FROM AUGUST 20 TO SEPTEMBER 20
ENEMY EAGER TO SAVE SPOILS BY PEACE
AUSTRIA'S BID FOR NEGOTIATIONS.—On September 15 the Austrian Government made public a Note sent to all warring powers proposing a preliminary, non-binding conference in a neutral country on the basic principles of peace. The Note argued that the professed aims of both belligerent parties were similar and that further struggle would be futile.
The introductory communication, while at times obscure in the present translation, and characteristically vague and involved in statement, argues that a more conciliatory atmosphere has been created by previous overtures.
The preliminary communication and the Note itself follow:
The Communication.—An objective and conscientious examination of the situation of all the belligerent States no longer leaves doubt that all peoples, on whatever side they may be fighting, long for a speedy end to the bloody struggle. Despite this natural and comprehensible desire for peace, it has not so far been possible to create those preliminary conditions calculated to bring the peace efforts nearer to realization and bridge the gap which at present still separates the belligerents from one another.
A more effective means must therefore be considered whereby the responsible factors of all the countries can be offered an opportunity to investigate the present possibilities of an understanding.
The first step which Austria-Hungary, in accord with her allies, undertook on December 22, 1916, for the bringing about of peace did not lead to the end hoped for.
The grounds for this lay assuredly in the situation at that time. In order to maintain in their peoples the war spirit, which was steadily declining, the allied Governments had by the most severe means suppressed even any discussion of the peace idea. And so it came about that the ground for a peace understanding was not properly prepared. The natural transition from the wildest war agitation to a condition of conciliation was lacking.
It would, however, be wrong to believe that the peace step we then took was entirely without result. Its fruits consist of something which is not to be overloked—that the peace question has not since vanished from the order of the day. The discussions which have been carried on before the tribunal of public opinion have disclosed proof of the not slight differences which today still separate the warring powers in their conception of peace conditions.
Nevertheless an atmosphere has been created which no longer excludes the discussion of the peace problem.
Without optimism, it at least assuredly may be deduced from the utterances of responsible statesmen that the desire to reach an understanding and not to decide the war exclusively by force of arms is also gradually beginning to penetrate into allied States, save for some exceptions in the case of blinded war agitators, which are certainly not to be estimated lightly.
The Austro-Hungarian Government is aware that after the deep-reaching convulsions which have been caused in the life of the peoples by the devastating effects of the world war it will not be possible to re-establish order in the tottering world at a single stroke. The path that leads to the restoration of peaceful relations between the peoples is cut by hatred and embitterment. It is toilsome and wearisome, yet it is our duty to tread this path—the path of negotiation—and if there are still such responsible factors as desire to overcome the opponent by military means and to force the will to victory upon him, there can, nevertheless, no longer be doubt that this aim, even assuming that it is attainable, would first necessitate a further sanguinary and protracted struggle.
But even a later victorious peace will no longer be able to make good the consequences of such a policy—consequences which will be fatal to all the States and peoples of Europe. The only peace which could righteously adjust the still divergent conceptions of the opponents would be a peace desired by all the peoples. With this consciousness, and in its unswerving endeavor to work in the interests of peace, the Austro-Hungarian Government now again comes forward with a suggestion with the object of bringing about a direct discussion between the enemy powers.
The earnest will to peace of wide classes of the population of all the States who are jointly suffering through the war—the indisputable rapprochement in individual controversial questions—as well as the more conciliatory atmosphere that is general, seem to the Austro-Hungarian Government to give a certain guarantee that a fresh step in the interests of peace, which also takes account of past experiences in this domain, might at the present moment offer the possibility of success.
The Austro-Hungarian Government has therefore resolved to point out to all the belligerents, friend and foe, a path considered practicable by it, and to propose to them jointly to examine in a free exchange of views whether those prerequisites exist which would make the speedy inauguration of peace negotiations appear promising. To this end the Austro-Hungarian Government has today invited the Governments of all the belligerent States to a confidential and unbinding discussion at a neutral meeting place, and has addressed to them a note drawn up in this sense.
This step has been brought to the knowledge of the Holy See in a special note, and an appeal thereby made to the Pope's interest in peace. Furthermore, the governments of the neutral States have been acquainted with the step taken.
The constant close accord which exists between the four allied powers warrants the assumption that the allies of Austro-Hungary, to whom the proposal is being sent in the same manner, share the views developed in the note.
[The official telegram proceeds to say that the note has been drawn up in French, and runs as follows:]
Text of the Note.—The peace offer which the Powers of the Quadruple Alliance addressed to their opponents on December 12, 1916, and the conciliatory basic ideas of which they have never given up, signifies, despite the rejection which it experienced, an important stage in the history of this war. In contrast to the first two and a half war years, the question of peace has from that moment been the centre of European, aye, of world discussion, and dominates it in ever increasing measure.
Almost all the belligerent States have in turn again and again expressed themselves on the question of peace, its prerequisites and conditions. The line of development of this discussion, however, has not been uniform and steady. The basic standpoint changed under the influence of the military and political position, and hitherto, at any rate, it has not led to a tangible general result that could be utilized.
It is true that, independent of all these oscillations, it can be stated that the distance between the conceptions of the two sides has, on the whole, grown somewhat less; that despite the indisputable continuance of decided and hitherto unbridged differences, a partial turning from many of the most extreme concrete war aims is visible and a certain agreement upon the relative general basic principles of a world peace manifests itself. In both camps there is undoubtedly observable in wide classes of the population a growth of the will to peace and understanding. Moreover, a comparison of the reception of the peace proposal of the Powers of the Quadruple Alliance on the part of their opponents with the later utterances of responsible statesmen of the latter, as well as of the non-responsible but, in a political respect, nowise uninfluential personalities, confirms this impression.
While, for example, the reply of the Allies to President Wilson made demands which amounted to the dismemberment of Austro-Hungary, to a diminution and a deep internal transformation of the German Empire, and the destruction of Turkish European ownership, these demands, the realization of which was based on the supposition of an overwhelming victory, were later modified in many declarations from official Entente quarters, or in part were dropped.
Thus, in a declaration made in the British House of Commons a year ago, Secretary Balfour expressly recognized that Austria-Hungary must itself solve its internal problems, and that none could impose a Constitution upon Germany from the outside. Premier Lloyd George declared at the beginning of this year that it was not one of the Allies' war aims to partition Austria-Hungary, to rob the Ottoman Empire of its Turkish provinces, or to reform Germany internally. It may also be considered symptomatic that in December, 1917, Mr. Balfour categorically repudiated the assumption that British policy had ever engaged itself for the creation of an independent State out of the territories on the left bank of the Rhine.
