The Project Gutenberg eBook of Bismarck: some secret pages of his
history, Volume II (of 3), by Moritz Busch
This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and
most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions
whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms
of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at
www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you
will have to check the laws of the country where you are located before
using this eBook.
Title: Bismarck: some secret pages of his history, Volume II (of 3)
Author: Moritz Busch
Release Date: June 8, 2023 [eBook #70943]
Language: English
Credits: Tim Lindell, Bryan Ness, Neil Mercer and the Online Distributed
Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net (This file was
produced from images generously made available by The Internet
Archive/American Libraries.)
*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK BISMARCK: SOME SECRET PAGES
OF HIS HISTORY, VOLUME II (OF 3) ***
Transcriber's note: Italic font is indicated by _underscores_.
Bolded words are indicated by =equals=.
BISMARCK
SOME SECRET PAGES OF HIS HISTORY
[Illustration]
BISMARCK
SOME SECRET PAGES OF HIS HISTORY
BEING A DIARY KEPT BY
DR. MORITZ BUSCH
DURING TWENTY-FIVE YEARS’ OFFICIAL AND PRIVATE
INTERCOURSE WITH THE GREAT CHANCELLOR
_IN THREE VOLUMES_
VOL. II
=London=
MACMILLAN AND CO., LIMITED
NEW YORK: THE MACMILLAN COMPANY
1898
_All rights reserved_
RICHARD CLAY AND SONS, LIMITED
LONDON AND BUNGAY
_Copyright in the United States of America_
CONTENTS
CHAPTER I
PAGE
NO. 76 WILHELMSTRASSE--THE CHANCELLOR’S RESIDENCE AND THE
FOREIGN OFFICE--THE CHIEF’S OFFICIAL SURROUNDINGS AND HIS
LIFE AT HOME--BUCHER AND ABEKEN 1
CHAPTER II
FROM OUR RETURN FROM THE WAR UP TO THE TEMPORARY DISCONTINUANCE
OF MY PERSONAL INTERCOURSE WITH THE CHANCELLOR--GLIMPSES
OF THE DIPLOMATIC WORLD--COMMISSIONS FOR THE PRESS 42
CHAPTER III
THE LAST TWENTY MONTHS IN THE FOREIGN OFFICE--DOCUMENTS
RECEIVED AND DESPATCHED 109
CHAPTER IV
HERR VON KEUDELL IN THE PRESS AND IN REALITY 247
CHAPTER V
ARNIM’S HAND--VISIT TO THE PRINCE IN BERLIN--I RECEIVE MY
INSTRUCTIONS FOR A PRESS CAMPAIGN AGAINST THE EMPRESS
AUGUSTA--THE “FRICTION” ARTICLES IN THE “GRENZBOTEN”--VISITS
AT VARZIN, SCHOENHAUSEN AND FRIEDRICHSRUH 258
CHAPTER VI
AT VARZIN AND FRIEDRICHSRUH 311
CHAPTER VII
I RETURN TO BERLIN AND RENEW MY INTERCOURSE WITH THE
CHANCELLOR--THE HISTORY OF MY BOOK--BISMARCK ON THE OPPOSITION
OF THE FREE-TRADERS AND THE HOSTILITY OF THE NATIONAL
LIBERALS--HIS OPINION OF THE EMPEROR AND OF THE CROWN
PRINCE AND PRINCESS--HIS INSTRUCTIONS TO ATTACK GORTSCHAKOFF’S
POLICY--MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT WHO HAVE NO EXPERIENCE
OF REAL LIFE--CONVERSATION WITH VON THILE RESPECTING
HIS RETIREMENT--THE TURNING AWAY FROM RUSSIA
AND TOWARDS AUSTRIA-HUNGARY--MATERIAL FOR THE HISTORY
OF THE ALLIANCE WITH THE AUSTRIANS--THE PRINCE ON THE
PARLIAMENTARY FRACTIONS--HE DESCRIBES BÜLOW’S POSSIBLE
SUCCESSORS: HATZFELDT, HOHENLOHE, RADOWITZ, SOLMS,
WERTHER, AND KEUDELL--THE CHANCELLOR’S REMARKABLE
OPINION OF STOSCH--ITALIAN POLITICS--POPE LEO--THE PRINCE
ON THE CROWN PRINCE--THE ENVIOUS AND AMBITIOUS IN
PARLIAMENT--THE CAUSES OF THE CHANCELLOR CRISIS IN
