and banking, 52 landed proprietors, and 252 artists, writers, and publishers. It was circulated only as a "strictly confidential manuscript." The full text is given in Grumbach, Das annexionistische Deutschland, 1917, pp. 132-40.
....The military results already gained in this war at the cost of so great sacrifices should be utilized to the extreme attainable limit. This is the fixed determination of the German people.
1. France.—We must ruthlessly weaken this country politically and economically for the sake of our own existence, and we must improve against her our strategical position. For this purpose, according to our conviction, a thorough improvement of our whole west front from Belfort to the coast is necessary. We must conquer as great a part as possible of the North-French Channel coast, in order to obtain greater strategical security against England and a better outlet to the ocean....
To avoid such conditions as exist in Alsace-Lorraine the enterprises and possessions that give economic power are to be transferred from hostile to German hands, the previous owners being taken over and compensated by France. To the part of the population that we take over no influence whatever in the Empire is to be conceded.
We must also remember that this country has disproportionately large colonial possessions and that England can indemnify herself in these possessions if we do not anticipate her.
2. Belgium.—We must keep Belgium firmly in our hands as regards political and military matters and as regards economic interests. In no matter is the German nation more united in its opinion: to it the retention of Belgium is an indubitable matter of honor.
....Belgium will bring us an immense increase of economic power. As regards population, she also give us an important increase, particularly if the Flemish element, which in its culture is so closely related to us, can in course of time be freed from the artificial Latinizing influences that surround it and be brought back to its Teutonic character.
....To the inhabitants of Belgium no political influence in the Empire is to be conceded; and, as in the districts to be ceded by France, the most important enterprises and landed estates are to be transferred from hostile to German hands.
3. Russia.—On our eastern frontier the population of the Russian Empire is increasing at a monstrous rate—at a rate of something like two and one-half millions a year. Within a generation the population will amount to 250,000,- 000. Against this overwhelming preponderance on our eastern flank.... Germany can assert herself only if she sets up a strong barrier....and if on the other hand the healthy growth of our own population is furthered by all possible means. Such a barrier and also a basis for safeguarding the growth of our own population are to be found in the territory that Russia must cede to us. This must be agricultural land adapted to settlement. Land that gives us a healthy peasantry, this fresh fountain of all national and political power. Land that can take over a part of our increase of population and offer to returning Germans who desire to turn their backs upon the hostile foreign world a new home in the old home Such land, required for our physical, moral, and spiritual health, is to be found first of all in the East….
This land will also serve to defray the Russian war indemnity…. Russia is over-rich in land, and the land of which she is to cede us political control we shall demand .... freed for the most part from private titles.… The Russian population is not so strongly rooted in the land as is that of Western and Central Europe. Russia itself has repeatedly transplanted large parts of its population to remote districts
4. England, the East, colonies, and the world across the seas.—We admit that the blockade by which England has transformed Germany during the period of the war into a closed commercial state has taught us something. It has taught us above all that, as has been explained in the earlier sections of this memorial, we must make ourselves as independent as possible in all political, military, and economic matters, on the basis of an expanded and better-secured home territory in Europe. Similarly we must organize upon the Continent, in immediate connection with our land frontiers.... the broadest possible Continental economic domain…. For this purpose it is important permanently to secure Austria-Hungary, the Balkans, Turkey, and Asia Minor to the Persian Gulf against Russian and English ambitions….
In the next place it is important to secure, in spite of England, our re-entry into the economic world beyond the seas…. In Africa we must rebuild our Colonial Empire more solidly and more strongly than before.... Here again the importance of a permanent connection with the world of Islam makes itself felt, and also the necessity of secure passage over the seas independent of the good or ill will of England….
It has already been pointed out that we must keep Belgium firmly under our control and must also obtain as much as possible of the North French Channel coast. It is important, besides, to break up the chain of maritime bases which England has thrown about the world or to enfeeble it by a corresponding acquisition of German bases. Egypt, which connects English Africa with English Asia, and, with Australia as a further barrier, converts the Indian Ocean into an English lake—Egypt, which maintains the connection between the mother-country and all its oriental colonies, is, as Bismarck expressed it, the neck of the English world-empire.... There England may be struck in its most vital nerve….