The Central Powers leave it in no doubt that they are only waging a war of defense for the integrity and the security of their territories.
Far more outspoken than in the domain of concrete war aims has the rapproachement of conceptions proceeded regarding those guiding lines upon the basis of which peace shall be concluded and the future order of Europe and the world built up. In this direction President Wilson in his speeches of February 12 and July 4 of this year has formulated principles which have not encountered contradiction on the part of his allies, and the far-reaching application of which is likely to meet with no objection on the part of the powers of the Quadruple Alliance also, presupposing that this application is general and reconcilable with the vital interests of the States concerned.
It is true it must be remembered that an agreement on general principles is insufficient, but that there remains the further matter of reaching an accord upon their interpretation and their application to individual concrete war and peace questions.
To an unprejudiced observer there can be no doubt that in all the belligerent States, without exception, the desire for a peace of understanding has been enormously strengthened; that the conviction is increasingly spreading that the further continuance of the bloody struggle must transform Europe into ruins and into a state of exhaustion that will mar its development for decades to come, and this without any guarantee of thereby bringing about that decision by arms which has been vainly striven after by both sides in four years filled with enormous sacrifices, sufferings, and exertions.
In what manner, however, can the way be paved for an understanding, and an understanding firmly attained? Is there any serious prospect whatever of reaching this aim by continuing the discussion of the peace problems in the way hitherto followed?
We have not the courage to answer the latter question in the affirmative. The discussion from one public tribune to another, as has hitherto taken place between statesmen of the various countries, was really only a series of monologues. It lacked, above everything, directness. Speech and counterspeech did not fit into each other. The speakers spoke over one another's heads.
On the other hand, it was the publicity and the ground of these discussions which robbed them of the possibility of fruitful progress. In all public statements of this nature a form of eloquence is used which reckons with the effect at great distances and on the masses. Consciously or unconsciously, however, one thereby increases the distance of the opponents' conception, produces misunderstandings which take root and are not removed, and makes the frank exchange of ideas more difficult. Every pronouncement of leading statesmen is, directly after its delivery and before the authoritative quarters of the opposite side can reply to it, made the subject of passionate or exaggerated discussion of irresponsible elements.
But anxiety lest they should endanger the interests of their arms by unfavorably influencing feeling at home, and lest they prematurely betray their own ultimate intentions, also causes the responsible statesmen themselves to strike a higher tone and stubbornly to adhere to extreme standpoints.
If, therefore, an attempt is made to see whether the basis exists for an understanding calculated to deliver Europe from the catastrophe of the suicidal continuation of the struggle, then, in any case, another method should be chosen which renders possible a direct, verbal discussion between the representatives of the governments, and only between them. The opposing conceptions of individual belligerent States would likewise have to form the subject of such a discussion, for mutual enlightenment, as well as the general principles that shall serve as the basis for peace and the future relations of the States to one another, and regarding which, in the first place, an accord can be sought with a prospect of success.
As soon as an agreement were reached on the fundamental principles, an attempt would have to be made in the course of the discussions concretely to apply them to individual peace questions, and thereby bring about their solution.
We venture to hope that there will be no objection on the part of any belligerents to such an exchange of views. The war activities would experience no interruption. The discussions, too, would only go so far as was considered by the participants to offer a prospect of success. No disadvantages would arise therefrom for the States represented. Far from harming, such an exchange of views could only be useful to the cause of peace.
What did not succeed the first time can be repeated, and perhaps it has already at least contributed to the clarification of views. Mountains of old misunderstandings might be removed and many new things perceived. Streams of pent-up human kindness would be released, in the warmth of which everything essential would remain, and, on the other hand, much that is antagonistic, to which excessive importance is still attributed, would disappear.
According to our conviction, all the belligerents jointly owe to humanity to examine whether now, after so many years of a costly but undecided struggle, the entire course of which points to an understanding, it is possible to make an end to the terrible grapple.
The Royal and Imperial Government would like, therefore, to propose to the governments of all the belligerent States to send delegates to a confidential and unbinding discussion on the basic principles for the conclusion of peace, in a place in a neutral country and at a near date that would yet have to be agreed upon—delegates who were charged to make known to one another the conception of their governments regarding those principles and to receive analogous communications, as well as to request and give frank and candid explanations on all those points which need to be precisely defined.
The Royal and Imperial Government has the honor to request the government of _______, through the kind mediation of Your Excellency, to bring this communication to the knowledge of the government of _______,
[The names of the intermediary government and of that addressed in the particular note dispatched are left blank.]
PRESIDENT WILSON'S REPLY
Secretary Lansing's announcement regarding the Austrian Note, issued on September 16, immediately after the receipt of the official text, was brief and pointed, as follows:
"I am authorized by the President to state that the following will be the reply of this government to the Austro-Hungarian Note proposing an unofficial conference of belligerents:
"’The Government of the United States feels that there is only one reply which it can make to the suggestion of the Imperial Austro-Hungarian Government. It has repeatedly and with entire candor stated the terms upon which the United States would consider peace and can and will entertain no proposal for a conference upon a matter concerning which it has made its position and purpose so plain.'"
RESTRICTION OF DISCUSSION.—It has been suggested that, denied unlimited fields of secret discussion of war issues, Austria may attempt a coup by assenting to a restriction of the discussion to the principles laid down by President Wilson as the only possible basis of peace.
It was said authoritatively today that such a proposition undoubtedly would be accepted. But this statement was accompanied by a significant reminder of conditions which must be met preliminary to any such discussion. These are that the Central Powers:
Must withdraw completely from all occupied territory in France and Belgium, Italy, Russia, and Serbia.
The Germans must drop the subterfuge of the Brest-Litovsk treaty made by Germany with Russian agents hired to betray their country.
They must loosen their hold upon the wheat fields of Ukrainia and the oil wells of Serbia and Russia.
And all this must be done before America would consent to talk of peace, even upon the basis of the President's stipulation.
GERMAN OFFER TO Belgium.—Coincident with the Austrian peace maneuver, and evidently in concert with it, Germany offered definite terms to Belgium, reported as follows: .
That Belgium shall remain neutral until the end of the war.
That thereafter the entire economic and political independence of Belgium shall be reconstituted.
That the pre-war commercial treaties between Germany and Belgium shall again be put into operation after the war for an indefinite period.
That Belgium shall use her good offices to secure the return of the German colonies.
That the French question shall be considered and the Flemish minority, which aided the German invaders, shall not be penalized.
