AND THE OUTBREAK OF WAR. QI

was ordered before it was known that a similar "

step had in fact been taken in Russia, and

also that no efforts were made by the German · p

Government to postpone this act. This is i

the point on which I wish especially to lay ;

stress. Germany, notwithstanding all the ¥

protestations of the Chancellor, took not a

single step to make smooth the way of g

¥ peace.

§ So much for the ürst two points. Now we `

come to the third. ·

ï I had pointed out the extraordinary help- F

lessness with which Herr von Iagow met Q

the Russian formula given to Count Pourtales l

at 2 a.m. on july 30th. I asked why, even i

if this formula could not be accepted, they

ä did not at least use the fact that a formula

i' had been offered as a basis for further nego 1

tiations, and why they rejected it summarily ,

without even referring it to Austria. Glaukos

does not dispute the facts; he covers himself

E merely by a quotation from the American e g

book by Professor Stowell, a quotation which

’ does not in the least meet my point, for my

I point was not that this formula could have

2 heen accepted, but that it could be made

the basis for further discussion, and that 1,

i the prompt and almost diseourteous rejection,

l l

was ordered before it was known that a similar "

step had in fact been taken in Russia, and

also that no efforts were made by the German · p

Government to postpone this act. This is i

the point on which I wish especially to lay ;

stress. Germany, notwithstanding all the ¥

protestations of the Chancellor, took not a

single step to make smooth the way of g

¥ peace.

§ So much for the ürst two points. Now we `

come to the third. ·

ï I had pointed out the extraordinary help- F

lessness with which Herr von Iagow met Q

the Russian formula given to Count Pourtales l

at 2 a.m. on july 30th. I asked why, even i

if this formula could not be accepted, they

ä did not at least use the fact that a formula

i' had been offered as a basis for further nego 1

tiations, and why they rejected it summarily ,

without even referring it to Austria. Glaukos

does not dispute the facts; he covers himself

E merely by a quotation from the American e g

book by Professor Stowell, a quotation which

’ does not in the least meet my point, for my

I point was not that this formula could have

2 heen accepted, but that it could be made

the basis for further discussion, and that 1,

i the prompt and almost diseourteous rejection,

l l