Untitled

Hawke's Bay Tribune, Volume VI, Issue 349, 7 February 1917, Page 4

Sir Henry Lucy, in the latest of his interesting weekly letterss to the “Sydney Moaning Herald, recalls the occasion of the official opening of the Kiel Canal in 1895, when Mr Gladstove and a host of more or

less distinguished guests atended at the invitation of the Kaiser. To them a preliminary banquet was given by the citizens of Hamburg, and at this the principal toast, the health of Mr Gladstone, was proposed by Dr. Sieveking, a professor of high rank in the realm of Kultur. After eulogising the Great English Statesman, he went on to say : “You will shortly leave us to witness the opening of the Kiel ('anal. I sincerely wish before you go to leave in your minds the impression that you are parting from friends as we when in England feel when we leave you. 1 hope, and I have reason for hoping. that you will think we Germans are hospitable not only because we endeavour to reciprocate our experiences in England, but because there are so many similar traits between Hamburg people and the people of England that it would be impossible during the course of a short speech to enumerate them.” Since the outbreak of war Dr Sieveking, in common with his professors, Jias had much to say about the relations between England and Germany. ! They were not couched exactly in this form or animated by the same spirit. The scattering broadcast among prominent Englishmen of invitations to assist at the ceremony of the opening of the canal, was the most successful of the German Emperor’s practical jokes. The humour was akin to that of a spider inviting a flv to inspect a new development of tlie construction of its web, which would complete its strength and adaptability to the uses for which it was designed. “Among the guests,” writes Sir Henry Lucy, “was Lord Charles Beresford, then on active service. I remember that he shocked my uninformed and unsuspecting mind by pointing out how immensely the canal, taken in conjunction with Heligoland, which a few years earlier Bismarck had wheedled out of Lord Salisbury, would strengthen the hands of Germany in the event of war with England'. For the rest, everybody, from Viscount Peel, just relieved from the Speakership of the House, of Commons, downwards, was genuinely pleased at the success of our neighbour’s enterprise, and vehemently cheered the Emperor William when the Hohenzollern achieved the first passage of the canal.”

Both Switzerand and Holland are under grave apprehensions with regard to an invasion of their territory by Germany’s armed forces, and have made preparations accordingly. Denmark, too, is doubtless uneasy as to -her ultimate fate should Germany prove victorious either in this, or the later war which is sure to be launched unless her claws are now effectually clipped. Germany has shown so profound a contempt for treaties, conventions. and guarantees that perhaps only an academic interest attaches to the question as to how far the three small neutral countries named are protected by international pledges such as that which Germany violated when she burst through the Belgian frontier. Denmark enjoyed a special guarantee under the treaty of 1852. by which her integrity was to be permanently protected. Five great Powers, including, of course, Britain and Germany, signed the guarantee, but that fact did not prevent Germany, twelve years later, from taking action that led to the annexation to Prussia of Schleswig and Holstein. If the British conscience had been as sensitive then as it was in. 1914, the course of European history would have run differently, but the rape of the Danish provinces was permitted. Denmark, therefore, has nad tragic reason to know the value of a “scrap of paper” bearing Germany’s signature. Both Denmark and Holland are concerned in documents signed as recently as 1908. The first, signed by Germany, Denmark, Russia and Sweden, agrees to the maintenance of the status quo in the Baltic, and the second is a declaration by Britain. Denmark, France, Germany, the Netherlands and Sweden regrading the maintenance of the status quo in the North Sea. Holland enjoys the “protection” of the Powers under the treaty which established the “strong State” of the Netherlands in 1815. but German writers in recent years have argued that whatever guarantees the Powers then gave were abrogated by the separation of. Holland and Belgium in 1839. Switzerland also enjoys specific protection under formal treaty. The Helvetic Republic, formed under French auspices in 1798, had virtually become a dependency of France, and was so used bv Napoleon. But by the first Peace 'of Paris, 1814, the independence of the Republic was decreed by the Powers and the international position of the country was defined in 1815, when Austria, Britain, France, Prussia and Russia acknow ledged and guaranteed its perpetual neutrality and the inviolability of territory.' Neither Switzerland nor Holland regards the guarantees oi the Powers as particularly valid, however, and both have schemes of defence against invasion, the Dutch system depending on the low level of the land and the Swiss on the mountains and on the excellence oi the shooting of the citizen soldiers.

