9

 

THE SECRET AGREEMENTS

 

It has been shown that France and Russia had plotted and provoked the World War and used Serbia as a tool to create a condition which made war inevitable. It has been proved beyond the shadow of a doubt that France and Russia were the actual aggressors and that England encouraged them in their plan to embroil Europe in an internecine war. The evidence is clear and convincing that bribery and corruption had been resorted to by French and Russian politicians to mislead the people of their respective countries, and that even the English government had resorted to fraud and deceit to lead the people of England to favor war. Nor is there any question but that the American people were deceived into the World War under the slogan "to make the world safe for democracy."

Our examination of the history of Europe and official documents, statements and admissions of responsible European statesmen has disclosed that the underlying purpose in the World War was not to "make the world safe for democracy" but to defeat Germany and Austria-Hungary, to injure them economically and to destroy the Berlin-Bagdad Railroad. We shall now proceed to examine further facts revealing why, how and by whom the destruction of Germany, Austria-Hungary and the Berlin-Bagdad Railroad was planned.

On April 26, 1915, about eight months after the outbreak of the World War, a secret conference was held in London by representatives of the allies of England. In that conference the territories of Germany, Austria, Hungary and Turkey were divided up among England's allies.{1}

United States Senator Nye, speaking on the floor of the U. S. Senate, on January 17, 1936, disclosed much valuable information relating to the London secret agreement,{2} and said that Ambassador Page, who was stationed in Rome, reported to the U. S. Department of State that on April 30, 1915, Italy was promised by England, France and Russia "a large part of Austrian territory" which Serbia claimed for herself. The price Italy was to pay was to enter the World War on the side of England, France and Russia. It was then expected that Roumania would also join England and her allies in the war.

Ambassador Page further reported to the U. S. Department of State that Russia was promised the Dardanelles, provided she would not make a separate peace.

 

Senator Nye produced more than ample evidence showing that the U. S. Department of State had full knowledge of the London secret agreement long before the United States of America had entered the World War, and that, therefore, we had official knowledge of the fact that the World War was not fought "to make the world safe for democracy." In other words, not only the people of Europe but also the American people were deceived, defrauded, misled and unscrupulously betrayed.

 

Someone in England asked Lloyd George, the British Prime Minister, a question somewhat as follows:

 

"Mr. Prime Minister, millions of English mothers are sending their sons, millions of English wives are sending their husbands to this war of carnage, and there are millions of English sweethearts whose hearts have been stabbed by the cruelty of the World War. The hearts of the good English mothers, the good English wives and the beautiful roses in the flower garden of England are profusely bleeding; all of England is bleeding. We are told that the World War is fought to make the world safe for democracy. A woman's heart is unable to understand that it is necessary to exterminate the people who are inhabiting the earth which is intended to be made 'safe for democracy.' Is not 'democracy' a human institution and is not 'democracy' for the benefit, prosperity and happiness of mankind? What good purpose could 'democracy' serve if mankind is exterminated? Of what possible benefit could 'democracy' be without democrats? Mr. Prime Minister, will you please explain to the people of England what this war is all about?"

This must have been a good question and it must have moved Lloyd George, because in the spring of 1917 he called the members of the British Cabinet to a meeting and called upon Lord Balfour, the Secretary of Foreign Affairs, to give his official answer and explain what the World War was all about. Lloyd George was telling the English people that he was going to "hang the German Kaiser" and no doubt he himself was interested to know why the German Kaiser would have to "swing"? Lord Balfour explained and gave the true reasons for the war, which reasons Lloyd George did not later put into his political show-window. Said Lord Balfour:

"This war has been described, and quite accurately I think, as a war against the world domination of Germany."

Lord Balfour swallowed a big lump in his throat, straightened out in his chair and continued:

"But I think that Germany, after all, was not equally anxious to have world domination in every direction at one and the same time."

This was not all. Lord Balfour disclosed further that:

"The practical destruction of the Turkish empire is undoubtedly one of the objects which we desire to attain."

It will be recalled that the Berlin-Bagdad Railroad was planned to run through Turkey and terminate at Bagdad. To destroy this railroad, Turkey had to be destroyed also. And since the same railroad was to run across Austria and Hungary, these countries had to be destroyed, as Lord Balfour admitted to his colleagues.

