Foreign Office. April 7, 1913.
ir,—In speaking to the Belgian' Minister to-day I said, speaking' unofficially, that it had been brought to my knowledge that there was apprehension in Belgium lest we should be the first to violate Belgian neutrality. I did not) think that this apore have come from a Bri THE NORTH-CA'NA 'LORALD.
205
The Belgian Minister informed Harbin, Jan. 24, British source which he could not|mans have made 100 prisoners.
of the landing of troops in Belgium by Great Britain in order to anticipate a possible despatch of German troops through Belgium to France, I said that I was cure that this Government would not be the first to violate the neutrality of Belgium, and I did not believe that any British Government would be the first to do s0, nor would opinion here ever approve of it. What we bad to consider. and it was a somewhat embarrassing question, was what it would be desirable and necessary for us, as one of the guarantors of Belgian neutrality, to do if Belgian neutrality was violated by any Power. For us to be the first to violate it and to send troops into Belgium would be to give Germany, for instance, justification for sending troops into Belgium also. What we desired in th: case of Belgium, as in that of other neutral countries, was that their neutrality should be respected, and as long as it was not violated by any other Power we should certainly not send troops ourselves into their territory.
Tam, ete.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.