While we hear a good deal of the gallantry displayed by actual combatants, but little attention is directed by the press to the heroism of those whose duty lies in the repairing and construction of river bridges. Mr. Henry Wood, the United Press Correspondent at French Headquarters, however, pays high tribute to rhe courage and resourcefulness of the French engineering corps to which it fell to carry out the construction of a series of bridges over the Meuse during the course of the German effort to gain possession of Verdun. These bridges, he explains, were no flimsy structures of a few hundred feet in length, but, owing to the marshy character of river valley, had to span distances varying from one and a half to two miles. “Half of the miracle of these bridges,” he writes, “is found in the almost incredible circumstances and conditions in which their construction took place. The object aimed at by the Crown Prince in attacking on both sides of the Meuse was to cut the French Army in. two by a wide marshy river that was utterly impassable except over the two or three bridges then in existence. This was one. of the defects in the defence of Verdun, which the French at once set themselves to remedy. The first bridge was built in reasonable tranquillity, with the result that, the army of French engineers employed on it completed their task in just fifteen days. The sudden appearance of this structure, however, revealed to the Germans what the French were doing, and from that moment every foot of the Meuse, north and south of Verdun, was kept under a terrific bombardment. Coupled with this unending hail of shells came also the frequent inun-

dations to which the Meuse is subject, especially in the spring. Day after day spans of the bridges would be washed out before they could be anchored firmly enough to ensure their permanency; bursting shells likewise carried away span after span, sometimes just at the moment of completion, sometimes while the work was still progressing, and sometimes long after the entire bridge had been completed and was in use. Yet itever for an instant did the French engineers relinquish their work. The bridges promise to remain for a long time as a lasting tribute and monument to the genius and perseverance of the French Army engineers.”

Again the day is, up to the. moment of writing, bare of news from any of the Eastern or South-eastern European fronts, while from the West comes word only of a. slight further advance secured by the British north of the Somme. The reports from the Tigris continue to be favourable, the Turks having been entirely cleared out of the area to the east of the Hai river, which runs into the main stream from the south, and the British having made some progress westward of the affluent named. Nothing is so far reported to have had the effect of definitely crystallising the situation between the United States and Germany, nor is there as yet. any very vivid evidence of extraordinary activity on the part of the German submarines, although, of course, they go on doing very material damage to belligerent and neutral shipping. America, however, continues to make her preparations for a complete breach, and it is notable that the arch-pacifist, Henry Ford, has ’verted and joined the war party. The President has “gone one better” than Britain on the question of arming merchantmen, asserting their right to carry guns amidships, as well as fore and aft. Simultaneously with the announcement of the withdrawal of the United States’ punitive force from Mexico come suggestions that German agencies are at work there endeavouring to incite further trouble for the Big Republic. It would now appear that the news of the German merchant ships interned in America have succeeded in effecting a greafe deal of damage to their machinery, which will render some of them useless for a time. Noting here yesterday the reported arrival of General Falkenhayn at Munster, we assumed that the town named to which reference was intended was that in Upper Alsace, not far from the French border. Most of our contemporaries have elected to apply the message to Munster in Westphalia near the Dutch border, where we were told some days ago that German forces were being concentrated. This, of course, may be right, but we are still inclined to the Alsatian town, as it is not far from the Swiss border along which we were also told that heavy concentrations were being effected by the enemy. The appearance of a commander of Falkenhayn’s standing among the troops on the Dutch frontier would seem to be rather unlikely, significant as it. would be of a menace to Holland.