chose, the pressure of a few newspapers. He pointed out that the days of Pan-Slav agitation in Russia were over, and that Moscow was perfectly quiet. The Russian Minister for Foreign Affairs would not, he thought, be so imprudent as to take a step which would probably result in many frontier questions in which Russia was interested, such as the Swedish, Polish, Ruthene, Rumanian, and Persian questions being brought into the melting-pot. France, too, was not at all in a condition for facing a war.' (Modified quotation, July 25, B. W. P. no. 32.)

Similarly, the German Under-Secretary of State, learning from St. Petersburg that Russia would not remain indifferent 'if Austria annexed bits of Servian territory,' drew the conclusion 'that Russia would not act if Austria did not annex territory.' (Modified quotation, July 26, B. W. P. no. 33.)

The German Memorandum admits, however, that 'Germany was fully aware in this connection that warlike moves on the part of Austria-Hungary against Servia would bring Russia into the question and might draw Germany into a war in accordance with her duty as Austria's ally.' (Modified quotation, G. W. B. p. 4.)

The Marquis di San Giuliano had previously, in a conversation with the French representative at Rome, said that 'unfortunately in this whole affair it had been and still was the conviction of Austria and Germany that Russia would not move. In this connection he read a dispatch from the Italian representative at Berlin reporting an interview he had had that day with the German Secretary for Foreign Affairs, in which the latter again repeated that he did not believe Russia would move, basing his belief on the fact that the Russian Government had only just sent an agent to Berlin to arrange about certain financial matters. Furthermore, the Austrian Ambassador in Berlin had told his English colleague that he did not believe in a general war, Russia being in neither a mood nor a condition

to make war. The Italian Minister for Foreign Affairs did not share this opinion, but considered that if Austria confined her action to humiliating Servia and to exacting in addition to the acceptance of the note, certain material advantages not affecting Servia's territorial integrity, Russia would still be able to find ground for a settlement with her. If, however, Austria wished either to dismember Servia or destroy her position as an independent state, he thought it impossible for Russia not to intervene with armed force.' (Modified quotation, July 29, F. Y. B. no. 96.)

Public opinion in Austria well understood Russia's attitude, for during the orderly patriotic demonstrations which followed the news of the rejection of the Servian reply, 'one or two attempts to make hostile manifestations against the Russian Embassy were frustrated by the strong guard of police which held the approaches to the principal embassies during those days' (modified quotation, B. W. P., Miscellaneous, no. 10, 1914), and in Berlin 'after the reception of the news of the mobilization of the Austrian army against Servia, a large crowd, composed, according to the newspapers, partly of Austrians, indulged in a series of noisy manifestations in favor of Austria. At a late hour in the evening the demonstrators gathered several times in front of the Russian Embassy, uttering cries against Russia. The police were practically absent and took no steps.' (Modified quotation, July 26, R. O. P. no. 30.)

'At St. Petersburg, M. Sazonof, Minister for Foreign Affairs, begged the German Ambassador to point out the danger of the situation to his Government. He refrained, however, from alluding to the step which Russia would doubtless be led to take if the independence or territorial integrity of Servia should be threatened. The evasive replies and recriminations of the German Ambassador made an unfavorable impression upon M. Sazonof, who nevertheless gave evidence of his moderation when he re

marked to the French Ambassador that they must avoid everything which might precipitate the crisis, and that, even if the Austro-Hungarian Government should proceed to action against Servia, they ought not to break off negotiations.' (Modified quotation, July 25, F. Y. B. no. 38.)

July 27, the French Ambassador at St. Petersburg informed his Government: "M. Sazonof has used conciliatory language to all my colleagues. In spite of public feeling the Russian Government is endeavoring with success to restrain the press. Great moderation in particular has been recommended toward Germany." (Extract, July 27, F. Y. B. no. 64.)

The Russian Ambassador at Vienna was instructed to point out to Count Berchtold 'how desirable it would be to find a solution which, while consolidating the good relations between Austria-Hungary and Russia, should give to the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy serious guaranties for its future relations with Servia.' (Modified quotation, July 28, R. O. P. no. 45; cf. F. Y. B. no. 18.)