A copy of the secret report of Lord Balfour has been in the secret files of the U. S. Department of State since May 18, 1917, bearing the formal number 763.72/51623. It is a secret document, hidden from the American people whose property it is. We had to foot the bill, bleed and die in a war in which we had no personal or national interest whatever. Our own Washington officials were shouting at the top of their voice that we should hurry up, shoulder our guns, rush to France and "make the world safe for democracy." And this, mind you, at the very time when they were betraying the American people and the very democracy under which we lived. Some persons have an idea that democracy is a hunting ground for international racketeers, brigands, gangsters and crooks; whereas it should be the finest human institution that the best human brains have ever been able to devise.

"The International News Service" has succeeded in securing a copy of the secret report of Lord Balfour and, on November 14, 1937, it was published in a number of American newspapers. Here we have an official document showing that England sat down with her allies and satellites and with the stroke of a pen dismembered centuries-old countries and empires of other peoples and divided them up as thieves and robbers divide up loot; and yet the American people are told daily in the American newspapers that the very countries that in 1914 and thereafter stooped to the lowest plane of international thievery and robbery are still busy "saving the democracies of Europe" and we should go over and help them.

The Balfour secret report discloses, among other things, the following:*

1. "Italy was promised those adjoining regions of Austria which were heavily populated by Italians; and also parts of the Dalmatian coastline of Austria on the Adriatic for use as a naval base.

 

2. "Roumania was pledged the great Hungarian province of Transylvania, (the New England of Hungary) and a part of Serbia in exchange for giving the latter an 'outlet' to the Adriatic.

 

3. "Serbia (now Yugoslavia) was promised the Austro-Hungarian provinces of Bosnia and Herzegovina as well as the 'outlet' to the Adriatic.

4. "France was pledged restoration of her former provinces, Alsace-Lorraine, with England insisting she take them as a means of depriving Germany of rich iron deposits in Lorraine, even though France indicated a willingness to accept an 'honourable peace' without them.

 

5. "Plans were fostered to pledge the independence of Poland, along with huge slices of German and Austrian territory, to keep her from sending an army to join the Germans.

 

6. "The allies were determined to create a new nation out of Bohemia, along with other Austrian territory. This eventually gave birth to Czechoslovakia."

The allies were pledged also to the "practical destruction of the Turkish empire" by wholesale annexation of her territory. Balfour plainly disclosed that Britain was not warring for democracy nor "to make the world safe for democracy," nor "to end all wars," but chiefly to rid herself of a powerful commercial rival, Germany. The major purpose of all these pledges, as Balfour outlined it, was to smash the German commercial lifeline, running from Berlin to Bagdad, namely, the Berlin-Bagdad Railroad.

"This document," says the "Chicago Herald and Examiner," "proves the Versailles treaty was not in reality a peace treaty but a mere ratification of the spoils of war, divided by the allies in secret pacts prior to the spring of 1917, fully two years before the end of the war. At Versailles the allied diplomats merely 'rubber-stamped' in public what they had pledged each other years earlier in secrecy."

The following few statements are quoted from the Balfour secret report. It should be remembered that this report was made by Balfour at the time England, France and Russia were pleading with the United States of America to enter the World War on their side "to make the world safe for democracy" and "to end all wars." Said Balfour in his secret report:

"We have entered into treaties with Italy, Roumania and Serbia, all of which affects Austrian territory.

 

"Italy, who has come into the war in April, I think it was of 1915, opened her mouth rather widely; that is Italy's way, and she not only got the Allies to promise her Italia Irredenta, the populations bordering upon her frontiers who are of Italian origin, speak Italian and possess Italian culture, but she asked also for parts of Dalmatia, which neither ethnologically nor for any valid reason can be regarded as a natural part of Italy.

 

"We promised to Serbia Bosnia and Herzegovina (Austrian territory) and an outlet to the Adriatic.

 

"We promised Roumania, if she came in, that part of Hungary which is predominantly Roumanian in race and in language should be handed to Roumania. It is undeniable that to take away the Roumanian part of Hungary, namely Transylvania, (it was never Roumanian!), and hand it over to Roumania is to break up historic Hungary. That does touch the historic kingdom of Hungary."

