This report was passed on by the Kaiser to Herr v. Tirpitz, the Secretary for the Navy, who not only expressed his approval of the project, but also recommended that the Imperial Chancellor, Herr v. Bethmann-Hollweg, who had succeeded Prince Bülow on July 14th should be kept informed of all that was done to bring about an understanding. The Chancellor, accordingly, was presented by the Kaiser himself with a copy of Ballin’s report. This was the correct thing to do, as it avoided a faux pas such as, during the chancellorship of Prince Bülow, had sometimes been made. Future developments, however, proved that this step deprived the whole action of its spontaneity, and its immediate effect was that the Secretary for the Navy was relieved of all responsibility in the matter. Ballin, in later days, summed up his views on this way of dealing with the subject by saying that if Herr v. Tirpitz had been left a free hand in the whole matter—if, for instance, he had conducted it as Imperial Chancellor—it would hardly have turned out a failure. The main object of the negotiations that Ballin had carried on was to ensure that a number of “experts and men of moderate views,” i.e. naval experts in the first instance, should join in conference in order to discuss how, without injury to their relative fighting efficiency, both countries could bring about a reduction of their naval armaments. This plan was so simple and so obviously right that, had it been carried out as a preliminary to something else, and had the attention of the experts been drawn to the enormous political importance of their decision, success would have been assured. The procedure, however, which the Chancellor adopted compelled him to combat the active opposition of the various departments involved even before a meeting of the naval experts could be arranged for, and this was a task which far exceeded the strength of Herr v. Bethmann-Hollweg, the most irresolute of all German chancellors, the man to whom Fate afterwards entrusted the most momentous decision which any German statesman has ever had to make.
An interview between Ballin and the Chancellor was followed up, with the consent of the latter, by an exchange of telegrams between Ballin and Sir Ernest Cassel. From these it became clear that official circles in London were favourably disposed towards the opening of discussions in accordance with the terms laid down in Ballin’s report, and Ballin approached the Chancellor with the request to let him know whether he should continue to work on the same lines as before, or whether the Chancellor would prefer a different method, by which he understood direct official negotiations. In a telegram to the Chancellor he explained that in his opinion Sir Ernest’s reference to the friendly disposition of official London implied that he was authorized to arrange the details about the intended meeting of experts. If, therefore, he went to England again, he would have to know what were the views and intentions of the Chancellor. The reply of the latter, dated August 11th, was as follows:
“Many thanks for your welcome telegram, which has found my closest attention. I shall send you further details as soon as I have interviewed the gentlemen concerned, which I intend to do to-morrow and during the next few days.”
This reply clearly showed that the Chancellor had made up his mind to deal with the matter along official lines and in conformity with his own ideas.
The subsequent course of events is indicated by a letter of the Chancellor to Ballin, dated August 21st, in which he says:
“I have to-day taken the official steps of which I told you. As Sir Ernest Goschen[2] and I have agreed to observe absolute secrecy in this matter, and as a statement of your friend to the British Government to the effect that I had undertaken an official démarche, might possibly be regarded as an indiscretion, I suggest that if you inform your friend at all, you should word your reply in such a way that this danger need not be feared.”
This letter shows, and later events have also proved, that the guiding spirits of Germany’s political destiny were unable to meet on such terms as expediency would dictate the overtures of a man like Sir Ernest Cassel, whose status and whose good intentions were beyond criticism. If, on receipt of this news, Sir Ernest, who had been working so hard for an understanding, was not entirely discouraged, it was no doubt due to the diplomatic skill with which Ballin—who was a master of this art, as of so many others—interpreted the Chancellor’s rebuff when communicating it to his friend.
That the latter’s account of British feeling towards Germany was perfectly unbiased, may also be inferred from another piece of news which reached Ballin about the same time from a British source, and which reads as follows:
“My only object in writing just now is to say that if there is any feeling in high quarters in your country favourable to coming to an understanding with this country concerning naval matters, I am quite satisfied from the inquiries I have made that the present would be an opportune time for approaching this question, and that the present Government of this country would be found entirely favourable to coming to such an arrangement.”
However, by that time, the matter was in the hands of the various departments, and they proved unable to make a success of it. Why they failed, and why the step which Herr v. Bethmann had taken with the British Ambassador produced no results, are questions which can only be answered by reference to the files of the Foreign Office.