our country with our
consent'; and in 1913 Sir Edward Grey gave the Belgian Government a
categorical assurance that no British Government would violate the
neutrality of Belgium and that 'so long as it was not violated by any
other power we should certainly not send troops ourselves into their
territory.'

"The Chancellor's method of misusing documents may be illustrated in
this connection. He represents Sir Edward Grey as saying, 'he did not
believe England would take such a step because he did not think
English public opinion would justify such action.'

"What Sir Edward Grey actually wrote was: 'I said that I was sure
that this Government would not be the first to violate the neutrality
of Belgium, and I did not believe that any British Government would be
the first to do so, nor would public opinion here ever approve of it.'

"If the German Chancellor wishes to know why there were conversations
on military subjects between British and Belgian officers he may find
one reason in a fact well known to him--namely, that Germany was
establishing an elaborate network of strategical railways leading from
the Rhine to the Belgian frontier through a barren, thinly populated
tract. The railways were deliberately constructed to permit of a
sudden attack upon Belgium, such as was carried out in August last.

"This fact alone was enough to justify any communications between
Belgium and the other powers on the footing that there would be no
violation of Belgian neutrality, unless it was previously violated by
another power. On no other footing did Belgium ever have any such
communications.

"In spite of these facts the German Chancellor speaks of Belgium as
having thereby 'abandoned and forfeited' her neutrality, and he
implies that he would not have spoken of the German invasion as a
'wrong' had he then known of the conversations of 1906 and 1911.

"It would seem to follow that according to Herr von Bethmann-Hollweg's
code wrong becomes right if the party which is to be the subject of
the wrong foresees the possibility and makes preparations to resist
it.

"Those who are content with older and more generally accepted
standards are likely to agree rather with what Cardinal Mercier said
in his pastoral letter: 'Belgium was bound in honor to defend her own
independence. She kept her oath. The other powers were bound to
respect and to protect her neutrality. Germany violated her oath.
England kept hers. These are the facts.'