The proposal contains no word respecting reparation or indemnities, no admission that Germany wronged Belgium.
This peace offer was made to the King of Belgium some time ago and immediately communicated to the Allied powers, but was kept secret until the Austrian offer was made.
It is understood that the Belgian Government has received the Austro-Hungarian peace note, and also a proposal that all the powers should withdraw their troops from the Murman territory.
CHANGED ATTITUDE OF GERMAN SPEECH-MAKERS.
The altered tone of the speeches of both royalty and government officials in Germany indicated clearly their decision that the best prospect for the Central Powers lay in an early negotiated peace. The change in the Crown Prince's attitude is reflected in the following interview:
Amsterdam, September 4.—The German idea of victory, as defined by the German Crown Prince, in an interview published in the Budapest Az Est, is an intention "to hold our own and not let ourselves be vanquished." The Crown Prince is quoted as saying that this was clear to him the moment England entered the war.
"If Germany had wanted war," he said, "we should not have chosen this moment. No moment could have been more unfavorable for Germany."
In reply to the question as to how he thought the end of the war would come, he replied:
"Through the enemy perceiving that they are not equal to the winning of their colossal stake, and that they cannot win as much as they are bound to lose."—N. Y. Times, 5/9.
VON PAYER GIVES UP INDEMNITIES.—Amsterdam, Thursday, September 12.—Reiterating that Germany "as the innocent and attacked party" in the war had a right to demand indemnification, Friedrich von Payer, the German imperial vice chancellor, in his speech today at Stuttgart, said that "we prefer on calm reflection, and even with our own favorable military situation, to abandon this idea."
Turning to the question of the occupied territories, the vice chancellor said that as a preliminary condition of peace for Germany and her allies those nations must have all their pre-war possessions, including the German colonies, restored. Then Germany, he declared, could evacuate the occupied regions and could give back Belgium without incumbrance and without reserve, providing no other state was more favorably placed in regard to Belgium than was Germany.
He asserted that Germany would not submit to the Entente Powers for approval or alteration the peace treaties which Germany had signed with the Ukraine, Russia and Roumania.
The postponement of peace prospects and the likelihood of a fifth war winter weigh equally on all belligerents and not only Germany alone, in the opinion of the vice chancellor.
"Our state debts," the vice chancellor said, "are everywhere reaching fantastic heights and everywhere we struggle against the encroachments on our personal liberty. All of the belligerents of Europe must admit, if they are not blind, that the longer the European peoples lacerate each other the more certainly will the historical and paramount position of weakened and impoverished Europe be lost in favor of cleverer and more calculating peoples."
Herr von Payer reminded his hearers that after four years the war still was being waged almost entirely on enemy territory. He admitted that the U-boat had not worked as quickly and surely as had been hoped. He added that it was useless to dispute whose was the fault. The enemy, he said, was still unable to compensate their losses by new construction, and declared that the robbery of neutral ships, almost without parallel, by the Entente could not be repeated.
"The more troops the United States sends the greater will be the need of shipping for reinforcements of munitions and provisions," Herr von Payer said. "The filling up of the enemy army by Americans, therefore, bears in itself its limitations."
He argued that the loss of shipping would become fatal to Great Britain after the war because it would lose its shipping superiority to the United States, "and the hope of compensating themselves from the German fleet, which still has to be conquered, will surely be inadequate comfort for the very imaginative Britishers."
Contending that technique and inventive genius, which already had helped the Germans over heavy obstacles, would still help them, Herr von Payer said:
"If we lack cotton and oils our enemies lack coal. Food is scarce here and there, but already things probably have turned in our favor. In the east the world is again open to us for a food supply, while our enemies' supplies of foodstuffs and raw materials give precedence to the front's calls for America's armies and their provisioning."—Washington Star, 13/9.
BURIAN PAVES WAY FOR PEACE OFFER.—Amsterdam, September 10—An exchange of views between the Central Powers and the Entente was tentatively suggested by Baron Burian, the Austro-Hungarian Foreign Minister, in an address to visiting German newspaper men, according to a Vienna dispatch today. Such a discussion, said the Foreign Minister, need not take the form of peace negotiations, but would have as its purpose the consideration of all things which are keeping the belligerent powers apart.
"This question arises," said the Foreign Minister: "Isn't it a crime against humanity even to think of completely pulling down a structure which has become historical, and which certainly here and there needs improvement, but is only capable of improvement, in order to found a paradise in future on its ruins? The defect in this, however, is that in accordance with the destructive methods of our enemies it can only be created with a much too great sacrifice.
"Count the past hecatombs of this war. Think of those to come and ask whether striving to attain war aims at such a price is justifiable—war aims in which the principle of justice is put foremost—without investigating whether an understanding could not be reached by a fair application of that principle.
"It is unthinkable that even the most confident hopes of final victory could permit the enemy in the long run to avoid considering whether the most terrific exertions and sacrifices can longer be justified in order to carry through principles which are not the enemy's monopoly or to regulate the affairs of other peoples who can manage them quite as well themselves.
"I believe that careful and sincere investigation would bring many on the other side to realize that they often are fighting for imaginary things. It may be an ungrateful task to want to communicate one's own perceptions of things to the enemy.
"The enemy group can, if it wishes, convince itself that in all questions of humanity and justice and of future international relations it will encounter on the part of our group no opposition and will be in line with our existing progressive aspirations. But at the same time it will meet our determination to continue steadfastly to stand up for our good right.
"Our adversaries need only provide an opportunity in a calm exchange of views—some sort of direct informative discussions is thinkable which would be far from being peace negotiations—of discussing and weighing everything which today separates the belligerent parties, and no further fighting will, perhaps, be needed to bring them closer together.
"But I would not delude you with baseless prospects of peace at a moment when the war fever still is shaking the world. I must, however, talk to you of peace because we honestly want it and because we are certain there is an ever-growing number of like-minded persons in all enemy countries.
"We desire to contribute to the best of our ability to a mutual understanding and help to pave a way for conciliation. But, so long as necessary, we shall hold out in a loyal and resolute joint defense."—N.Y. Times, 11/9.
GERMANY WANTS HER COLONIES BACK.—In a speech before the German Society on August 21, Dr. W. S. Solf, German Secretary for the Colonies, expressed clearly Germany's concern for her lost over-seas possessions. He said that Belgium would be restored as an independent state, but that "the safeguarding of our colonial future has become an aim of the German people" and "our colonial war aims are second to none in national importance."
