BEHIND THE SCENES

Evening Post, Volume CXII, Issue 51, 28 August 1926, Page 21

BEHIND THE SCENES

POINCARE'S INTERESTING

MEMOIRS,

The Memoirs of Raymond Poincare (1012). Translated and adapted by Sir George Arthur. (Heinemann, 21s).

M. Poincare has played so prominent a part in recent European history that his own account of the happenings of these years must always possess historical importance of the first order. It is needless to add that it also possesses high literary value. In this volume, wo are confined to the events of 1912, when the author took office as Premier for the first time. In subsequent volumes we are to have the inner history of the war years, and the Premiership which followed the war; PBB-WAB • PBOMISES. M. Poincare ib at pain 3 in the present instalment of his work to answer cortain charges brought against him by pro-German propagandists, and supported by carefully selected passages from diplomatic documents in the archives of the Tsarist Government published by the Soviet authorities. The gist of these charges is that during the Balkan troubles of 1912 M. Poincare gave Russia a promise of unlimited support for her schemes, and that out of this promise came the Great War. He is thus held up as the real originator of that overwhelming calamity. It is not necessary here to go in any detail into his reply to' the accusation, which is -on the face of it contrary to the known history of the next two years. M. Poincare admits' that in the course of that year, when a clash between Austria and Eussia seemed inevitable over the question of Serbian claims for a port, on the Adriatic, he assured Bussia that if Germany took up arms on behalf of Austria France would immediately eomo to the aid of her ally. That was the express undertaking on which the Franco-Bussian Alliance was based, and in the previous year, in connection with the Agadir incident, France had called upon Russia for a similar pledgo and had obtained it.

But M. Poincare emphasises that ho was far from giving Eussia a free hand, and that, on the contrary, he was continually under the necessity of reminding the Tsar's Ministers that Franc* was entitled to much fuller information and more intimate opportunities of consultation than were being afforded her In this respect he had several times to tell M. Sazonoff that he compared .very unfavourably with Sir Edward Grey Moreover, M. Poincare shows himself by no means in sympathy with Panslavisfc aims. He refused to discuss with the Russian Ambassador in Paris, M. Isvolsky, the question of Russian expansion in Turkey, and he was definitely opposed to Bussian possession of Cod stantinople and the Straits. In one oi the war agreements the promise of such possession was made, but M. Poincarp notes that it came from the British Government. THE ENTENTE. M. Poincare undoubtedly found Sir Edward Grey a more sympathetic per sonality to deal with than M. Sazonoff, and he seems to have set at least as much store by the Entente as by the Alliance, even although, owing to British political requirements and the divided nature of the Cabinet, tho Entente had to remain on a basis which was distressingly vague to one who had so very definite a perception of the danger hanging over Europe. There had been consultations between the Army staffs of the two countries as to possible co-operation, without thereby binding Great Britain, but up to this time there had been no naval conferences of any kind. At the beginning of 1912 a commencement was made iv this direction, but in a manner which scarcely brought reassurance to the French, authorities. M. Poincare tells us: Mr. Churchill forwarded to our Naval and Military Attache an advance plan of concerted defence, but —doubtless to [ forestall the possible objections of sey-

eral of his colleagues—tho First Lord drafted a preamble, which, in the opinion of our General Staff, threatened to destroy the practical value of the Entente. It did not so much matter if Article 1 recited that the arrangement must not affect the political liberty of tho contractants: what did matter was that Article 2 added that naval disposition would be made by each of tho two Governments with entire independence, and wholly ;in conformity with their country's interests—surely, a very inadequate method of' concerting two naval engagements. As Paul Cambon himself said a little later, "With a declaration like this, one might well aslf whether the Entente was worth while." AN AMBASSADOR'S HINT. In spite of this vagueness, however, the French Prime Minister retained his full faith in the value.of the Entente, and worked heartily, for, it. He also pays tribute to the good faith of the British Government and the frankness with which they kept him informed of their actions. When, for example, in 1912 Lord Haldane went on his mission to Berlin to discuss disarmament, Sir Edward Grey gavo.the French Premier detailed information as to all that was happening. And in this connection M. Poincare relates.'a somewhat unusual incident in diplomatic procedure.

It will be remembered that in the course of the Haldane visit the German Chancellor had sought to obtain from Great Britain an, undertaking of neutrality in the event of Germany going to war with another nation —France being, of course, the nation- in mind. The reply had: been that in such an event Great Britain would reserve full liberty of action. Sir Edward Grey promptly informed 'M. Poincare of this incident, and the latter begged his Ambassador "to thank .the British Government for their entire loyalty." Shortly after, Sir Francis Bertie, British Ambassador at Paris, called upon M. Poincare. . . He began: "Will.you allow me to forget for a moment that I am an Ambassador?" "I will forget it myself, if you like," I said. .He then proceeded: "Sir Edward' Grey writes to me that you and M. Paul Cambon are both fully satisfied with 'our assurances as to the declaration, of neutrality which Germany has asked-for. . I am just a little surprised that you take this so easily. If no declaration has been given it doesn 't follow necessarily that it has been altogether brushed aside. What Germany asked of us was not a simple promise of neutrality, but a definite engagement to preserve a benevolent neutrality: a ridiculous notion, as a benevolent neutrality is no longer a pure neutrality. However preposterous this demand, Sir :Edward Grey must have full praise for having ■. blankly refused it—he is, as a matter of fact, surrounded by colleagues. of whom several have leanings towards Germany. This makes me a little uncomfortable; it is imperative that this . declaration of neutrality shall not be made, and there is some risk of it if the German Government returns again and rain to the charge. . .No, believe me, it will not do for Paul Cambon to appear satisfied, and if only you ;speak resolutely to London, the British-Government will do more than hesitate before committing the blunder-which I dread." A BOYAL VISITOB. During 1912 the Prince of Wales paid a long visit to Paris. The suggestion came from King: George, who. in March of that year invited the Marquis de Breteuil, an intimate friend of King Edward'Vll., .to Buckingham Palace, where he broached .the subject of the visit. "I have.always been conscious," said the King, "of my imperfect knowledge of France, and of my inability to speak French with real ease and without accent. Perhaps,this was because, as a child, there seemed little chance of my coming to the Throne. I am very anxious that my eldest son should not suffer from the same' 1 dis-! ability." .

The Prince went to Paris and won all hearts. "The Prince of Wales's ultrayouthful appearance," writes M. Poineare, "and- shyness of demeanour might have caused a casual observor to form of him a different opinion from those who, like myself,, mot him frequently and recognised a thoughtful character, an.eagerness to learn, an interest in practical problems, and a real knowledge*- of industrial possibilities and difficulties. The young. Englishman loved sport, if not;his father's favourite sport; he had a keen sense of humour, and enjoyed, all that was interesting in Paris, but was an ascetic as regards the pleasures of the table, the choicest menus being treated by him with complete indifference, if not with total neglect. "—Sydney , "Daily Telegraph." ;•, ,'."'