Balfour then discussed Bohemia. He had already promised over one-half of historic Hungary to Serbia and Roumania; but he wanted to cut out another large slice and give it to Bohemia. So he said:

"If all accounts are true, Bohemia has a hatred of German civilization. Some form of autonomy should be given to Bohemia in the Austrian empire."

In other words, if it could be demonstrated that the Bohemian people "hated German civilization," they would receive a nice slice from the territory of historic Hungary. It should be stated here that the Bohemian (now Czech) people did not hate German civilization and there is no evidence anywhere that they ever did. It was only a few leeches, who themselves were not members of the Bohemian race, that made the misrepresentation that the Bohemian people "hated German civilization." What is more, the Bohemian people had never authorized anybody to represent them as haters of German civilization, because probably most of them spoke German and were part and parcel of German civilization. Nor is there any evidence anywhere to the effect that the Bohemian people have ever asked England or anybody to take any territory from Austria and Hungary and to add it to Bohemia. And when the Bohemian people are given an opportunity to vote on the question freely and without molestation by self-appointed leaders who are not members of the Bohemian race, the overwhelming vote of the Bohemians will be against the wholesale robbery which Balfour indicated in his secret report. This is written on May 20, 1938, at 6:45 P.M. and shall stand in full confidence and belief that the Bohemian people, when given an opportunity, will repudiate the mutilation of the territories of Austria and Hungary.

An accurately drawn map was reprinted in thousands of copies, showing how Germany, Austria, Hungary and Turkey were expected to be divided up and distributed among the Allies. When the war spirit was lagging in Germany and Austria-Hungary, allied (English and French) airplanes flew over Germany and showered thousands of these maps upon the German people, calling their attention to the way their country and the countries of their allies were to be divided up and distributed among other countries, and challenging them to go to the front and shoot the English, French and Russian soldiers or to be shot by them.{3}

Thus the Germans, Austrians, Hungarians and the Turks were challenged by England and France to shoulder their guns and fight in defense of their homeland, homes, wives, children and firesides. Men who would refuse to fight in defense of their country, their homes, wives and children are not worthy. Can there be any question as to what we, the American people, would do, if we discovered that some foreign powers planned to divide our country and have it distributed among foreign people? Godless Communist Moscow and its agents have already painted a "Black Strip" across the map of the United States of America and it is now alleged that Comrade Trotsky (Bronstein), who is sojourning in Mexico, is working on a plan of invasion of the United States of America. When and if that plan of invasion materializes, the American people will be ready with their answer, even as the Germans, Austrians, Hungarians and Turks were, when they were challenged to defend their countries.

Many will recall when England and her allies had planned the division of Germany, Hungary, Austria and Turkey and to distribute the severed parts among the allies of England, the American newspapers were detailing under glowing headlines how Germany was going to divide the world, and American moving pictures were showing pictures, in which the German Kaiser was shown as a big fat butcher, cutting up the world and distributing the parts among his sons. And all this happened when a copy of the London secret treaty was on file in the U. S. State Department! Is there any wonder that Pierre Renaudel, a member of the French Parliament, bitterly exclaimed: "It is only for the poor devil, that war is not a gentleman's agreement!" And John H. Hylan, Mayor of New York City issued a statement, in which he said: "We have a rich man's war and a poor man's fight."{4}

 

The World War was a paying proposition for England and France and their sympathizers. Ponsonby, a member of the English Parliament states in his book that England received new territories covering 1,415,929 square miles, which is slightly less than one-half of the entire land area of the United States of America. The territory of France was increased from 207,054 to 212,659 square miles. Yugoslavia, Roumania and Czechoslovakia were given more than two-thirds of the territory of Hungary and a large part of Austria. What did we, the American people get? Well, 126,000 of our boys were killed, 234,000 were wounded or crippled for life; we spent 60 billion dollars of our money; loaned 12 billion dollars to our allies, which they have neglected to repay; our economic structure has collapsed; 13 million of American men and women are out of work; about one-half of the American people are living near the poverty line; and if you happened to have reached the age of forty, you are told that in the richest country in the world you are of little earthly use here! In addition to all these sacrifices, we were told by the noble English Lord, Northcliffe, that we, the American people, were on the same plane with the Chinese!

The noble English Lord and his ilk may poke fun at us and the good Chinese people; but we happen to know that the Chinese people, though they may be poor in earthly goods, are honorable. This, we regret to say, cannot be said of the men and governments who betrayed their own people, misled the American people, and brought indescribable tragedy upon suffering mankind!