To Mr. Balfour's condemnation of German colonial policy and methods, Dr. Solf replied with a charge of tu quoque. Regarding German aggressions in Russia, he said:
"The Brest-Litovsk peace came about by agreement between the Russian and German Governments, that the frontier peoples of Russia after centuries of oppression should be permitted to live their own national life, for which object they had been striving. This agreement on the fate of the border peoples is a fact of world importance which never can be erased from history.
"Not about the aim, but about the ways and means leading to conferring their own national life upon these peoples, did the Russian and German conceptions differ. Our conception was and is that the path to freedom shall not lead through anarchy to wholesale murder. Between the first bursting of the bonds and full capability for self-determination of the border peoples there lies a natural transitory period. Until the regulation forces should co-operate in the various countries, Germany felt called upon to protect these communities in their own, as well as in the general, interest, as indeed she has been called upon to do by both national majorities and minorities.
"The Brest-Litovsk peace is a framework, and the picture which is to appear within is only sketched in rough lines.
“England forfeited the right to act as moral champion of the Russian border States in their unparalleled time of suffering. During the war they repeatedly appealed to England for help. It was always denied them."
SECRETARY BALFOUR ON AUSTRO-GERMAN OVERTURES.—London, September 16.—A. J. Balfour, the British Foreign Secretary, giving his personal viewpoints on the Austrian peace note to visiting journalists, said:
"It is incredible that anything can come of this proposal."
The Foreign Secretary said he agreed with the Austrian Note when its authors pointed out that the whole of civilization was at stake and that the prolongation of hostilities was a risking or sacrificing of a great deal that was really dear to everybody interested in the progress of mankind. The terms of peace and war were so tremendous, and the calamities imposed by the continuation of hostilities so overwhelming, that he would never treat with disrespect any peace proposal.
"But," he went on, “I cannot honestly see, in the proposals now made to us as I have been able to study them, the slightest hope that the goal we all desire—the goal of a peace which shall be more than a truce—can really be attained."
Coming after the recent speech of Friedrich von Payer, the German Imperial Vice Chancellor, Mr. Balfour continued, "this cynical proposal of the Austrian Government is not a genuine attempt to obtain peace. It is an attempt to divide the Allies." No coalition ever had been so strong as the allied coalition and the enemy would not succeed in breaking it.
Conversations such as were proposed by Austria-Hungary undoubtedly would have great value under certain circumstances. They would serve to smooth out obscurities such as questions of pride, etc., but the questions now between the belligerents were definitely defined.
"I am not taking the proposals of two years ago, or of last year, but of last week," Secretary Balfour said. "The German Vice-Chancellor, speaking for the German Government, clearly and without obscure verbiage, showed where Germany stood on the question of Belgium, Alsace-Lorraine, the German colonies, and the Brest-Litovsk and Bucharest treaties."
It could not be more clearly set forth than it was by von Payer last week that Germany intended to pay no indemnity to Belgium. The Vice-Chancellor indicated that Germany did not believe in the principle of indemnities, and yet at the same time she was squeezing millions of dollars out of Russia.
"This," the speaker went on, "was for the wrongs Russia is supposed to have done Germany. How can those wrongs be compared with the devastation and ruin which Germany is wreaking on Russia now?"
Regarding the question of colonies, Secretary Balfour said:
"The colonies are one question on which there is no misunderstanding. We stand on one side and Germany on the other."
Referring to the lack of concerted effort by the Central Powers, as emphasized by the von Payer speech and the Austrian Note, the Foreign Secretary commented on the clumsiness of German diplomacy.
"The German," he added, "excels in direct, simple brutality, but when he tries to dress in President Wilson's clothes or tries to act as President Wilson would act, he is clumsy."
GERMANY
SAFETY OF CROWN HINGES ON FRANCHISE.—In a speech which afterward caused wide discussion Chancellor von Hertling on September 4 declared that the protection of the Prussian crown and dynasty required the passage of a satisfactory franchise reform bill.
Amsterdam, September 5.—"According to my honest belief as to this difficult question (the reform of the Prussian franchise) it is a matter of protection of the Crown and the dynasty. Any suspicion that an effort is being made to postpone the matter will add fuel to the agitation and lead to serious disturbances."
So declared Chancellor von Hertling in the course of his most pointed speech to the Franchise Reform Committee of the Prussian Upper House, which met yesterday to deal with that measure of reform solemnly promised more than a year ago by the Kaiser, as King of Prussia.
As is well known, the Prussian reactionaries not only delayed the bill, but so altered it that it no longer is worthy of the name of a measure of reform, but instead has become one of the purest reaction. Throughout the country this Junker defiance of the Prussian King and the government has aroused not only in Prussia but in all Germany the most serious anger and unrest.
Has Hertling read the signs of the times at last? He spoke very briefly and very emphatically. The eyes of all political circles, and not only in Prussia, he said, were directed toward them and the decisions to which they had to come.
"The government regards it as its task," he declared, "to carry out that royal promise made in the manifesto of July of last year. Just as all sons of the Fatherland have defended the country by putting forth all their strength; just as in war there has been no question of social distinctions, and high and low, rich and poor, old and young, have done their duty in the same way; so after the war, in the peace for which we hope, there must be no social distinctions in the political activity of voting."
To bring that about, he said, was one of the duties he took upon himself when he assumed office; and he declared himself to be firmly determined to preserve with all his strength and to stand or fall by it.—N. Y. TIMES, 7/9.
RUSSIA
SUPPLEMENTARY AGREEMENTS WITH GERMANY.—Copenhagen, August 30.—The North German Gazette explains the import of the three supplementary agreements to the Brest-Litovsk peace treaty signed in Berlin on August 27. It says the agreements are intended to regulate a number of political and military-political questions arising from the fact that Russia's relations with the border States are still unsettled.
"Esthonia and Livonia stand in the foreground of German interest. The supplementary agreements contain a solution which assures the Baltic States independence, but gives Russia routes of commerce to and from ports on the Baltic for all time.
"Germany succeeded in getting Russia's consent to recognition of the independence of Georgia, but it was impossible to secure Russia's consent to acknowledge other States in the Caucasus. The Russian Government laid the greatest weight on assuring to itself the Baku territory with its rich naphtha fields. Germany could not disregard this wish in view of the fact that Russia pledged itself to place a portion of the naphtha production at the disposal of Germany and its allies.
"The 6,000,000,000 marks which Russia undertakes to pay Germany includes all sums lost by Germans up to July 1, 1917, through Russian revolutionary confiscatory legislation.
The newspaper adds that of the 6,000,000,000 marks Russia has agreed to pay, Ukraine and Finland jointly will pay 1,000,000,000.