5. War indemnity.—It is probably France that comes into consideration, primarily if not exclusively, as regards any financial indemnification for the costs of the war. We should not hesitate, from any false humanity, to burden France as heavily as possible. To ease the burden imposed upon her she may call upon her ally across the Channel. If the latter refuses to fulfil her duties as an ally financially, a secondary political result might be attained with which we could well be content
6. No policy of culture without a policy of power.—If the undersigned, and particularly the men of science, or art, and of the church among them, should be reproached for setting up only political, economic, and perhaps social demands and forgetting the purely spiritual problems of the German future, our answer is a threefold one.
The care of the German spirit is not one of the aims of war nor one of the conditions of peace.
If, however, we are to say anything concerning the German spirit....first of all, Germany must be able to live in political and economic security before it can pursue its spiritual vocation in freedom.
Finally....we do not desire a German spirit that is in danger of suffering decomposition and of working also as a decomposing agency—a national spirit that, lacking root, is forced to seek a home in all countries, and to seek it in vain; that must everywhere adapt itself and falsify its own nature as well as the nature of the nations that grant it hospitality In our demands we are seeking to gain for the German spirit a healthy body
We are conscious of setting up goals that can be reached only through a resolute spirit of sacrifice and through most energetic diplomacy. But we invoke a saying of Bismarck's: "More than in any other domain it is true in politics that faith tangibly removes mountains, that courage and victory are not causally connected but identical."
Otto Richard von Tannenberg, Grossdeutschland: Die Aufgabe des zwanzigsten Jahrhunderts, 1911, pp. 219, 220, 230, 231:
It would be the beginning of a world-empire, our first empire of the sort, if to East Africa, Cameroon, and Southeast Africa we should add Angola and the Belgian and French Congo.... In the way of this first world-empire stand Portugal, France, and England. Portugal and France will be the mourners. England will not be able to hinder it. This will not be accomplished today nor tomorrow; but a day will come when Europe will settle her accounts. On that day the reservists of Nimes will go on strike, if the sons of the German heroes of Metz and of Sedan attack them in rainy weather. On that day the English Channel will be paved with French submarines of the successful Pluviose type, if the German dreadnoughts bombard the French ports of the North Sea.
.... Our fathers have left us much to do. In compensation, the German nation holds a position among the European Powers that permits it at once to reach its goal by a single rapid rush. At the present time the German nation finds itself in a position similar to that of Prussia at the beginning of the reign of Frederick the Great. He raised his country to the rank of a great European Power. It is Germany's task today to pass from the position of a European Power to that of a World-Power.
The German people must take possession of Central Africa from the mouth of the Orange River to Lake Tchad and from the Cameroon Mountains to the mouth of the river Rovuna. They must take possession of Asia Minor, of the Malayan Archipelago in Southeastern Asia, and finally of the southern half of South America. Only then will Germany possess a colonial empire that will correspond to her actual power.
A policy of sentiment is folly. Enthusiasm for humanity is idiocy. Charity should begin among one's compatriots. Politics is business. Right and wrong are notions needed in civil life only.
The German people is always right, because it is the German people and because it numbers 87,000,000. Our fathers have left us much to do.
A. Oelzelt-Newin, Welche Strafe soll die treffen, die Schuld am Weltkrieg tragen, 1915, pp. 12-16:
Russia is by far the most dangerous enemy, not only of Middle Europe, but of all Europe and of the whole civilized world The object of any treaty of peace must therefore be to preserve Russia's Asiatic character and, so far as possible, to weaken her position as a European Great Power. This can be done only by taking from her those western territories which are most valuable from the cultural and the economic points of view and by keeping her away at the same time from all European seas (except the White Sea).... The boundary that should be drawn would....run from Kronstadt by way of Brest-Litovsk and Taganrog to Baku, Finland, of course, being included. Besides the razing of all Russia's western fortresses, especially the fortresses on the sea, it would be necessary to take from her Finland, Esthonia, Livonia, Kurland, Poland, Volhynia, Podolia, Bessarabia, portions of Little Russia and of South Russia, Taurida (Krim) and the Caucasus.... In the Balkans, if these are freed from Russian assistance and intrigues, two kingdoms, Servia and Montenegro, should be wiped completely off the map....
