SOME QUESTIONS ANSWERED AS TO THE CAUSES OF THE WAR
The questions uppermost in the minds of many people are: "How will the war end? When will it end? Who is in the right? and Who is in the wrong?"
Since our country has declared neutrality, there is only one thing for every sensible American to do—to have sympathy for every man who has been called to the front, and for every family left worrying and in want at home.
There are a number of questions that enter into this war. Foremost among these is militarism. There is not a country at war today that believes that a government is made for its people, their theory being that a people belongs to its government. Therefore it is the interest of the country, not the interest of the individual, that counts. This idea is part and parcel of the old feudal form of government, where there were a few mighty feudal lords and many vassals or dependents. These dependents lived on the estates of their lords and got their sustenance from them. In turn they had to swear life and death allegiance to their lords, fight for them in times of danger, accompany them on crusades and amuse them in time of peace in jousts and tournaments.
Though feudalism as a form of government is no longer fashionable, it still survives in spirit. Thousands of men are employed in Europe in different ways by their governments or by their monarchs, and they are in honor bound to fight for these kings and princes. In times of danger, these men are employed on railroads belonging to the government, working in palaces or on royal estates, or in the army. There are many old towns in Europe where you see feudal palaces perched on high hills or overhanging crags. These were protected by drawbridges, moats or great encircling walls. All that remain of their past glory are the deserted ruins, mouldered walls and drawbridges, but the spirit of these feudal rulers still remains. They now live in capitals in the winter and on lovely estates in the summer. They have from five to twenty estates apiece. Many of these places are only used a few weeks out of the year. Their permanent residences are adorned with priceless furniture, tapestries and ornaments. These are kept up by a retinue of servants, while even those that are occupied for a short time call for plenty of care and expense for their maintenance.
Hard though it is to believe, there are palaces that have been twenty years in the process of building and are still not completed. When a new monarch comes to the throne it is not unusual to have his palace refurnished from top to bottom. Entertaining at these courts means a great expenditure of money, for their china-closets are crowded with priceless china, finest glass, silver and gold service for all occasions. Though the menus planned for any of these state affairs are costly, the great extravagance comes in the fine wine-cellars, rare fruits, and the hot-house flowers used for decorations. I have walked over royal estates for a half-day without reaching their limit. The place included summer houses, pagodas, alleys, private promenades, stables and carriage-houses.
More than one royal stable in Europe has more than two hundred royal carriages. Among these are coronation coaches, state coaches, funeral coaches, guest coaches and private coaches. The finest of these are lacquered with silver and gold, while the harnesses and whips are made of real silver and gold. The private carriages include landaus, victorias, and a great number of fine automobiles. Many of these are used only a year or two, and then are sold or exchanged for others.
Even more splendid are the stables, which include fine horses and beautiful ponies gathered from many parts of Europe and the Orient. The caring of these horses involves much work and cost. I have seen as many as a hundred men at work caring for one of these royal stables. Some of these horses have rare pedigrees and need excellent care. They are not used on all occasions—some are kept for state functions, others for private use, and still others for military practice.
A court is not complete without handsome coronation jewels to be worn at coronations and great state balls. These include priceless crowns studded with diamonds, pearls, sapphires; vieing with these are ropes of pearls, pearl and diamond rings, high orders set with diamonds, rubies and emeralds, and gold swords with hilts set with brilliants and rubies.
A country might have all these things, and still she would be lacking in dignity unless she had her own royal guard. These stand watch day and night to guard the palace, and to change guards is accompanied with so much ceremony that it often takes an hour's time. If it takes a royal guard of nearly a thousand men to protect a palace, it requires a good-sized standing army and navy to protect any of these royal countries. The newest of these countries can boast that her army is not an integral part of her government. Even France, which is a republic in name, is a military form of government; it is the army and the army man that has the last word to say.
A part of this royal system of government is colonization. Just as Spain counted her power and wealth in her colonies, so do most of the other European powers do so today. England gets much of her strength and wealth from her colonies—they work for her, give her men in times of danger, and permit her to control the channel with courage and boats. Her imperialism gave her the courage to tell us that she claimed certain rights to the Panama Canal because of the Hay-Pauncefote treaty. Though India and Canada have brought her much wealth and strength, many say that she has looked upon Java, Holland's rich possession, with an envious eye, while much of her friendship for France is based on her African possessions.