Washington, September 10.—What is regarded as closely approximating an offensive and defensive alliance between Germany and the Bolshevist Government in Russia is involved in the treaty just negotiated between them, the first official information concerning which reached the State Department today in a dispatch from American Ambassador Francis at Archangel.
The Ambassador confirmed recent news that the new treaty supplementary to that of Brest-Litovsk provides that if the Bolshevist Government orders an offensive and fights against the Entente allied forces in Northern Russia, Germany will guarantee Russia against attack either by or through Finland. The treaty also stipulates that after the expulsion of the allied forces from Russia, Germany will guarantee the security of the coasting and fishing fleets of Russia in Russian waters.
So far as can be ascertained from official sources all that Russia obtains in return for the 6,000,000,000 marks she has agreed to pay to Germany and for undertaking an offensive against the Entente forces stretched southward along the railway from Archangel toward Vologda, is a guarantee of protection against attack by, or through, Finland, and a contingent guarantee of protection to the Russian coastal and fishing fleets.—N. Y. Times, 11/9.
RAIDS AND MASSACRES BY SOVIETS.—On August 31 Bolshevist troops sacked the British Embassy in Petrograd and murdered Captain Francis Cromie, a former British submarine officer, afterward attached to the legation in Petrograd. The British Government at once telegraphed a protest demanding immediate reparation and punishment, failing to secure which Great Britain would hold members of the Soviet Government individually responsible and endeavor to have them treated as outlaws by all civilized nations. The message stated that the Soviet Ambassador in London, with his staff, had been placed under preventive arrest pending the release of British and French subjects arrested in Russia by decree of August 29.
An official announcement made at Petrograd and reported from Amsterdam on September 9 stated that up to that time 512 so-called counter- revolutionaries had been put to death in reprisal for the murder of Moses Uritzky, a Soviet official in Petrograd.
Stockholm, Sept. 17.—Wholesale executions are increasing in Petrograd, according to private telegrams received here by the way of Helsingfors. During the past week 812 persons were executed, and more than 400 others are on the proscribed list. Most of them have already been made hostages.
All persons of the rank of councillors of state have been imprisoned regardless of their political views.
ALLIES DENY HOSTILE ATTitude.—Archangel, August 22.—An official announcement issued today by the Entente Allied Governments in the northern region of Russia denied the statement recently made by Lenine and Trotzky, the Bolshevist Premier and War Minister, respectively, that Great Britain, France and the United States were enemies of Russia. The allied military action, the announcement added, was aimed at the expulsion of the Germans from Russian territory and the suppression by force of arms of the Brest-Litovsk treaty. The statement follows:
Lenine and Trotzky declare that the British, French, and Americans who disembarked at Archangel are brigands, and they call upon the Russian proletariat to fight against them as enemies of Russia who attacked her without a declaration of war.
We declare to all Russian citizens for whom the welfare of Russia is dear that this is not true. The British, French, and Americans at Archangel are the allies of Russia. They were invited to make a landing here by the legitimate government and with the complete and unanimous agreement on the part of the population.
The government of the northern region is composed of members of the Constituent Assembly, which was elected by the whole population of the northern border district. It comprises also representatives of the Zemstvos and municipalities, elected by universal suffrage.
This government has been formed and was overturned by the illegitimate Bolshevist Government before the descent of the Allies. It was formed on the initiative of the League for the Regeneration of Russia, which reunites representatives of all the political parties recognizing the Constituent Assembly as the only rightful Russian Government.
The Allies, then, were called to Russia by the only legitimate and representative authority, for the purpose of military action in common aiming at the expulsion of the Germans and the complete suppression by force of arms of the Brest-Litovsk treaty, traitorously signed by the Bolsheviki. But they were called on the distinctly specified condition that they must not mix themselves in the internal affairs of the government of Russia.—N. Y. Times, 26/8.
ATTEMPT TO KILL LENINE.—On August 30, Nickolai Lenine, Bolsheviki Premier, was shot and seriously wounded. Dispatches from Moscow on September 4 reported his condition as still serious. Mlle. Dora Kaplan, who shot Lenine, was prominent in the Social Revolutionary Party. She was put to death on September 4, according to news from Moscow via Berlin.
FINLAND AND THE ARCTIC COAST.—Finland's desire for Petchenga is easily explained. The Russian and Norwegian coasts meet on the Arctic and cut Finland off from ice-free water. Finland is therefore restricted to navigation via the Baltic. Only at the expense of either Norway or Russia could she reach the ocean. The acquisition from Russia of a narrow belt of land at Petchenga would give her the outlet she needs. The Finns adduce three arguments in support of their plan. First, they allege, the Petchenga territory was promised to them long ago by Russia in exchange for territory ceded in South Finland. Second, the Bolshevik Government last winter agreed to cede Petchenga to the short-lived Finnish Red Government in exchange for Ino and Raivola, two districts on the Gulf of Finland which are necessary for the defence of Kronstadt. Third, the Petchenga population is mostly Finnish. The Bolshevik Government is apparently still willing to carry out this cession. In May, the Assistant Foreign Minister, Vosnessensky, defended the "deal" on the ground that the greatest width of the territory to be ceded is only forty-five miles, and that as the new Finnish stretch of coast on the Arctic would be seventy miles from Murmansk, Russia's port and railroad would be in no danger. In a later statement Vosnessensky declared that the Allies need not be nervous, as the Germans had no intention of establishing themselves on the Arctic. To this a group of Young-Finnish politicians who oppose the Helsingfors policy of too close union with Germany replied that "as long as Finland and Germany are identical in Allied minds, the acquisition by Finland of Petchenga will inevitably be regarded as a threat, even if the Murman Railway is left intact."
The second Finnish claim—to part of the Russian Government of Olonetz and to part of the interior of Archangel—is inspired by Irredentist motives. The districts claimed are known as "Russian Karelia." . . .
In Olonetz, in territory adjoining Finland proper, are about 70,000 Karelians and Tchuds (another Karelian race); and in Archangel, mostly in the district of Kem, are about 20,000 Karelians. The northwest of Olonetz is not only ethnically, but also geologically, part of Finland. By pushing her frontier eastward from 50 to 100 miles, Finland would achieve her aim.
The Irredentist movement is purely an outcome of the Russian revolution. The Finns at home are all Lutherans, whereas the Karelians in Russia are Greek Orthodox. Of 70,000 Karelians and Tchuds in Olonetz, only 3,000 are registered as Lutherans, and these are immigrants from the former Grand Duchy of Finland. The whole population now claimed by Finland as Irredenta, however, does not number more than 100,000, and there would probably have been no annexation agitation at all had not Finland's national self-consciousness been strengthened by independence, and had not the Bolshevik regime given the Russian Karelians cause of complaint.
