763.72119/308½
The Ambassador in Italy (Page) to the Secretary of State
[Received January 17, 1917.]
My Dear Mr. Secretary: Matters seem to be moving so in these days that it is difficult to keep up with them, and it would be unwise to prognosticate anything. As you know, the President’s circular note to the belligerents60 created here as elsewhere a great sensation, and still makes a strong impression not only on the public mind but on the minds of the men in the government. The very first reception was one of questioning, then came within twenty-four hours a mass [Page 743] of curiously vehement criticism—so vehement in fact that it had a tone of insincerity—and I feel sure that it was responsive to a cue given the press. I have just written the President a letter giving an account of my interview with the Minister of Foreign Affairs who is I think the ablest man in the Government and has the gift of calmness—not the commonest gift here. I have a conviction that the criticism of the note was first for home consumption—to prevent the opposition, which is secretly stronger than it appears, from running away with the situation; and secondly, was for the Allies. In fact, I tend to believe that the reception accorded the note was by concert among the Allies—all of whom having just passed through Ministerial crises or peril of such, felt it necessary to withhold from their people any belief that peace is possible in the present situation. The Italian criticism followed almost exactly the French criticism. Along with the attack on the President’s note went reports of desperate conditions in Germany and Austria-Hungary. The British here are always talking of this—and I think delude themselves and thereby hurt themselves. I cannot however get out of my mind the impression that this last note, whether sent at the right time or not according to the views here, was timely enough to serve—and that it marks the beginning of a movement that will bring peace eventually if it be followed up.
The day the note came—the 20th.—I tried again and again to get an appointment with the Minister of Foreign Affairs, but he was at the Chamber that day and at seven o’clock I called without avail to see if I could not get a chance to see him. And as I could not do so I saw his chief Secretary and told him that I had a very important document and would call next morning at ten. When I saw Sonnino next morning he undoubtedly felt the importance of the note, though he thought the moment unpropitious for its success. I however left no doubt on his mind as to the earnestness behind it—and it still continues the chief subject of discussion here. The vehement criticism of it is probably due as I say to apprehension that the opposition might use it as a weapon against the Government. A short time back there was quite a recrudescence of the Giolitti opposition. The violence has, however, begun to show signs of having spent itself and I have thought it timely to bring attention back to the note itself from the mass of adverse criticism directed against it, and so I have just given out a statement calling attention to several glaring errors in the criticism—especially that which has stated that the note assumed that both sides are fighting for the same objects—naturally, I expressed no opinion myself but simply asked that the note be taken and read itself and judged on its own merits. I think that it is known by the thinking that the note must [Page 744] bring the result it was intended to bring—though the time when that result comes may be somewhat deferred. Privately men tell me that it was just what ought to have been done—so we will have to wait and see. The Czar’s address just out is thought by those I have talked with to mean that Russia feels it necessary to show activity in order to get Constantinople. It also outlines what Russia is fighting for.
I am sending and would like the President to see a short paper which I wrote over a month ago and came near sending before.61 You will see if you care to look at it that my reasoning led me to conclusions not unlike those which you must have reached about the same time. The term “a just and durable peace” has a certain effect here and may well be emphasized.
Believe me [etc.]
- Foreign Relations, 1916, supp., p. 97.↩
- Not printed.↩