763.72/12807
The Minister in the Netherlands ( Garrett ) to the Acting Secretary of State
[Received February 19, 1919.]
Sir: The Queen’s invitation to President Wilson to visit Holland on his trip through Europe has been in general most favorably commented on, and the President’s postponement of a definite reply has aroused the hope that he may yet find his way to spend a few days in the Netherlands. The Queen herself is deeply interested in the project, and on December 26th summoned me in special audience to [Page 81] make sure that she was not mistaken in awaiting a further reply from the President before taking any new action or sending another telegram. She had determined to regard in a favorable light his indefinite message, and was seriously considering the form his visit should assume. She declared that in her democratic country she was wont to consult the wishes of her subjects, and would do so on this occasion too, as they joined with her in wishing to welcome President Wilson.
Two days later Mr. J. B. Kan, the Secretary General in General Service, and right hand man of the Premier, called at the Legation, and read to me, for my information, a tentative program of the visit, though he was unwilling to leave a copy. He stated that it had been drawn up by Her Majesty in person, and consisted of the arrival at Amsterdam, which is the capital of the country in distinction to The Hague which is merely the Queens Residence and Seat of Government, a drive through the city, the reception of delegates either inside the Palace or outside, a gala dinner; the following day a visit to the University of Leiden, the oldest of Dutch universities, then a trip to The Hague, a reception by the two houses of the States General in the Binnenhof, closing with a possible visit to the Peace Palace.
In connection with the possibility of the President’s visit two extremely interesting articles appeared on December 27th and 28th in the Handelsblad, the powerful organ of the commercial world, raising the point of whether Holland had violated her neutrality in inviting to her territory in time of war the head of a belligerent nation who was constitutionally vested with the supreme command of land and sea forces. In view of this invitation, the paper reached the conclusion that, discounting the political aspect of the case, the admission of the former German Emperor sank to a position of secondary significance. It declared unjustified the reproaches from the Entente press to the effect that Dutch hospitality to the Kaiser was inspired by a spirit of friendliness toward Germany, and pointed out what it termed the glaring contrast between the attitude of the Government toward the Kaiser and that toward the President.
This comparison, however, was expressed so negatively as to convey the impression that should the President accept the Queen’s invitation, America would thereby lose her moral right to protest at the Kaiser’s presence in Holland. Aside from these two articles, this aspect of the case has been studiously avoided in the press.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
The question of whether or no the Kaiser was invited directly or indirectly by the Dutch Government to seek refuge on Netherlands soil is still unsettled, and the statements of the Ministers in reply to questions on the point have been most equivocal. A new element in the [Page 82] case was brought up on the 28th by Professor van Hamel, a warm friend and admirer of the Entente, in de Amsterdammer; according to his article, the Dutch sergeant who was guarding the frontier at the point where the Kaiser crossed, made the following statement:
“When on the morning of the 10th of November the 8 or 9 motor cars stopped at the frontier, a Captain or a Lieutenant-Colonel stepped out of the first car and said, when I refused to allow the Kaiser and his suite to pass, ‘You can safely do this, your Government is fully acquainted.’
“When I continued to oppose yet further objections, still other German officers stepped out of their cars, among them a very tall thin man, the only one who wore a broad silver band on his cap. This officer also said to me, ‘The Dutch Government knows everything about this,’ or at any rate words to this effect. The Kaiser himself, I believe, did not put in an appearance. Whether or no they told the same story to the officer who had in the meantime been called from Maastricht, I do not know.”
Thereupon the editorial continues:
“Probably light can be thrown upon this from Amerongen! If those accompanying the ex-Kaiser did not hesitate, in their haste to flee to Dutch territory, to lie to Dutch soldiers and to compromise the Dutch Government, then such action is surely worthy of an apology. If they were able to obtain admission with their Princely burden by means of cunning pretexts, then the matter is still worse and the presence of the ex-Kaiser here would have been forced upon the country by deceitful means.”