The price we have paid and are still paying for our entry and participation in the World War is uniquely expressed in a little poem written by Florence E. Marshall in her book of poems, entitled "Silence Is Yellow" and quoted in "Nautilus Magazine," April, 1938, page 9:

"A pretty penny we paid for War!

Let's make an honest confession;

$45,000,000,000 spent

And what did we get?

The depression!"

 

The Balfour secret report convicts England, Russia, France and their allies of fraud, deceit, falsification and wholesale robbery.

England and France have betrayed and are still betraying the Russian people, in that England and France are supporting and maintaining in Russia the godless Communist form of government, headed mostly by non-Russians. In addition, France and England had refused and still refuse to give Russia the Dardanelles but instead they encourage the continuation of the ruthless oppression and torture of the Russian people by foreigners whose only claim to Russia is that they are using her as a hunting ground for the riches which should belong to the Russian people.

The Communist regime in Russia is supported by England and France for the reason that, as long as the ungodly Communist regime remains, no demand will be made by or in behalf of the Russian people for an all-year-round open seaport which Russia needs and should have. Governments that are guilty of betrayal, double dealing, double-crossing and deceit should take off their masks and cease to call themselves Christians! Every good Christian wishes well for the good Christian Russian people and devoutly prays for their deliverance from the control of the sadistic foreigners who are now oppressing and torturing them.

It is known that the "phantom submarines" that, in connection with the Spanish civil war, recently have been terrorizing shipping on the Mediterranean Sea and sending English seamen to their cold watery graves, were manned by Russian navy men, carrying with them Czechoslovakian passports, provisioned and carried on their furloughs by a Greek ship to a secret submarine base at Oran, North Africa, which, by the way, is a French territory. It is significant to note in this connection that Russia, Czechoslovakia, Greece and France are allies of England, yet they cooperated secretly in terrorizing English shipping on the Mediterranean Sea and unmistakably hinting that the "phantom submarines" were Italian or German war craft. It is further significant to note in this connection, that when this international treachery was done, Leon Blum was Prime Minister of France and Sir Anthony Eden, who is said to be a brother-in-law of the Russian Foreign Commissar, Litvinoff (Finkelstein), was the Secretary of Foreign Affairs of England. It was fortunate for the English, French, Italian and German people that the "phantom submarines" were unsuccessful in provoking a war.{5}

 


* "The Chicago Herald and Examiner," November 14, 1937.

1 John Bass's "The Peace Tangle," p. 14; Birinyi's "The Tragedy of Hungary," pp. 143-6.

2 Congressional Record, January 17, 1936, p. 557, et seq. [sic; no ref. in text]

 

3 "The Peace Tangle," pp. 20-22.

4 "The Tragedy of Hungary," pp. 147-153; U. S. Senate Document, "Justice for Hungary," No. 346, 1923, p. 17.

5 This Communistic Russian treachery was exposed by this writer in the "Cleveland News," June 15, 1938, and in the "Bridgeport," June 17, 1938. Subsequent to that exposure, the Russian government indicated a better international behavior and the French government closed the French borders to the shipping of arms and ammunition to the Communist forces in Spain.

 

 

Production of Iron, in million quintals of the new Danubian States

 

 

10

 

THE ALLIES ARE GUILTY

 

We shall now proceed to summarize the evidence, state the law applicable thereto, and then render our verdict. If you keep in mind the evidence read, how the cards were shuffled behind the screen by unscrupulous politicians and diplomats, and how the people were misled by bribed and corrupted newspapers, you will be able to interpret the daily news, as now printed, with a fair degree of accuracy. If you keep in mind, furthermore, that there are two well-defined divisions of mankind, namely the group that is comprised by the creators and the builders, and the group that is comprised by the leeches and parasites; that the struggle between these two groups is as old as the story of Cain and Abel; that the leeches and parasites are successful only when they are able to bribe and corrupt politicians, diplomats and newspaper owners and editors; and that the fight and struggle going on in your immediate neighborhood and throughout the world is between these two groups, namely, the creators and builders and the leeches and parasites, -- if you keep these things in mind, you will be fully as competent as the next professor to read from the daily news the actual facts which they are trying to hide.