Finland's argument is that as long as she does not annex any Russian territory traversed by the Murman Railway, her acts do not threaten the railroad, and have therefore no particular importance for the war. The real issue here is obviously not Finland but Germany. The Allied note protesting against annexation of any Russian territory implies that, with Finland at Petchenga on the Arctic Ocean, or within striking distance of Petrozadovsk, the whole Murman coast and railroad could be threatened at any time should Germany decide to move northward or eastward. In that lies the gravity of the Murman question.—Robert Crozier Long, N. Y. Nation, 31/8.
HORVATH'S COUP A FAILURE.—Washington, August 28.—The self-appointed dictatorship of Lieut. Gen. Horvath, anti-Bolshevik military leader in Eastern Siberia, under which he sought to assume control of all the Russian military forces in the Far East, was short-lived.
Diplomatic advices from Vladivostok were received in Washington today stating that his coup d'etat had failed through the intervention of the allied representatives at Vladivostok, who informed his representative, General Pleshkoff, that the authority of the new Siberian Government would be upheld.
According to those advices the coup of General Horvath was of scarcely an hour's duration. The diplomats made very clear that no government based on personal assumption of power would be acceptable to the Entente Powers, but that they were prepared to support governments in Russia that were based on a free expression of popular sentiment.
There was nothing left for General Horvath but to reliquish his pretensions to hold the reins of governmental power.—N. Y. Times, 29/8.
LENINE AND TROTZKY UNDER GERMAN PAY
Washington, September 14.—Proofs removing any doubts that Lenine and Trotzky, the Bolshevik leaders, are paid German agents—if indeed any doubts remain—are laid before the world today by the United States Government in the first installment of an amazing series of official documents disclosed through the Committee on Public Information.
Secured in Russia by American agents, these documents not only show how the German Government through its Imperial Bank paid its gold to Lenine, Trotzky and their immediate associates to betray Russia into deserting her Allies, but give added proofs, if any be necessary, that Germany had perfected plans for a war of world conquest, long before the assassinations of Sarevejo, which, as the world is now convinced, conveniently furnished her pretext.
These documents further show that before the world war was four months old, and more than two years before the United States was drawn into it, Germany was already setting afoot her plans to "mobilize destructive agents and observers," to cause explosions, strikes and outrages in this country and planned the employment of "anarchists and escaped criminals" for the purpose.
Human Treachery for Gold.—Almost ranking in their sensational nature with the notorious Zimmermann note proposing war by Mexico and Japan upon the United States, which was first given to the world through the Associated Press, these documents lay bare new strata of Prussian intrigue, a new view of the workings of Kultur to disrupt the Allies, standing between the world and Kaiserism. They disclose a new story of human treachery for gold which might almost well be described without sacrilege as placing its perpetrators on a pedestal with Judas and his twelve pieces of silver.
The intrigue appears to have been carried down to the last detail of arrangement with typical German system. Not only do the disclosures prove that Lenine, Trotzky and their band are paid German agents, they show that the Bolshevik revolution which threw Russia into such orgy of murder and excesses as the world seldom has seen, actually was arranged by the German General Staff. They show how the paid agents of Germany betrayed Russia at the Brest-Litovsk "peace" conference; how German staff officers secretly have been received by the Bolsheviki as military advisers; how they have acted as spies upon the embassies of the nations with which Russia was allied or at peace, how they effectually have directed the Bolsheviki foreign, domestic and economic policy wholly in the interest of Germany and the shame and degradation of Russia.
They show how a picked German commander was detailed to "defend" Petrograd against the German army and an extent of German intrigue and domination almost beyond the realm of imagination.
The Committee Statement—The Committee on Public Information statement says, in part:
The documents are some seventy in number. Many are originals, annotated by Bolshevik officials. The remainder are photographs of originals, showing annotations. And they corroborate a third set of typewritten circulars, of which only two originals are possessed, but all of which fit perfectly into the whole pattern of German intrigue and German guilt.
The first document is a photograph of a report made to the Bolshevik leaders by two of their assistants, informing them that in accordance with their instructions there had been removed from the archives of the Russian Ministry of Justice the order of the German Imperial Bank "allowing money to Comrades Lenine, Trotzky 'and others' for the propaganda of peace in Russia," and that at the same time "all the books" of a bank in Stockholm had been "audited" to conceal the payment of money to Lenine, Trotzky and their associates by order of the German Imperial Bank.
Document No. 3 is the original protocol signed by several Bolshevik leaders and dated November 2, 1917, showing that on instructions of the representatives of the German General Staff in Petrograd" and "with the consent of the Council of People's Commissars," of which Trotzky and Lenine were the heads, two incriminating German circulars had also been "taken from the department of secret service of the Petrograd district" and given to the secret service department of the German General Staff in Petrograd. On the bottom of the protocol the German adjutant acknowledges receipt of the two incriminating circulars with his cipher signature. And to complete the evidence the circulars are themselves penciled with the cipher signature of the head of the German secret service bureau.
These two circulars apparently had been obtained by some Russian agent in Germany and transmitted to Russia. The German General Staff evidently wished to get them back in order to destroy them. By the order of the German General Staff and with the "consent" of Lenine and Trotzky they were turned over to the Germans to be destroyed. Why? Because they are conclusive proof that on June 9, 1914, the German Government was preparing for war, several weeks before the assassination of the Austrian Archduke, which was made the pretext for war.
One circular is an order from the German General Staff, dated June 9, 1914, informing "all industrial concerns" in Germany to open the sealed envelopes containing their "industrial mobilization plans and registration forms" so that they might be prepared for the war for which the excuse had not yet been found.
The second circular is an order from the German General Staff of the high sea fleet, dated November 28, 1914 calling for the mobilization of "all destructive agents and observers" in the United States and Canada for the purpose of preventing the sailing of ships from American ports to Russia, France, and England. The order calls for explosions, strikes, "delays, embroilments, and difficulties," and it recommends the employment of "anarchists and escaped criminals" for the purpose.
Real Damning Proofs.—It is these damning proofs of a German conspiracy against the nations of Europe in June, 1914, and against the United States in November, 1914—it is these that Lenine and Trotzky surrender to the German Secret Service in Petrograd on order of "the representatives of the German General Staff in Petrograd."