The German Ambassador at St. Petersburg reported that M. Sazonof in a previous interview (July 26) with the Austrian Ambassador had been visibly calmed by the latter's assurance that 'Austria Hungary was planning no conquests, and simply wished to secure peace at last on her frontiers.' (Modified quotation, July 26, G. W. B. exhibit 5.)

These extracts show that Russia was ready to acquiesce in some plan by which Austria might be relieved of the constant menace to her security resulting from the PanSerb propaganda. But when the Austrian Government was unwilling to discuss with the other powers the conditions of the settlement of her difference with Servia, M. Sazonof felt that Russia must prepare to insist that she be heard.

2. Russia believes Austria's action is directed against herself Russia employed all her efforts to obtain a pacific issue which would be acceptable to Austria, and satisfy her amour-propre as a great power. (August 2, R. O. P. no. 77.)

St. Petersburg considered that 'Austria's action was in reality directed against Russia. She aimed at overthrowing the present status quo in the Balkans and establishing her own hegemony there.' (Modified quotation, July 25, B. W. P. no. 17; cf. F. Y. B. no. 65; B. W. P. nos. 90, 91; R. O. P. no. 75.) Russia seemed to be justified in this view by the terms of the ultimatum and Austria's refusal to modify them, as well as by the hostile demonstrations before the Russian Embassies in Vienna and Berlin.1 (July 26, R. O. P. no. 25.) Austrian and German expressions of opinion that 'Russia neither wanted nor was in a position to make war' (modified quotation, July 29, B. W. P. no. 71; cf. F. Y. B. no. 96) confirm this impression.

The attitude of the Russian Minister for Foreign Affairs is indicated in the following report which Count Szapary, Austrian Ambassador at St. Petersburg, sent to Count Berchtold on July 27: "Have just had a long interview with M. Sazonof. I told the Minister that I had received the impression that there was misunderstanding in Russia regarding the nature of our action, that we were accused of wishing to undertake an advance in the Bal

666

This is indicated by the following extract from a cable dispatch of July 25 from Berlin to the New York Sun, July 26: Down with Russia,' resounds to-night in Unter den Linden, where vast throngs of excited thousands are moving from the Imperial Palace down past the Brandenburger Gate to the famous Avenue of Victory, around the column of Victory, which is largely composed of French cannon captured in 1870. This is faced by huge statues of Prince Bismarck, Field Marshal von Moltke, and Field Marshal von Roon. The immense crowds are singing the 'Watch on the Rhine,' 'Deutschland Ueber Alles,' and the German and Austrian national hymns. In front of the Russian Embassy on Unter den Linden there are constant shouts of 'Down with Russia!' while across the street and almost opposite there are jeers at the French Embassy. The police are trying to keep the crowds constantly moving."

kans, and a march to Saloniki or even Constantinople. Others, I added, went so far as to see in our action the beginning of a preventive war against Russia. I said all this was a mistake, nay, absurd in part; that the purpose of our action was self-preservation and self-defense against a hostile propaganda of words, writings, and deeds which was threatening our national integrity. I said that nobody in Austria-Hungary thought of threatening Russian interests or even of picking quarrels with Russia, but that we were absolutely resolved to achieve the goal which we had set ourselves and that the road we had chosen seemed to us the best. I added that as it was a matter of self-defense, however, I would not attempt to conceal from him that we could not allow ourselves to be turned aside by any consideration of the consequences, no matter what they might be. M. Sazonof agreed with me. He considered that our purpose, such as I had explained it to him, was perfectly legitimate, but it was his opinion that the way we had chosen to achieve it was not the safest; that the note which we had sent was not happy in its form. He said that he had studied it meanwhile, and that if I had time he wished to go through it again with me. I remarked that I was at his disposal, but was not authorized either to discuss the text of the note with him nor to interpret it; that, however, his remarks would be naturally of interest. The Minister then took up all the points of the note, and found to-day that seven out of the ten might be accepted without great difficulty and that only the two points dealing with the participation of Austro-Hungarian officials in Servia and that which dealt with the dismissal of officers and officials to be named by us were unacceptable in their present form. As to the first two points, I was in a position to give an authentic interpretation of them, in the light of Your Excellency's telegram of the 25th inst.; as to the third, I expressed the opinion that it was a necessary demand;