Eternal vigilance is the price of success and liberty. An intelligent and vigilant democracy can easily withstand the attack of the leeches and parasites. If you belong to the creating and building group, and let us hope you do, and if you have written on your banner the words "For God, home and country," be of good cheer, for behind the stormy clouds that are hovering around and above you, the Sun of Righteousness is rising slowly and majestically and is steadily coming toward your group with healing in His wings. As light is always and invariably triumphant over darkness, so will your group and mine, the creators and the builders, triumph over the leeches and parasites. The price you and I must pay is just eternal vigilance.

The evidence proves beyond the shadow of any honest doubt that England was jealous of Germany's industrial and commercial growth and considered the Berlin-Bagdad Railway system especially antagonistic to her international financial and commercial interests; that Russia wanted the Dardanelles for an outlet from the Black Sea to the Mediterranean Sea and for that reason she objected to the Berlin-Bagdad Railroad crossing the Dardanelles; that France wanted to take away from Germany Alsace-Lorraine, in order to cripple Germany's coal and iron ore supply; that a concerted plan was prepared by France, Russia and England to attack Germany and to defeat and destroy her and the Berlin-Bagdad Railway system; that the "Pan-Slavic" movement was used by France, Russia and England as their agency in stirring up and inciting the people living in the Balkan countries against Germany and Austria-Hungary with the specific purpose and undisguised intention of precipitating a war between Balkan countries and Austria-Hungary; that members of the French government, French politicians and the French press were bribed and corrupted with Russian money with the intention of misleading the French people and creating a French public opinion inimical to Germany and Austria-Hungary; that Serbia was used as a nest for the anti-Austro-Hungarian and German agitation; that the Serbian Black Hand society was financed and directed from France and Russia and its members carried a violent terror into Hungary and Austria; that the Austrian Archduke and his wife were assassinated by members of the Serbian Black Hand society, who were financed, trained and supplied with guns, ammunitions and explosives from the arsenals of the Serbian army; that the Serbian government and even members of the Serbian ruling family knew of the plot to assassinate the Austrian Archduke; and that the outrages directed against Austria-Hungary were threatening the very existence of that dual monarchy.

The evidence has further proved that immediately after the assassination of the Austrian Archduke, the Austro-Hungarian government, following the usual diplomatic course, made a diplomatic representation to the Serbian government, demanding that the agitation against Austria-Hungary cease and the assassins and their confederates be seized, tried and punished under the laws of Serbia; that Serbia was encouraged by Russia and France not to yield; that Serbia sent a dilatory and unsatisfactory reply to Austria-Hungary and, before dispatching the answer, the Serbian government ordered the secret mobilization of the entire Serbian army against Austria-Hungary; that Hungary tried to avoid the threatening conflict but, by reason of the attitude of France and Russia, her efforts had failed; that France had decided upon war and Russia ordered the mobilization of her army and navy against Austria-Hungary and Germany; and that there was no other avenue left for Austria-Hungary and Germany than to order the mobilization of their armies and navies.

It is true that Austria-Hungary declared war on Serbia first and Germany declared war on Russia and France first; but it is equally true that under the circumstances and according to the rules and principles of international law that was their right and duty to do. Besides, the declaration of war by Austria-Hungary and Germany had no other meaning than as if they said, "We know you are coming and we give notice that we are going to meet you." The Serbian army was already moving toward Austria-Hungary, and the Russian army and navy were already moving toward Germany and Austria-Hungary, while the French army was already mobilized and ready for action.

Austria-Hungary and Germany had a perfect right and, indeed, it was their duty to move and move fast in the defense of their territories and their people. You do not have to be a diplomat to understand this inherent and inalienable right of a nation. It is the same right that you, as an individual, have and enjoy. If, while going about your business, you are surrounded by two or three persons who exhibit a threatening attitude toward you and they give you sufficient reason to believe that they will attack you and, if successful, they will injure your person and take your property away from you, it is perfectly right and lawful for you to use all the necessary force to repel the threatening attack, even if you have to beat and kill your adversaries, in the protection of your person and property. This is known as the right of self-defense and self-preservation. Nations have the same right under international law which declares that:{1}

"In the last resort almost the whole of the duties of states are subordinated to the right of self-preservation."

 

The Versailles treaties and the Treaty of Trianon declare that the guilty party is the aggressor and the aggressor must pay the loss and damages caused in and by the World War. International law declares that the aggressor is he who makes self-defense necessary.