There can be no united and powerful Middle Europe so long as France retains her present size and power. To deprive her of these must be the object of any treaty of peace. Of course it is not a question solely of acquisition of territory, for nations can be ruined by war indemnities or by commercial treaties, but of these we are not talking at present. We are asking only, What cessions of territory are necessary in order to lessen by two the number of Great Powers in Europe? What is necessary for this purpose?
Whether the cession of northern seaports will come into question is a matter that had better not be discussed at present. Possibly the Middle States may even need a port on the Mediterranean like Toulon, which would necessarily involve the annexation of Nice.... That France must lose all the north coast of Africa that belongs to her is the more certain because she would not be sufficiently crippled by war indemnities alone. Nor would it be enough to insist on the transfer of her fleet, but among her fortresses those that protect harbors must first be razed; and one of the most important conditions of peace that we should strive to obtain would be that she should maintain only a commercial fleet. France should be forced into a position similar to that now held by Spain....
.... The punishment that England would find most severe would perhaps be her complete exclusion from the Mediterranean.... She would be shut off from Malta and the other islands if Gibraltar were taken from her and if Tangiers ceased to be neutral.... If any part of these protecting walls is defectively constructed, our culture will be permanently injured or perhaps annihilated before another generation. Then the great sacrifice of life would have been made, not for life, but only for death.
Albert Ritter, Der organische Aufbau Europas, 1916, pp. 27-28:
Middle Europe must consider strategic necessities in fixing her eastern Boundaries.... East Prussia needs stronger protection on the North and on the East.... In the west military considerations demand a greater extension of the geographic boundary.... If the military object of gaining permanent security against France and also the freedom of the seas is to be really attained, the northeastern part of France, as a number of leading statesmen have already indicated, must be brought within the German northwestern frontier, as far as the mouth of the Somme, somewhere along the line Vignacourt-Bapaume-Verdun-St. Mihiel-Pont à Mousson The establishment of this frontier, together with the taking of Belfort and its environs, which are necessary for the protection of South Germany, seems thoroughly justified.... As regards the annexation of Belgium to Middle Europe, to which the majority of its inhabitants belong as regards language, no further words need be wasted; it is a matter of course.
In the southwest the geographical frontier must in like manner be pushed forward, in order that Triest, one of the most important points for Middle Europe, may be removed from hostile attack.... The northern part of Venetia, the districts of Friuli and Treviso, up to a line running from the south end of Lake Garda to the mouth of the Piave, must be taken as a glacis at the foot of the Alps in order to ward off from Austria's Adriatic coast all future menace. On national grounds, however, this necessary line of security may and will be pushed forward a few kilometers....
Albert Ritter ("Konrad von Winterstetten"), Nordkap-Bagdad, 1915, pp. 33, 34: .... In general, the problem of making England....innocuous and her overthrow as useful as possible for us may best be solved if we make ourselves masters (from a military point of view) of the European center of the British Empire. The road from Gravelotte and Verdun to Dunkirk and Boulogne might be continued by the occupation of a bridgehead at Dover—a castle on English soil. This proposal may seem fantastic, but it is quite as easy to carry it through as a landing on British soil, and without this the war must last for years. Only the taking of London, which we shall live to see, will make peace possible, and after the taking of London one treaty provision may just as well be exacted as another.
"Wann wird der Krieg beendigt sein?" by "Diplomaticus," October, 1914, p. 16:
[Our enemies] must also pay, and must pay a very high price, for the injuries they have inflicted upon our interests and upon our good name by the lies they have spread over the whole world. Germany must insist that, in the treaty of peace to be signed by our enemies, they themselves shall confess that they forced the war upon us and that they have lied to the whole civilized world. So only can we stand justified before the tribunal of history.