In the States General, too, there has been some attempt to criticise the
action of the Government. In particular Mr. van Emden put the following
series of questions to the Ministers of Justice and Foreign Affairs:
As yet these questions remain unanswered, but in connection therewith it is of interest to call attention to the private conversation between Mr. Heemskerk, the Minister of Justice, and Mr. Stiles, correspondent of the Chicago Daily News, which was reported in my telegram number 5565 of December 24, 7 p.m.7 In the course of this the [Page 83] former declared that should the Allies demand the delivery of the Emperor he favored bringing him for examination before the tribunal at Utrecht, in whose jurisdiction Amerongen lay, after which he could make a definite decision on the matter for the Government. He added that the present Dutch Commission is only formed to advise him on the legal aspects of the situation.
It is difficult to judge just what is the precise attitude of the people at large towards the presence of the Kaiser. Whereas at first all papers united in stating that he had as much right to Dutch hospitality as the most humble French or Belgian poilu, there has of late been apparent an undertone of irritation at his presence which is seemingly gaining in extent. The rumors are persistent despite denials that it has been unofficially hinted to him that the Government would be relieved of embarrassment were he voluntarily to leave Holland. Whatever may be the truth of the matter, the Government’s attitude is summed up in the words of the Premier that it would have been better pleased if circumstances had led to his not having sought refuge here.
The German Legation at The Hague has openly and without reservation accepted the new order. The days following the flight of the Emperor were spent in burning papers, whose ashes fell in profusion on the porches of the Belgian Legation, a house or two away. The sign on the Chancery door “Kanzlei der Kaiserliche Gesandschaft” was painted out, and after a few weeks a new sign was added “Kanzlei der Deutsche Gesandschaft”. The attitude apparently adopted by the members of the Legation is one of social defiance; they appear in public places, and dine, wine and dance together quite as if they ignored the fact that they are a defeated nation and that their country is being wracked by revolution if not by actual internecine war.
The position of the German Legation has been impaired yet further by the publication of the reported arrest of three telegraph operators accused of pilfering, in order to deliver to it, the telegrams of the Entente Legations at The Hague to their Governments. This had apparently been going on since September with a short interlude during the Dutch revolutionary outbreaks in November. The central detective office at Utrecht noticed that important parts of the vouchers leaving The Hague were cut, and after investigation discovered that these copies were carried by courier from Amsterdam to The Hague where they came into the hands of the German Legation through an intermediary. The courier was arrested and furnished all possible information at the Head Office as a result of which the three arrests were made.
In the matter of Holland’s Foreign relations, the first event to be chronicled is the decision of Mr. van Karnebeek to name as successor to Jhr. Beelaerts van Blokland, the recalled Minister to Pekin, Mr. W. J. Oudendijk, former Minister to Russia. The rumors of this [Page 84] selection, which was confirmed by the Minister for Foreign Affairs to my French colleague, have already spread abroad, and been favorably commented on. Among so many of the Dutch diplomats, who stand convicted of pro-German sentiments, Mr. Oudendijk is conspicuous as a shining exception. He is now staying in London, having but recently returned from Petrograd where as Dutch representative in Bolshevik Russia he won the confidence of the Entente powers by his courageous action on behalf of Allied citizens. As one paper expressed it, he is expected to “wipe out some of the black spots which have been made on Holland’s reputation owing to the unneutral actions of many of the Ministers.”
Dutch-Belgian relations have undergone a marked improvement. As much space is devoted to the questions as formerly, but the earlier acrimonious spirit is softening. The question is almost on the point of becoming academic, and the reassuring voices of the statesmen are being listened to once more. Whether this is but a lull in the storm it is impossible to judge, but all indications would point to a concerted and successful effort of both Governments to put a stop to the unreasoning agitations of the Press.
Of the recent correspondence of the Associated Governments protesting against the passage of German troops through Limburg and demanding compensatory privileges therefor, and of the comments of the Dutch Press on President Wilson’s trip to Europe, I purpose to inform the Department in separate despatches.
I have [etc.]
- Not printed.↩