I should like first of all to recall to your mind the two treaties of 1831, signed by England, France, Prussia, Austria, and Russia, and that of 1839, approved by Holland, which guaranteed the independence of Belgium, and declared it to be a neutral state for all time.
A German jurist states that the duty of a neutral state is "to abstain from every aggression, to watch over the inviolability of its territory, and as a consequence not to allow one of the belligerents to use it as a base of operations for hostilities against the other." In return the Powers who guaranteed the neutrality have duties towards Belgium, which another German jurist, the famous Bluntschli, formulates as follows: "If the nations which have guaranteed the neutrality of Belgium do not defend her against an invader, and do not keep to their engagements, they are guilty of the violation of the Right."
Now until 1914 Belgium has scrupulously kept to her engagements: in 1914 Germany has brutally violated hers. And yet, during the last few years, whenever there arose a diplomatic crisis, Germany every time made reassuring declarations to Belgium. In 1911 Herr von Bethmann-Hollweg stated "that Germany had no intention of violating the neutrality of Belgium." In 1913, in answer to a socialist deputy on the committee of the Budget in the Reichstag, von Jagow replied: "The neutrality of Belgium is settled by international treaties which Germany will most certainly respect."
Right up to the very last moment Germany unceasingly sought to captivate the confidence of Belgium. On August 1, when the French Minister, M. Klobukowski, promised that France would respect the neutrality of Belgium, the German Minister, von Below, said that he was not authorized to make an official communication, but he added that "they knew his