A memorial, dated May 20, 1915, was addressed to the imperial Chancellor by six of the most important agricultural and industrial associations of Germany: "Bund der Landwirte," "Deutscher Bauernbund," "Vorort der christlichen deutschen Bauernvereine," "Centralverband deutscher Industriellen," "Bund der Industriellen," and "Reichsdeutscher Mittelstandsverband." It was transmitted to the governments of the several German states and was extensively circulated in print as a "confidential" communication. Its publication in German newspapers was not permitted. The entire text was first published in the Paris Humanité, August 11, 1915. The complete German text is given in Grumbach, Das annexionistische Deutschland, pp. 123-32.
....In addition to the demand for a colonial empire that shall fully satisfy the many-sided economic interests of Germany, in addition to securing our future in the matter of customs and trade policy and the attainment of a sufficient...war indemnity, [the undersigned associations] find the chief aim of the conflict that has been forced upon us in the securing and improvement of the German Empire's basis of existence in Europe and particularly in the following directions:
Belgium....as regards military and customs policy, and also as regards monetary, banking, and postal systems, must be subjected to German imperial legislation. Railroads and canals are to be made portions of our transportation system. For the rest, after separating the country into a Walloon district and a preponderantly Flemish district, and after transferring to Germans economic undertakings and possessions that are important for the domination of the country, its government and administration must be so conducted that the inhabitants shall obtain no influence upon the political destinies of the German Empire.
As regards France....the possession of the coast beyond the Belgian frontier, perhaps to the Somme, and therewith an outlet to the Atlantic Ocean, must be regarded as vital to our future importance on the sea. The hinterland that is to be acquired with this coast strip must be sufficient to secure complete strategic control and economic exploitation of the ports that we acquire on the Channel. Apart from the necessary acquisition of the ore fields of Briey, any further annexation of French territory is to be made exclusively on considerations of military strategy. It may be assumed as self-evident after the experiences of this war, that we....cannot leave in the hands of the enemy the fortified positions which threaten us, particularly Verdun and Belfort, nor the western slope of the Vosges that lies between them. The acquisition of the line of the Meuse and the French coast on the Channel involves, in addition to the above-mentioned ore fields of Briey, also the possession of the coal fields in the Departments of the North and of Pas-de-Calais. After our experiences in Alsace-Lorraine, it is probably self-evident that in these acquisitions also the people of the annexed districts are not to be put in a position to obtain any political influence upon the destinies of the German Empire, and that the economic resources to be found in these districts, including medium and large land holdings, are to be put into German hands, with an arrangement that France shall indemnify and take care of the former proprietors....
The need for strengthening also the sound agricultural basis of our national economy....demands a considerable extension of the imperial and Prussian frontiers toward the East, by annexing parts at least of the Baltic provinces and the districts lying south of the same, taking into consideration at the same time the object of making our East-German frontier defensible from a military point of view....
As regards the extension of political rights to the inhabitants of these new territories and the safeguarding of the German economic influence therein, what has been said as regards France is valid here also. The war indemnity to be paid by Russia must consist largely in the transfer of private titles to land....
GERMAN INTRIGUES AGAINST AMERICA IN TIME OF PEACE
BY THE U.S. BUREAU OF PUBLIC INFORMATION, JUNE, 1917
Evidence of the bad faith of the Imperial German government soon piled up on every hand. Honest efforts on our part to establish a firm basis of good neighborliness with the German people were met by their government with quibbles, misrepresentations, and counteraccusations against their enemies abroad. And meanwhile in this country official agents of the Central Powers—protected from criminal prosecution by diplomatic immunity—conspired against our internal peace, placed spies and agents provocateurs throughout the length and breadth of our land, and even in high positions of trust in departments of our government. While expressing a cordial friendship for the people of the United States, the government of Germany had its agents at work both in Latin America and in Japan. They bought or subsidized papers and supported speakers there to rouse feelings of bitterness and distrust against us in those friendly nations, in order to embroil us in war. They were inciting to insurrection in Cuba, in Haiti, and in Santo Domingo; their hostile hand was stretched out to take the Danish Islands; and everywhere in South America they were abroad sowing the seeds of dissension, trying to stir up one nation against another and all against the United States. In their sum these various operations amounted to direct assault upon the Monroe Doctrine. And even if we had given up our right to travel on the sea, even if we had surrendered to German threats and abandoned our legitimate trade in munitions, the German offensive in the New World, in our own land and among our neighbors, was becoming too serious to be ignored.