And they surrender them in conformity with a working agreement between the Bolshevik leaders and the German General Staff, of which agreement a photograph is included in the series as Document No. 5.
A Hun Election.—What their "mutual activities" were to be is sufficiently indicated by Document No. 7, which is a photograph of a letter signed in cipher by this Major Luberts and his adjutant, Lieutenant Hartwig. They notify the Bolshevik leaders, on January 12, 1918, that "by order of the German General Staff" the German intelligence section "has informed us of the names and the characteristics of the main candidates for re-election" to the Russian Bolshevik "central executive committee," an "the General Staff orders us to insist on the election of the following people." They add a list of Russian leaders satisfactory to the German General Staff. The list is headed by Trotzky and Lenine. They were elected, and the rest of the present Bolshevik executive committee were chosen from the same German list.
Document No. 28 gives evidence of the quid pro quo. It is a photograph of a letter from the president of the German Imperial Bank to the Bolshevik commissar of foreign affairs. It is marked "Very secret" and dated January 8, 1918. It says: "Information has today been received by me from Stockholm that 50,000,000 rubles of gold have been transferred to be put at the disposal of the people's commissars," which is the title of the Bolshevik leaders. "This credit," the letter continues, "has been supplied to the Russian Government in order to cover the cost of the keep of the Red Guards (the Bolshevik revolutionary troops) and agitators in the country. The Imperial Government considers it appropriate to remind the soviet of people's commissars of the necessity of increasing propaganda in the country, as the antagonistic attitude of the south of Russia and Siberia to the existing (Russian) Government is troubling the German Government."
Four days later the same president of the German Imperial Bank sent another 5,000,000 rubles to the same address to provide for the sending of a Russian revolutionary leader to Vladivostok to get possession of the "Japanese and American war materials" at that port, and if necessary to destroy them. A photograph of his letter is given as Document No. 9.
There were earlier payments, but probably none later than these. None was necessary. By this time the loot of an empire lay open to the Bolsheviks and the Germans.
Spies to America.—In Document 16 Trotzky is providing fraudulent passports for German officers who are going to England, France and America, as spies and enemy agents. And Document 17 shows Trotzky indorsing a similar proposal "to be urgently executed. L. T."
Three German submarines are to be sent to the Pacific on the trans-Siberian Railway by orders of the German high command in Document No. 23. Lists of German and Russian spies watching the British, French and American Embassies in Petrograd are given in Document No. 25. And, finally, in Document No. 15 the Bolshevik leaders are warned that information concerning "the connection of the German Government with the Bolshevik workers" has leaked out and that Russian troops are hearing of it.
Letters are given to show how the Bolshevik leaders and the German officers arranged for the assassination of Russian Nationalist leaders (Documents 35, 39 and 52), for the destruction of the Polish legionaries in the Russian Army (Documents 40 to 42), for the disorganization of the Roumanian army and the deposing of the Roumanian king (Document No. 37), for the substitution of officers satisfactory to Germany in command of Russian troops instead of patriotic Russian generals (Documents 31 and 31), for the suppression of patriotic agitation among the Russian soldiers (Documents 13 and 14), for an attack upon the Italian Ambassador in Petrograd and the theft of his papers (Documents 26 and 27) and for the employment of German soldiers in Russian uniforms against the Russian national armies in the South (Document 35).
Several of the letters are indorsed by Trotzky. Even standing alone, they are complete proof that the Bolshevik leaders were ruling as German agents in Russia and obeying German orders to act against all Germany's enemies and even against Russia itself.
Suppressed Own Revolution.—Moreover, these Bolshevik leaders acted as German agents by suppressing their own Socialist revolution in the Russian provinces where their doctrines interfered with German plans of annexation. Document 46 is the original letter from the Petrograd department of the German General Staff, addressed to the Bolshevik Commissar of Foreign Affairs. It reads: "According to instructions of the representatives of our General Staff, I have the honor once more to insist that you recall from Estland, Litva and Courland all agitators of the Central Executive Committee of the Soviet of Workmen and Soldiers' Deputies." And in Document 47 the General Staff orders the Bolsheviki to cease the agitation in Estland which had "finally led to the German landlords being declared outlawed," and to "take immediate steps for the restoring of the rights of the above-mentioned German landlords."
Another group of letters (Nos. 33 to 36) shows how the Germans cheated the Bolshevik leaders in their dealings with the Ukraine and made a separate German peace with the anti-Bolshevik leaders in that Russian province. And another group shows the Germans assisting both sides of the civil war in Finland (Documents 38, 43 and 53).—Baltimore Sun, 15/9.
UNITED STATES
HAMBURG-AMERICAN PLANT IN VIRGIN ISLANDS SEIZED.—On September 12 agents of Alien Property Custodian Palmer seized in the Virgin Islands the large marine plant owned by the Hamburg-American line and German capital, but the title of which had been transferred to a Danish Hun sympathizer by a camouflage sale.
The plant admitted possibilities as a naval base, and included land, buildings, docks, warehouses, large water tanks and cisterns, lighters, motor boats, loading paraphernalia and coaling facilities.
That the Germans intended it for a naval base was proved by the fact that the principal building commanding the harbor is of reinforced concrete, and the plaza in the foreground has an eight-foot foundation of concrete, fit for gun emplacements.
In January of last year, prior to the declaration of war by the United States on Germany, the business agent of the Hamburg line, who was also German consul at St. Thomas, sold the plant to the line's lawyer, Jorgensen, when it was ascertained that the United States had purchased the Dutch West Indies from Denmark. The sole consideration was his note for $210,000, given by Lawyer Jorgensen to the Hamburg line, payable three months after date and renewable every three months until after the war. No interest was to be paid until final settlement. These stipulations already noted and others contained in the bill of sale made it clear to government authorities that bungled German camouflage was once more at work.—Washington Star, 13/9.
SENATOR LODGE, REPUBLICAN LEADER, DEMANDS DICTATED PEACE.—F01lowing the death of Senator Gallinger of New Hampshire, Senator Lodge of Massachusetts became Republican leader of the United States Senate. In his first speech, Senator Lodge characterized his peace terms as an "irreducible minimum," and outlined them thus:
Belgium must be restored.
Alsace and Lorraine must be returned to France—unconditionally returned—not merely because sentiment and eternal justice demand it, but because the iron and coal of Lorraine must be forever taken from Germany.
Italia Irredenta—all those areas where the Italian race is predominant, including Trieste—must go back to Italy.
Serbia and Roumania must be established in their independence.
Greece must be made safe.
