'saw no possibility of Austria's receding from any point laid down in her note to Servia, but believed that, if Servia would even then accept it, Austria would be satisfied, and if she had reason to think that such would be the advice of the powers to Servia, Austria might defer action. Servia, he thought, might be induced to accept the note in its entirety on the advice of the four powers invited to the conference and this would enable her to say that she had yielded to Europe and not to Austria-Hungary alone.' (Modified quotation, July 27, B. W. P. no. 57.)

When the British Government had learned, July 25 (B. W. P. no. 21), how conciliatory the Servian reply would be, it tried to use every means available to prevail upon Austria to accept it. The forecast of the reply was communicated to the German Ambassador, and Sir Edward Grey said that, 'if the Servian reply when received at Vienna corresponded to the forecast, he hoped the German Government would feel able to take a favorable view of it.' (Modified quotation, July 25, B. W. P. no. 27.) This conversation was communicated to the British representatives at Berlin, Paris, and St. Petersburg, so that they might exert themselves to secure action along the same line. As soon as the substance of Sir Edward Grey's remarks had been communicated to Italy, July 28, the Marquis di San Giuliano immediately telegraphed the Italian representatives at Berlin and Vienna 'in precisely similar terms.' (Modified quotation, July 28, B. W. P. no. 63.) Sir Edward Grey probably expressed the opinion of the Entente Powers, and Italy as well, when he told the German Ambassador that, 'if Austria put the Servian reply aside as being worth nothing and marched into Servia, it meant that she was determined to crush Servia at all costs, being reckless of the consequences that might be involved. The Servian reply should, he said, at least be treated as a basis for discussion and pause.' (Modified quotation, July 27, B. W. P. no. 46.)

7. Austrian assurances

But 'Austria refused to accept any discussion on the basis of the Servian note' (modified quotation, July 29, B. W. P. no. 81; cf. B. W. P., Miscellaneous, no. 10, 1914, p. 2), and to all the efforts of the powers to induce her to postpone hostilities, she replied by defending the justness and necessity of her action, and by giving repeated assurances as to her designs. (Cf. G. W. B. exhibits 5; 10; A. R. B. no. 30.)

Count Berchtold, Austrian Minister for Foreign Affairs, told the Russian Chargé at Vienna, on July 24, that 'the Dual Monarchy entertained no thought of conquest of Servia. Austria would not, he said, claim Servian territory, but insisted merely that the action taken was meant to check effectively Serb intrigues. Impelled by force of circumstances, Austria must have a guaranty for the continuation of amicable relations with Servia. It was far from his purpose to bring about a change in the balance of power in the Balkans.' (Modified quotation, G. W. B. exhibit 3; cf. A. R. B. no. 18.)

The statements of the German representatives at the different capitals to the same effect had the double purpose of guaranteeing the Austrian promises and of indicating Germany's firm intention to back up her ally. At St. Petersburg the German Ambassador stated under instructions that Germany would be 'all the more able to support Russia's wish not to allow the integrity of the Servian Kingdom to be called into question, since Austria herself did not call this integrity into question.' (Modified quotation, July 26, G. W. B., Memorandum, p. 7.) July 27, the German Ambassador at Paris, Baron von Schoen, confirmed in writing his declaration of the day before, namely, 'that Austria had declared to Russia that she did not seek acquisitions and was not attacking the integrity of Servia.' (Modified quotation, July 27, R. O. P. no. 35; cf. A. R.

B. no. 32.) July 28, he stated that 'Austria would respect the integrity of Servia, but when asked whether her independence also would be respected, he gave no assurance.' (Modified quotation, July 28, B. W. P. no. 59.)

8. Austria declares war on Servia

In answer to all these efforts to persuade Austria directly and through Berlin, the Austrian Government replied, July 27, 'As peaceable means had been exhausted, the Austrian Government must at last appeal to force. They had not taken this decision without reluctance. Their action, which had no sort of aggressive tendency, could not be represented otherwise than as an act of self-defense. Also they thought that they would serve a European interest if they prevented Servia from being henceforth an element of general unrest, such as she had been for the last ten years.' (Modified quotation, July 27, B. W. P. no. 48; cf. R. O. P. no. 37.) July 28, Count Berchtold told the Russian Ambassador that 'the crisis had become so acute, and that public opinion had risen to such a pitch of excitement, that the Government, even if they wished it, could no longer recede or enter into any discussion about the terms of the Austro-Hungarian note.' (Modified quotation, July 28, B. W. P. no. 93; cf. B. W. P. no. 61.)