So long as it was possible, the government of the United States tried to believe that such activities, the evidence of which was already in a large measure at hand, were the work of irresponsible and misguided individuals. It was only reluctantly, in the face of overwhelming proof, that the recall of the Austro-Hungarian ambassador and of the German military and naval attachés was demanded. Proof of their criminal violations of our hospitality was presented to their governments. But these governments, in reply, offered no apologies nor did they issue reprimands. It became clear that such intrigue was their settled policy.** [**"War Information Series": How the War Came to America.]
On the first of February we intend to begin submarine warfare unrestricted. In spite of this it is our intention to endeavor to keep neutral the United States of America.
If this attempt is not successful, we propose an alliance on the following basis with Mexico:
That we shall make war together and together make peace. We shall give general financial support and it is understood that Mexico is to reconquer the lost territory in New Mexico, Texas, and Arizona. The details are left to you for settlement.
You are instructed to inform the President of Mexico of the above in the greatest confidence as soon as it is certain that there will be an outbreak of war with the United States, and suggest that the President of Mexico, on his own initiative, should communicate with Japan suggesting adherence at once to this plan; at the same time offer to mediate between Germany and Japan.
Please call to the attention of the President of Mexico that the employment of ruthless submarine warfare now promises to compel England to make peace in a few months. [**Intercepted dispatch of the German Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs to the German Minister in Mexico.
GERMAN DOMINATION IN SOUTH AMERICA
The German colonies in southern Brazil and Uruguay are the one bright spot in this gloomy picture of South American civilization. Here dwell some half-million Germans; and it is to be hoped that by the reorganization of South America, when the half-breed population—a cross between the Indians and the Latin races—has disappeared, the vast basin of the La Plata will become German territory. The Germans in southern Brazil—like the Boers in South Africa—have, on the average, twelve to fifteen children; so that, by this natural increase alone, the country is assured to us. In these circumstances is it not wonderful that the German people has not long since decided to take possession of this territory? For the people of the republics which have inherited the former domains of Spain and Portugal it would be altogether a blessing to become subject to German power. They would soon be reconciled to our rule and be proud of their part in the world-wide glory of the German name.** [** Tannenberg, Grossdeutschland, p. 295.]
TREATY BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES AND PRUSSIA—1785
Article XII.—If one of the contracting parties should be engaged in war with any other Power, the free intercourse and commerce of the subjects or citizens of the party remaining neuter with the belligerent Powers shall not be interrupted. On the contrary, in that case, as in full peace, the vessels of the neutral party may navigate freely to and from the ports and on the coasts of the belligerent parties, free vessels making free goods, insomuch that all things shall be adjudged free which shall be on board any vessel belonging to the neutral party, although such things belong to an enemy of the other; and the same freedom shall be extended to persons who shall be on board a free vessel, although they should be enemies to the other party, unless they be soldiers in actual service of such enemy.
TREATY BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES AND PRUSSIA—1799
Article XIII.—And in the same case of one of the contracting parties being engaged in war with any other Power, to prevent all the difficulties and misunderstandings that usually arise respecting merchandise of contraband, such as arms, ammunition, and military stores of every kind, no such articles carried in the vessels, or by the subjects or citizens of either party, to the enemies of the other, shall be deemed contraband, so as to induce confiscation or condemnation and a loss of property to individuals. Nevertheless, it shall be lawful to stop such vessels and articles, and to detain them for such length of time as the captors may think necessary to prevent the inconvenience or damage that might ensue from their proceeding, paying, however, a reasonable compensation for the loss such arrest shall occasion to the proprietors; and it shall further be allowed to use in the service of the captors the whole or any part of the military stores so detained, paying the owners the full value of the same to be ascertained by the current price at the place of its destination. But in the case supposed of a vessel stopped for articles of contraband, if the master of the vessel stopped will deliver out the goods supposed to be of contraband nature, he shall be admitted to do it, and the vessel shall not in that case be carried into any port, nor further detained, but shall be allowed to proceed on her voyage.
