D O C U M E N T 2 2 2 J U N E 1 9 2 2 3 3 9 TLS. [43 515]. The letter is addressed “Herrn Professor Albert Einstein.” There are perforations for a loose-leaf binder at the left margin of the document. [1]For Einstein’s account of his conversation with Aulard in Paris, see Doc. 170. [2]The public controversy between Delbrück and Aulard began in early 1922 following Delbrück’s refusal to sign a joint manifesto “for democracy and peace” by the Ligue française pour la défense des droits de l’homme et du citoyen and the Bund “Neues Vaterland,” which declared that “Germany should acknowledge not only a legal but also a moral obligation that it had to redress the damage caused by its attack against France” (“Deutschland solle nicht nur als eine juristische, sondern als eine moralische Pflicht anerkennen, daß es den Schaden gutmachen müsse, welcher durch seinen Angriff gegen Frankreich entstanden sei” Mitteilungsblatt der Arbeitsausschusses deutscher Verbände [1. Aprilheft 1922], 2, 7, p. 1). In his article of 25 May, Delbrück responded to Aulard’s article in Dépeche de Toulouse of 15 April and discussed various issues related to the question of who was responsible for the outbreak of World War I (see Berliner Tageblatt, 25 May 1922, Morning Edition). In an addendum, Delbrück also responded to Aulard’s article in Revue de Paris of 1 May, in which Aulard had insisted that the dispatch of 31 July 1914 from the German chancellor to the German ambassador in Paris, Wilhelm von Schoen (1886–1960), in which he instructed Schoen to ask the French to remain neutral if Ger- many and Russia went to war, was a forgery. In his addendum, Delbrück presented evidence belying Aulard’s claim (see Berliner Tageblatt, 28 May 1922, Morning Edition). [3]Von Schoen’s article, “Die französische Revanchepolitik,” was published in 1923 in Ziegler 1923, pp. 16–29. He essentially argues that the nationalist revanchist attitudes and actions of Ray- mond Poíncaré and of his newly appointed ministers and ambassadors were substiantially responsible for creating a belligerent atmosphere that facilitated, if not ushered, the outbreak of war. [4]Victor Basch (1863–1944) was Professor of German Studies and Philosophy at the Sorbonne and a member of the Ligue française pour la défense des droits de l’homme et du citoyen. [5]Raymond Poincaré (1860–1934), Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs of France. [6]Gerlach had protested against the acquittal of Nikolaus Cossmann, the editor of the Süddeutsche Monatshefte, who had been accused of slander by Felix Fechenbach, the former secretary of revolu- tionary leader Kurt Eisner, over his role in the alleged forgery of a central document pertaining to the “war guilt” of the German government in World War I (see Die Welt am Montag, 15 May 1922, and Geyer 1998, pp. 291–292). In reaction, Delbrück accused Gerlach of writing an article “whose factual claims were for all intents and purposes utterly untrue” (“an dessen tatsächlichen Behauptungen sozusagen kein wahres Wort war” see Delbrück1922 ). [7]The meeting that Einstein was to address on 11 June (see Doc. 218). [8]Otto Lehmann-Russbüldt. [9]This passage is in Delbrück’s hand. 222. From Henry S. Hatfield[1] Berlin. Kurfürstenstr 124, 7 Juni 1922 Hoch verehrter Herr Professor! Auf Dr. Freundlichs Ermunterung[2] wage ich es, Ihnen beiliegende Beschrei- bung einiger Gedanken über Kristall-Struktur zuzusenden, mit der Bitte um Ihre Urteil, ob Sinn oder Unsinn vorliegt. Ich bin leider mathematisch so schlecht ge- schult dass ich nicht in der Lage bin, die Grundhypothese auf ihre Richtigkeit streng zu prüfen aber wenn Sie meinen, dass die Ideen wertvoll und neu sind, so werde ich trachten, weiter zu kommen.
Previous Page Next Page