 

"The real aggressor is not he who first employs force, but he who renders the employment of force necessary."{2}

 

We have seen that the French government recognized the principle that:

 

"He who mobilizes first is the aggressor."{3}

 

The Franco-Russian military agreement of 1893 specifically stated that:

"The first to mobilize must be held to be the aggressor and general mobilization is war."{4}

 

The evidence has clearly shown that Serbia, Russia and France had mobilized first, and General Gurko, the Russian military expert, has admitted that:

"The Russian mobilization meant for Germany the necessity of declaring war without wasting a single day."{5}

 

We have read the verdict of history, that:{6}

 

"The Russians were the first to take steps which they knew must lead to war."

 

But that:

 

"France was the first country in the European crisis officially to announce her determination upon war." In other words, "The French were the first to declare themselves through with diplomacy and determined upon war."

 

And that:

 

"The only direct and immediate responsibility for the general European war falls upon Russia and France."{6}

And since England was in sympathy with Russia and France, our verdict must be that France, Russia and England were the aggressors.

Under the circumstances in which Austria-Hungary had found themselves and when their very existence was in danger and jeopardy, it was their right, under the self-preservation clause of international law, to intervene in Serbia and punish the criminals, gangsters and assassins who made life wretched in Austria-Hungary. It was under this clause that the United States government sent an expeditionary force into Mexico in pursuit of Pancho Villa and his bandits. The law is:{7}

"The right of self-preservation in some cases justifies the commission of acts of violence against a friendly or neutral state when from its position and resources it is capable of being made use of to dangerous effect by an enemy, when there is a known intention on his part to make some use of it, and, when he is not forestalled, it is almost certain that he will succeed, either through the helplessness of the country or by means of intrigues with the party within."

That is to say, if, for example, Russia would be planning to invade the U. S. A. through Mexico and if the Mexican government were either unable to keep out Russia or were in conspiracy with Russia against us, we would have the right to invade Mexico and prevent Russia from attacking us.

It was under this clause that Germany was entitled to pass through Belgium in order to prevent the invasion of Germany by the English and French armies.

The evidence is clear and conclusive as to the guilt of the government of Serbia in helping, urging and arming the Serbian gangsters and assassins to annoy Austria-Hungary and to assassinate the Austrian Archduke and his wife. International law clearly provides that in a situation of that kind the aggrieved government may move right into the territory of the guilty government and exact punishment or reparation or both. The law declares:{8}

 

"When an injury or injustice is committed by the government itself, it is idle to appeal to the courts; in such cases as in others in which the acts of the government has been of a flagrant character, the right naturally arises immediately exacting reparation by such means as may be appropriate."

 

If the government of the state, in which the prevailing conditions are such as to endanger the safety and peace of a neighboring state, is unable to keep order, it is the right of the injured state to march right into the territory of the state which is either incapable of suppressing the crime complained of or its government is in conspiracy with the criminals, as the members of the Serbian government were in conspiracy with the Black Hand Society. It is the right of the aggrieved state to

intervene or, in other words, to enter the territory of the guilty government and create order, as the U. S. Government did, when the American expeditionary force was sent into Mexico in pursuit of Pancho Villa and his bandits. International law declares that:{9}

 

"International law at the present time undoubtedly regards intervention when strictly necessary to preserve the fundamental right of the intervening state to its existence, as a permissible act, though contravening the right of independence in another state."

 

International law recognizes the right of a state to tranquility and peace; reversely, no state has any right to disturb its neighboring state. When this right is violated, it is the right of the complaining state to take whatever action is appropriate and effective. The law declares that:{10}

"International law must rest upon observance of certain general principles. It may in extreme cases be necessary to intervene in order that these principles may be respected by certain states in their dealings with other states which, though weaker in physical force, have equal rights in international law."

 

Surrounded by the mobilized forces of Serbia, Russia and France, Austria-Hungary and Germany were fully authorized by international law to do exactly what they did in their own defense. The law is:{11}

 

"In the face of actual dangers immediately threatening its existence, a state may take such measures as are necessary for self-preservation, even though not sanctioned by international law."