All cannons, mortars, firearms, pistols, bombs, grenades, bullets, balls, muskets, flints, matches, powder, saltpeter, sulphur, cuirasses, pikes, swords, belts, cartouch boxes, saddles, and bridles, beyond the quantity necessary for the use of the ship, or beyond that which every man serving on board the vessel, or passenger, ought to have; and in general whatever is comprised under the denomination of arms and military stores, of what description soever, shall be deemed objects of contraband.
Article XXIII.—If war should arise between the two contracting parties, the merchants of either country then residing in the other shall be allowed to remain nine months to collect their debts and settle their affairs, and may depart freely, carrying off all their effects without molestation or hindrance; and all women and children, scholars of every faculty, cultivators of the earth, artisans, manufacturers, and fishermen, unarmed and inhabiting unfortified towns, villages, or places and, in general, all others whose occupations are for the common subsistence and benefit of mankind, shall be allowed to continue their respective employments, and shall not be molested in their persons, nor shall their houses or goods be burnt or otherwise destroyed, nor their fields wasted by the armed force of the enemy, into whose power by the events of war they may happen to fall; but if anything is necessary to be taken from them for the use of such armed force, the same shall be paid for at a reasonable price.
TREATY BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES AND PRUSSIA—1828
Article XII.—The twelfth article of the treaty of amity and commerce, concluded between the parties in 1785, and the articles from the thirteenth to the twenty-fourth, inclusive, of that which was concluded at Berlin in 1799, with the exception of the last paragraph in the nineteenth article, relating to treaties with Great Britain, are hereby revived with the same force and virtue as if they made part of the context of the present treaty, it being, however, understood that the stipulations contained in the articles thus revived shall be always considered as in no manner affecting the treaties or conventions concluded by either party with other Powers, during the interval between the expiration of the said treaty of 1799, and the commencement of the operation of the present treaty.
The parties being still desirous, in conformity with their intention declared in the twelfth article of the said treaty of 1799, to establish between themselves, or in concert with other maritime Powers, further provisions to insure just protection and freedom to neutral navigation and commerce, and which may at the same time advance the cause of civilization of humanity, engage again to treat on this subject at some future and convenient period.
TREATY OF LONDON, NOVEMBER 15, 1831
Article VII.—Belgium, within the limits indicated in Articles I and II, Sec. 4, will form an independent and perpetually neutral State. It will be required to observe this same neutrality toward all other States.
Article XXV.—The Courts of Austria, France, Great Britain, Prussia, and Russia guarantee to his Majesty, the King of the Belgians, the execution of all the preceding articles.
[The engagements contained in this treaty were renewed by that of 1839, which definitely established the status of Belgium and recognized that all the articles of the treaty of 183 1 were placed under the guaranty of the five Powers.]
TREATY OF LONDON, MAY 11, 1867
Article II.—The Grand Duchy of Luxemburg, within the limits determined by the act annexed to the treaty of April 19, 1839, under the guaranty of the courts of France, Austria, Great Britain, Prussia, and Russia, will henceforth form a perpetually neutral State. It will be required to observe this same neutrality toward all other States. The high contracting parties bind themselves to respect the principle of neutrality stipulated by the present article. The latter is and continues to be placed under the sanction of the collective guaranty of the Powers who are signatories to the present treaty, with the exception of Belgium, which is itself a neutral State.
