TUESDAY, OCTOBER 3, 1916. GERMAN VIEW OF THE WAR.

Auckland Star, Volume XLVII, Issue 236, 3 October 1916, Page 4

TUESDAY, OCTOBER 3, 1916. GERMAN VIEW OF THE WAR.

In a volume entitled "Deutschland und der Weltkrieg," or "Germany and the World' War,"- a volume comprisin'over sis hundred closely printed pages, nineteen of the most eminent among the German professors ihave set forth the German view of events leading up to the war, together with several chapters dealing with German aims and aspirations, and her political. relations with her allies and the countries with which she is now in conflict. A transla tion of the book was recently published in America, but the book was originally published in Germany in March of last year, just before Italy entered the war on our side, and the allusions made to that country show that Italian intervention was not unexpected. The book is marked by a studied moderation of tone, a feature of an the best literature on the subject j in all countries, and tha writers show a wide acquaintance with English and French historical works on the origin and causae of the war. But as a defence of the German attitude the book is deplorably weak, a defect due to the inherent weakness of the cause they •have undertaken to defend rather than to any lack of either Gkill or learning on the part of the distinguished authors. I It is, of course, quite impossible in the course of one article to give more | than the barest outline of a book so exhaustive and of a quite unique inIterest. Briefly their contention is this. Germany was being slowly ringed round | and isolated, mainly as the result of trade jealousy on the part of England, I the desire for revenge on the part of France, and the barbaric lust for territory which, has always been a feature of Russian policy- They think England by her system of understandings, which fell short of actual alliances, played into the hands of Russia and in reality was bound to assist her, while maintaining the outward show of freedom from entangling alliances. They regard Sir Edward Grey as an idealist who undertook obligations against Germany while at the same time he was striving after an agreement with Germany* and they pay a tribute to his honesty and admit that in matters concerning both Africa and the Bagdad railway he did his ibest to. remove causes of estrangement. Professor Oncken classes ■ him. amongst those "who would not plaj false, and yet would wrongly win." The writers then go on to show that German}- was a young and virile State, and required :oom for expansion. In other word? the time had come for the Germans to rob some of their neighbours of their territory, the contention being that Germany would make better use of this territory than the present possessors. It is the argument of the burglar ctated in terms of Kultur.

But perhaps the most interesting chapters are those dealing with the question of Belgian neutrality. The invasion of Belgium is defended on several grounds, and these show the peculiar lack of appreciation of moral issues which has characterised German action throughout the war. The argument that as only Prussia signed the. treaty it cannot be binding on the Germany of to-day is touched on, but the writer admits that in 1913 yon Jagow admitted the binding nature of the treaty on his countrymen. The next contention is that as Belgium has become rich in both money and colonial territory since the treaty was signed the altered conditions made the treaty no' longer binding, and that Belgium had in fact acted in a manner hostile to Germany by lending; money to Russia and by acquiring colonies in Africa which Germany wanted for herself. Then it is seriously contended that no country can in reality elect to remain neutral if war is declared against it, and the writers admit that the ultimatum presented to the Belgiums was an act of war, the reason given for this etrange doctrine being that to admit such a contention would amount to a prohibition of war, a. thing unthinkable to the followers of Bernhardt. Rut none of these arguments seem to have been very convincing even to the authors of them, and so. they fall hack on -the old argument of the Chancellor, and contend that military necessity compelled the Germans to invade the country they had sworn to protect. The chapters on Belgium "are the most damning indictment of Germany 'yet written, and they are from the pens of Germans themselves.

The writers leave no room for doubt that the real aim of Germany is the destruction of the British Empire, and that this was the real basic cause of the war. Professor Ernst Troeltsch, the professor of theology in the University of Berlin, concludes his essay on "The Spirit of German Kultur" with the following remarkable words, which ought to be remembered by every member of our Empire: "We are," he says, "in the first place fighting for our life. But this political life of ours as a Great Power carties with it an aspiration that fills us with unshakable confidence —the belief that tbe various nationalities must be released from England's dominance in the political and moral ordering of the I world and her tyrannical control of the

seas." It ie-the part and duty of the British Empire to see that the weaker nations of the world are not handed over to the Kultur that has left its mark in Belgium and Serbia, and that the seas do not pass under the control of the murderers of . the women and children who perished in the Lusitania. The book closes with the words: "We are carrying on the war in order to break tho yoke" of England's eea and world dominion." It is for every son of Britain to see to it that the Empire of our Fathers is never broken by these modern descendants of Alaric and Attila.