BELGIUM AND GERMANY.

Globe, Volume IV, Issue 325, 28 June 1875, Page 3

BELGIUM AND GERMANY.

The German Government has sent a second note to Belgium. In the Belgium Chamber on the 16th April there was a \ ery full attendance to hear the expected ministerial statement relative to the first German note and the reply. All the members of the Diplomatic body were present. The Foreign Minister read both the German note of the 3rd of February and the Belgian answer of the 24th of February, and added—“ I intended when the interpellation was addressed to the Government to explain them in a still more precise manner, but we received only last evening the answer of the Berlin Government to the Belgian note of the 26th of February, We shall examine conscientiously this new communication, and when our reply shall have been prepared and sent we shall lay these documents before you We must therefore postpone for a short time the explanations which we intended to give to-day.” The Minister requested the House not to discuss the subject at present, and after M. Dumortier, who had raised the

the question, had thanked the Minister, the matter dropped.

This second note, of which a full summary has appeared in the Cologne Gazette , is dated April 15th. It says that the consideration of the question how each State is to fulfil its international duty of protecting the subjects of neighboring States from disturbances of their domestic peace fomented on its territory and avert injury to its national relations does not interest Belgium alone, but in an equal degree all States which make it their task to cultivate the general peace and good neighborly relations. “ The present time is no longer suitable, as may have been the past, for exclusively adhering to individual sovereignty in dealing with international obligations. The note points to the interwoven character and sensible reciprocal action of the present means of intercourse, the soliditary of interests which had grown up with this state of things, and the proportionate increase of the power of action of the elements hostile to the existence of peace. All this is true to an extent which it was not possible to foresee a generation back. The note draws from these arguments the conclusion that no State can remain free from the reaction of such disturbances of regular regulations. If the adoption of preventives meet with manifold difficulties, a friendly exchange of views may facilitate the task, as has already happened, in a friendly way, through the public discussion brought about by the preceding consideration of the subject. By this very means the attention of the Imperial authorities in Germany has been drawn to the defects in the laws of that country, similar to those existing in Belgium, as regards the protection of other States against enterprises undertaken by German subjects, and the Imperial Chancellor has lost no time in calling upon the authorities of the Empire to consider by what legislative provisions it is possible to procure protection for foreign countries, and for the internal peace of neighbouring States against possible future disturbances. The note expresses a wish that Belgium will follow this example, and “ thereby give a fresh proof of the value which she attaches, as repeatedly expressed by her, to the maintenance of good relations with the German Empire.” The note gives an emphatic denial to the misrepresentation conveyed by the newspapers that the German Government was aiming against the freedom of the press in Belgium. It was not sought to interfere at all in Belgium’s internal affairs, but to prevent foreign intervention in the internal affairs of Germany. It is stated in a Berlin telegram that this note, like the former one, was communicated by the Berlin Government to the Powers guaranteeing the neutrality of Belgium, and that "it is believed that the Imperial Chancellor is desirous that the guaranteeing Powers should effect reforms in their laws similar to those contemplated by the Imperial Government for remedying the defects of German legislation.” It was reported that Austria and Russia had supported the representations made by Germany to Belgium, but this has been contradicted. In the Belgian Chamber M. Jottrand and M. Bara, ex-Minister of Justice, attacked the Government for having ordered military honors to be paid to the Archbishop of Malines on the occasion of his entry into Malines after his appointment as Cardinal. M, Jottrand argued that by doing so the Government would be unable to maintain that the Archbishops were not public functionaries, and would place itself in a difficult position towards Germany. In reply, the Minister of War contended that he had only acted according to law and precedent. In reference to the Duchesne’ affair a Brussels telegram of Thursday says: —The Judge of Instruction has examined Duchesne three times. He persists in his refusal to name the person who dictated the letter which he addressed to the Archbishop of Paris offering to assassinate Prince Bismarck. Eleven witnesses have been summoned to give evidence.