Most important of all, if we are to make the world safe in the way we mean it to be safe, the great Slav population now under the Government of Austro-Hungary—the Jugoslays and the Czechoslovaks, who have been used to aid the Germans, whom they loathe—must be established as independent States.
The Polish people must have an independent Poland.
We must have these independent States created so that they will stand across the pathway of Germany to the East. Nothing is more vital than this for a just, a righteous, and an enduring peace.
Constantinople must be finally taken away from Turkey and placed in the hands of the allied nations as a free port, so as to bar Germany's way to the East and hold the Dardanelles open for the benefit of mankind.
Palestine must never return to Turkish rule, and the persecuted Christians of Asia Minor—the Syrians and the Armenians—must be safe.
"LUSITANIA" SUITS DECIDED.—Suits against the Cunard Company for damages due to loss of life and property in the sinking of the Lusitania on May 7, 1915, were decided on August 24, 1918, by Judge Julius M. Mayer of the United States District Court of New York. The Judge in his decision held it proved that the Lusitania was unarmed and had no explosives of any kind on board, that all safety measures were taken, and that her sinking by a German submarine was an act of piracy, "an inexpressibly cowardly attack," in violation of the law of nations, for which Germany must be held responsible.
UNITED STATES RECOGNIZES CZECHOSLOVAKS AS BELLIGERENTS.—On September 3 Secretary Lansing issued the following statement recognizing the Czechoslavak nation, and Professor Masaryk as President of the de facto government:
The Czechoslovak peoples having taken up arms against the German and Austro-Hungarian Empires, and having placed organized armies in the field, which are waging war against those Empires under officers of their own nationality and in accordance with the rules and practices of civilized nations; and,
The Czechoslovaks having, in prosecution of their independent purposes in the present war, confided supreme political authority to the Czechoslovak National Council,
The Government of the United States recognizes that a state of belligerency exists between the Czechoslovaks thus organized and the German and Austro-Hungarian Empires.
It also recognizes the Czechoslovak National Council as a de facto belligerent government, clothed with proper authority to direct the military and political affairs of the Czechoslovaks.
The Government of the United States further declares that it is prepared to enter formally into relations with the de facto government thus recognized for the purpose of prosecuting the war against the common enemy, the Empires of Germany and Austria-Hungary.
SPAIN
SPAIN SEIZES GERMAN SHIPS.—On August 21, following a long series of protests, Spain issued a statement of her decision to seize German ships to compensate for Spanish ships thereafter sunk by Germany.
The Cabinet statement read:
"In the course of the recent meetings held at Madrid the government considered the international situation. As a consequence of the submarine campaign more than 20 per cent of our merchant marine has been sunk, more than 100 Spanish sailors have perished, a considerable number of sailors have been wounded, and numbers have been shipwrecked and abandoned. Ships needed exclusively for Spanish use have been torpedoed without the slightest pretext, serious difficulties resulting to navigation.
"Consequently the government has decided to address the Imperial German Government and declare that owing to the reduction of tonnage to its extreme limit, it will be obliged in the case of new sinkings to substitute therefor German vessels interned in Spanish ports. This measure does not imply the confiscation of the ships under definite title. It would be only a temporary solution until the establishment of peace, when Spanish claims also will be liquidated.
To the notice thus served on Germany the latter government replied with several notes of "reassurance" and finally with a threat to sever relations in case German ships were seized.
On August 31, following the sinking of a Spanish vessel with coal from England to Spain, Premier Dato announced the government's decision to put their threat into effect and seize one of the interned German steamers.
NEGOTIATIONS WITH UNITED STATES FOR LOAN.—It is reported that 'negotiations with the United States for a loan to Spain of from $60,000,000 to $100,000,000 are proceeding satisfactorily.
SWEDEN
COMMERCIAL TREATY WITH ENTENTE.—New York, August 22.—Terms of the commercial treaty recently signed by the Entente Allies and Sweden, which is expected to diminish the sending of supplies to Germany, were made public here today by Axel R. Nordvall, head of the special commission of the Swedish Government to the United States. It gives to the Allies 400,000 tons of deadweight shipping and 2,000,000 tons of Swedish iron ore.
Sweden also agrees to license the export to the Allied governments of wood pulp, paper, iron, steel, etc., and to grant to the Allies suitable credit in Sweden for the purchase of Swedish goods during the continuance of the present unfavorable monetary exchange.
The Stockholm Government, according to Mr. Nordvall, has given satisfactory guarantees that no goods imported to Sweden from allied countries or any nations whose shipping the Allies control will be exported to any of the Central Powers.
In exchange for these commodities, facilities, and guarantees, the Allies have agreed to ship to Sweden bread, cereals, coal and coke, mineral and edible oils, sugar, rubber and rubber goods, cotton and cotton goods, hides, leather and tanning material, coffee, cocoa, tobacco, copper, ferro-alloys, tin, tin plate, nitrate of soda, raw phosphates, sulphur "and other goods and materials necessary for Sweden's economic life."
Signing of the pact between the Allies and Sweden, Mr. Nordvall admitted, was a virtual acceptance by the latter government of the Allied blockade. Negotiations, he said, had been carried on by representatives of the signatories since May, 1917, soon after the United States entered the war, and continued for a year. The treaty was signed by France, England and the United States May 29 last.
Conditions in Sweden, the envoy stated, were very serious; in fact, no foodstuffs of any nature were being shipped out of the country because of domestic scarcity. Prior to the depletion of Sweden's storehouse, he said, Germany had been her bigger customer. For twenty-five years Germany had purchased virtually the entire output of the Swedish iron ore mines. Germany would still continue to receive some iron ore from his country, Mr. Nordvall stated, but in greatly lessened quantity.—Philadeiphia Inquirer, 23/8.
CHINA
Hsu SHIH CHANG ELECTED PRESIDENT.—Peking, September 6.—Hsu Shih Chang, former Vice-President of the Privy Council, has been elected President of the Chinese Republic by a large majority.
Hsu Shih Chang became prominent during the latter days of the Chinese monarchy. He was one of the leading statesmen who conducted the negotiations preliminary to the settlement of the relations between Japan, Russia and China as the result of the Russo-Japanese war.
When the Constitutional Government was established Hsu became Vice Prime Minister, and at one time was thought to be in line for the post of Premier. In June, 1917, he was named dictator by a rebel conference at Tien-Tsin. When Huan Tung relinquished the role of Emperor in the summer of 1917 Hsu was appointed his guardian. It was later suggested that he might replace President Feng, and last month he was nominated for the Presidency by the Generals of the Northern Chinese army.—N. Y. Times, 7/9.