Though France has not an enormous population, she always speaks of her need of more territory which she has found in Morocco, while even the smaller countries, such as Belgium and Holland, have valued their colonies as their greatest prize.
Germany is the last of the great powers to look for colonies. This she has done because she found her own territory too small for her growing population. After looking about carefully, she found out the easiest way to enlarge her territory was to get more control in Africa. The question was finally settled when France gave her a small part of the Congo. This was done almost at the price of the sword and the bayonet, and France and England then decided that they would cry halt if Germany tried for any other extension of territory in Africa. At the same time France had not forgotten that she had given Alsace-Lorraine to Germany by the treaty of 1871, and she hoped to get it back again some time in the future.
Russia and Austria had not been friends for many years, and Germany increased this feeling for herself when she made an alliance with Austria in 1879. Russia had always looked upon Austria as her chief enemy, and she was greatly irritated by Germany's alliance. Russia thought by joining hands with France she would offset the power of Germany and Austria. The Triple Entente thus faced the Triple Alliance.
England, isolated from the continent of Europe, was not worried by the triple alliance until she saw Germany spring up as a great commercial nation. She looked upon Germany as her chief commercial rival, for she saw the trade-mark "Made in England" gradually being supplanted by that "Made in Germany."
English merchants managed to tolerate German merchants in the markets of Europe, but when England saw that Germany was beginning to build up a strong sea-power, she was determined to offset her by courting the dual alliance of France and Russia. The terms of her agreement with these two powers have never been published, but it was probably arranged that if Russia or France should ever get in any serious difficulty, England would mediate for them. This was to be a protection to England, and a check to Germany on the one side and the Balkan states on the other. For Servia had not forgotten that Austria had annexed Bosnia and Herzegovnia in 1908. By stepping forward in the list against Austria, Servia became, as it were, a protector to the Balkans, and a thorn in the side of Austria. She did this because Bosnia is inhabited by people of Serb speech. Russia, while acting as a protector of Servia, saw the advantage of using Servia as a cat's-paw. The murder of the Austrian prince and princess by the Servian government, backed by Russian influence, was merely the match that set the powers of Europe fighting together. Whether the conflagration should spread beyond Servia depended on Austria and Russia's attitude. Austria hoped to confine the fight to Servia, while Russia showed her warlike attitude by mobilization. In mobilizing, Russia showed a hostile attitude toward Austria and Germany. After the Russian general mobilization became known in Germany, the imperial ambassador at St. Petersburg was instructed, on the 31st of July, to explain to the Russian government that Germany declared the state of war as counter-measure against the general mobilization of the Russian army and navy, which must be followed by mobilization if Russia did not cease its military measures against Germany and Austria-Hungary within twelve hours, and notified Germany thereof.
As the time then given to Russia had expired without the receipt of reply to the Emperor's inquiry, the Emperor ordered the mobilization of the entire army and navy on August the first at five p. m. The German ambassador at St. Petersburg was instructed that in the event of the Russian government not giving a satisfactory reply within the stated time, he should declare that Germany considered itself in a state of war after a refusal of her demands. However, a confirmation of the execution of this order had been received, Russian troops crossed the frontier, and marched into German territory. A few hours later France mobilized, and the next day opened hostilities.
There were still hopes that England would come to the fore and settle the dispute. She said that she would remain neutral, providing Germany did not touch French coast, Russian coast, and respected the neutrality of Belgium. But Germany did not see how to make this promise and still meet her two formidable enemies, and thus a world-war began.
Just as it will take time to say who will be the winner and who the loser by this war, so it will take time to say who was responsible for this condition. For nations as well as for individuals, supremacy becomes mere madness when it is gained by guns and battleships. This bellicose system may once have been popular when piracy and feudalism prevailed, but this military peace, which trembles and rumbles all the time, forewarns earthquakes.
It was an American who made the peace palace a reality. It must be America again who will make eternal peace more than a promise. When the time comes for the stopping of this awful carnage and bloodshed, America must insist that every nation in the world shall lay down her arms and that they shall change their men-of-war into merchant marines for the benefit of mankind. This is the fulfillment of the building of the Panama Canal.