STATUTE ENACTED BY THE GERMAN PARLIAMENT, JULY 22, 1913. TO GO INTO EFFECT JANUARY 1, 1914
A German who is neither domiciled nor permanently resident in this country loses his German nationality by the acquisition of a foreign nationality, if this acquisition is at his request or at the request of the husband or of the guardian, and if, in the case of a wife or a ward, the conditions exist under which, according to articles 18 and 19, a petition is admissible to be dismissed from German allegiance. The German nationality is not lost by one who prior to acquiring the foreign nationality has upon his petition obtained the written authority of the competent official of his native state to retain his German nationality. Before this authority is granted the German consul must be heard. The Chancellor with the consent of the Federal Council may ordain that the authority provided for in this paragraph shall not be granted to persons who desire to acquire the nationality of designated foreign states.
A SHORT BIBLIOGRAPHY
There are innumerable books and pamphlets dealing with war questions from the point of view of all the belligerents. A few only are mentioned below, which it is believed are especially significant. In some of these further bibliographies will be found.
Bernhardi, Germany and the Next War (1911). London: Longmans, 1914.
This is the well-known expression of the views of a Prussian general officer, clearly outlining the theories and purposes at the basis of the present aggressive war by Germany.
Cheradamé, André, The Pan-German Plot Unmasked. New York: Scribner, 1917.
This contains an important presentation of the whole Pan-German scheme, especially as based on the plan for Central-Europe domination from Hamburg to Bagdad, and thereafter for the conquest of the world. Dampierre, German Imperialism and International Law. London: Constable, 1917.
Dickinson, The Choice before Us. New York: Dodd, Mead & Co., 1917.
Gerard, My Four Years in Germany. New York: Doran, 1917.
An authoritative discussion by the American Ambassador at Berlin. Gibbons, The New Map of Europe (1911-1914). New York: Century, 1914.
----------, Out of Their Own Mouths. New York: Appleton, 1917.
A very striking collection of various presentations of the German case by Germans themselves, clearly revealing their purposes and the underlying doctrines on which the extraordinary German disregard of law and humanity is based. Citations in Appendix A are from this valuable book.
Grumbach, Das annexionistische Deutschland. Lausanne: Payot & Co., 1917.
A collection of numerous texts illustrating German aims of plunder. The English of many of these will be found in the preceding title.
Lewin, The German Road to the East. New York: Doran, 1917.
Naumann, Mitteleuropa. Berlin: Reimer, 1915. (English Edition) Central Europe.
London: King & Son, 1916. Important as showing German political purposes.
Sarolea, The Anglo-German Problem. New York: Nelson, 1912.
Besides an intelligent discussion of the issues will be found a considerable bibliography bearing on the various topics.
Tannenberg, Grossdeutschland, die Arbeit des 20sten Jahrhundert. Leipzig-
Gohlis: Bruno Volger, 1911.
This is a full presentation of the Pan-German program outlined before the great war began.
Usher, Pan-Germanism. New York: Century, 1915.
One of the innumerable Pan-German pamphlets which are significant is that issued by the Pan-German Union in 1895, Grossdeutschland und Mittel Europa um das Jahr 1950. A brief discussion of the contents of this pamphlet, especially as concerned with Tannenberg's book, will be found in Chéradame. The National Security League is publishing many useful pamphlets and books on the war from the American point of view. One of the most useful of these is Hart and Lovejoy, Handbook of the War, New York, 1917. This Handbook contains in brief form many interesting documents and also a very considerable bibliography.
The Committee on Public Information at Washington, consisting of the Secretaries of State, War, and Navy, and Mr. Creel as chairman, is publishing a series of authoritative documents, the "War Information Series." Of course, being official in character, they may be regarded as entirely reliable. Note especially:
How the War Came to the United States; No. 1. The War Message and the Facts behind It; No. 3. Hazen, The Government of Germany; No. 4. McLaughlin, The Great War, from Spectator to Participant; No. 6. American Loyalty, by Citizens of German Descent.
© J. Fred MacDonald, 2013
If you appreciate the articles, read the e-novel informed by them —
THE HEADLONG FURY
A Novel of World War One
By J. Fred MacDonald