 

It is the law of nations that, when a neighboring state injures a state, it is the right of the injured state to obtain redress, after the usual diplomatic procedure fails. Austria-Hungary was deeply injured by Serbia and Serbia refused to give redress. It was the right of Austria-Hungary to send a military expeditionary force into Serbia, as the United States sent one into Mexico, to punish the criminals, terrorists and assassins. The law on this point is:{12}

 

"The state injured by an abusive act committed by a sister state is authorized by international law, after due notice and the fulfillment of the required steps of procedure, to intervene against the delinquent sovereign and by the use of appropriate measure of force, to constrain it to reform its abusive conduct and to conform to international law."

 

The same holds true under the "nuisance" clause of international law:

 

"When the local sovereign fails in its duty, the state injured by the failure may act within the limits of the urgent necessity of the case."{13}

 

Regarding the declaration of war by Austria-Hungary and Germany and the entering of Belgium by the German army, international law is clear and it provides that a state in danger of being attacked does not have to wait until an actual attack is made on her. The law says:{14}

"Other states are not obligated to await the actual commission of an act in violation of their rights."

 

And also that:{15}

 

"Necessity justifies an invasion of foreign territory so as to subdue an expected assailant."

 

Furthermore, a state does not have to wait until it is attacked by its enemy. Germany was in danger of being invaded by the French and English armies through Belgium. Under the circumstances it was the right of Germany to move through Belgium to withstand an attack upon her own territory. The law provides:{16}

 

"Intervention to prevent hostile act, when the danger is imminent, is established today both in doctrine and in practice."

 

Writing on the same subject, Lord Bacon said:{17}

 

"Neither is the opinion of some of the schoolmen to be received, that a war cannot justly be made but upon a precedent injury or provocation, for there is no question but a just fear of an imminent danger, though there be no blows given, is a lawful cause for war."

 

In other words, it is not the first blow but the preparation and intention to challenge the delivery of the blow that is the cause of war. In other words, the aggressor is not he who declares war first but he who makes the declaration of war necessary.

 

"The first cause of a just war is an injury not yet done which menaces body and goods."{18}

 

Sir Edward Greacy states the principle in perfect form, under which Austria-Hungary and Germany were within their rights to protect themselves as they did against the intended attack:{19}

 

"A state's right to security means not only the right to defend itself against the actual direct attack, but the right to preserve itself from injury by anticipating attack, in case where it is manifest that attack is intended, and that such attack cannot be prevented by any pacific measures, which do not involve undue self-abasement and loss of real national dignity. In such cases and in those of quarrels between individuals the real aggressor is not he who first employs force, but he who renders the employment of force necessary."

 

And finally:{20}

 

"The right of a state to exist in safety calls for no remarks. Its violation or threatened violation gives rise to the remedial right of self-preservation."

From the facts presented, the evidence adduced and upon the application of the principles of international law, the inevitable conclusion is that France, Russia and England are guilty in having provoked and precipitated the World War. The verdict, therefore, is that Austria, Hungary and Germany are innocent of the charges made against them in the indictment incorporated in the Versailles treaties and the Treaty of Trianon.

It follows, therefore, that the treaties of Versailles and the Treaty of Trianon are a fraud, therefore the same are void and of no effect in law.


1 W. E. Hall, "A Treatise on International Law," p. 110.

 

2 Greacy, p. 150.

 

3 Supra, Chapter 7: "Die Kriegsschuldfrage;" Nov. 1928.

 

4 Supra, Chapter 7.

 

5 Supra, Chapter 7.

 

6 Supra, Chapter 7.

 

7 Hall, "A Treatise on International Law," p. 110.

 

8 Ibid, p. 352.

 

9 G. G. Wilson, "International Law," 8th ed., p. 89.

 

10 Ibid, p. 89.

 

11 Ibid, p. 81.

 

12 E. C. Stonewell, "International Law," p. 308.

 

13 Ibid, p. 313.

 

14 Quincy Wright, "Control of America's Foreign Policy," p. 152.

 

15 J. Q. Adams's, Mem. IV:113.

 

16 W. E. Lingelbach, "The Doctrine and Practices of Intervention in Europe," in "Annals of American Academy of Political and Social Sciences," July 16, 1920.

 

17 Ibid, p. 112.

 

18 Grotius, Ibid, p. 112.

 

19 Greacy, p. 150.

 

20 Holland, "Elements of Jurisprudence," 13th ed., p. 397.