In a telegram to St. Petersburg Count Berchtold related how, 'in reply to the statement of the Russian Ambassador to the effect that Austria would not decrease, but rather increase, the undeniably hostile attitude of Servia by having recourse to warlike measures, he had given him some light on those relations existing between Austria and Servia which had made it inevitable for the former state to declare to her restless neighbor with the requisite emphasis, that, quite against her will and without any selfish motives, she was no longer willing to tolerate the continuance of a movement directed against herself and acquiesced in by the Servian Government. The

Austrian Minister added, moreover, that the behavior of Servia after receiving the Austrian note was not calculated to bring about a peaceful solution, since Servia, even before handing the Austrian Government her unsatisfactory answer, had ordered complete mobilization and had thus committed a hostile act against that Government; but that Austria, nevertheless, had waited three days. The Austrian Minister further remarked that the Servians had the day before opened hostilities against Austria on the Hungarian border, thereby making it impossible for Austria to continue her patient course with Servia, or bring about any thorough yet peaceable settlement of her difficulties with that country, — Austria could not, therefore, do otherwise than meet the Servian challenge in a manner befitting the dignity of the Monarchy.' (Modified quotation, July 28, A. R. B. no. 40.)

Previously, July 26, Austria had declared that the withdrawal of her Minister from Belgrade did not imply a declaration of war. (B. W. P. no. 35.)

But the German White Book (p. 6) states that, from the moment Austria broke off diplomatic relations with Servia, a state of war actually existed. It is perhaps more correct to say that at the expiration of the time limit of the ultimatum, and after the formal breaking-off of all negotiations, Austria might have considered herself at liberty to commence hostilities without further notice.1 There could have been no doubt as to this, had it not been for Austria's assurances 'that her note to Servia was not an ultimatum, but only a démarche 2 (inquiry) with a time limit at

1 A London cable of July 26, published in the New York Sun of July 27, 1914, declared that General Putnik, Servian Chief-of-Staff, was arrested in Hungary, July 25. He was traveling with his daughter in his private capacity on their return from a vacation.

2 A démarche in diplomatic parlance is a word very difficult to translate. It may mean an inquiry or a request for an explanation or answer in regard to a certain matter; it may likewise include a representation or mild protest made to any other Government. Sometimes it denotes simply action taken, i.e., proceedings or even procedure.

tached.' (B. W. P. no. 14.) It would appear that actual hostilities did follow the rupture of diplomatic relations. For the British Government publish in the White Paper a telegram, dated July 28, from their representative at Belgrade that 'two Servian steamers had been fired on and damaged and two Servian merchant vessels captured by a Hungarian monitor at Orsova.' (Modified quotation, July 28, B. W. P. no. 65.)

To avoid any doubt as to their compliance with the terms of Article I of the Hague Convention of October 18, 1907, Relative to the Opening of Hostilities,1 Austria delivered, on July 28, the following formal declaration of war against Servia, giving her reasons, as required by the Hague Convention: "In order to bring to an end the subversive intrigues originating from Belgrade and aimed at the territorial integrity of the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy, the Imperial and Royal Government delivered to the Royal Servian Government a note in which a series of demands were formulated, for the acceptance of which a delay of forty-eight hours was allowed the Royal Government. The Royal Servian Government not having answered this note in a satisfactory manner, the Imperial and Royal Government are obliged themselves to see to the safeguarding of their rights and interests, and for this purpose to have recourse to force of arms." (July 28, B. W. P. no. 50; cf. A. R. B. no. 37; S. B. B. no. 45.) Austria may also have intended by this course to pursue her favorite fait-accompli policy and to make still clearer to the powers that she would brook no mediation in her dispute with Servia.

The same day, the British Ambassador at Vienna reported to his Government that 'Austria-Hungary had addressed to Servia a formal declaration, according to Article I of the Convention of 18th of October, 1907, Relative to the Opening of Hostilities, and considered herself from 1 See Documents, post, chap. XIII.