APRIL--KING STEPHAN AGAINST KING WILLIAM--THE NEW MINISTRY IN
ENGLAND--DELBRÜCK’S ILLNESS AND THE PRINCE’S OPPONENTS
IN THE REICHSTAG--THE CENTRE PARTY DESCRIBED--THORNDIKE
RICE’S REQUEST 362
CHAPTER VIII
THE ARTICLE “THE GOVERNMENT AND THE ITALIAN BISHOPS”--LOTHAR
BUCHER ON HOHENLOHE, RADOWITZ AND THE TWO BÜLOWS--THE
CHIEF WISHES TO BE REPRESENTED IN THE “DAILY
TELEGRAPH” AS A LEGITIMIST, THOUGH THE FACT MUST BE
REGRETTED--COURT INTRIGUES AND THE REQUEST TO BE RELEASED
FROM OFFICE--BUCHER ON THE SECESSIONISTS, AND THE FUTURE
MINISTERS--THE CHIEF ON THE MEANS OF SECURING THE FUTURE
OF THE WORKING MAN--THE OPPOSITION TO THIS REFORM--THE
JEWS--THE DEFECTION OF THE CONSERVATIVES AND NATIONAL
LIBERALS--THE KING THE SOLE MEMBER OF HIS PARTY--THE
“GRENZBOTEN” REGARDED AS AN OFFICIAL GAZETTE--THE DEBATE
IN THE UPPER CHAMBER ON THE REMISSION OF TAXES,
AND A “GRENZBOTEN” ARTICLE ON THAT SUBJECT BY THE
CHIEF--THE BERLINERS IN PARLIAMENT--THE CHANCELLOR UPON
THE JEWS ONCE MORE 444
BISMARCK
SOME SECRET PAGES OF HIS HISTORY
CHAPTER I
NO. 76 WILHELMSTRASSE--THE CHANCELLOR’S RESIDENCE AND THE FOREIGN
OFFICE--THE CHIEF’S OFFICIAL SURROUNDINGS AND HIS LIFE AT
HOME--BUCHER AND ABEKEN
Before resuming the extracts from my diary I beg to be allowed to
present the reader with a picture of the house in which the Chancellor
resided during his stay in Berlin at the time when I had the honour of
working under his instructions, and to add a few words upon the life of
which that house was the centre.
I purpose to do this in some detail, not omitting even matters of
secondary interest, and regardless of the question whether it may be to
the taste of certain critics, as I hope the public will come to a very
different conclusion, and will welcome my description.
In spite of the Radical newspapers of Berlin, and of the old women who
write in the _National Zeitung_, and of the parliamentarian spirit
which hovers over the turbid waters of the press, No. 76 Wilhelmstrasse
is, in the highest sense of the word, a house of historic interest.
Under its roof and in its rooms German history has been made, and--(as
the new-born Germany, now raised to the position which is her due,
may be regarded, without boastfulness, as one of the leading European
Powers)--also a great, and perhaps the best part of the political
history of the Continent. It has been the scene of great thoughts and
deeds; and to give as precise an account of such a place as discretion
will permit, enabling the reader to form a distinct picture of it
in his mind’s eye, appears to me to be a praiseworthy undertaking,
particularly when, as in the present instance, the house in question
has already undergone important changes, and will in time altogether
disappear.
What was the dwelling of the political regenerator of our people? how
did he live at the time when he began his work and carried the most
important part of it into execution? and what were the instruments
which he employed? Our great-grandchildren and their grandchildren will
ask these questions, and so will the following generations, as we now
do respecting the heroes of the two preceding periods of regeneration
in the life of the German people, respecting Luther, who liberated and
rejuvenated our spiritual life, and respecting Goethe and Schiller,
the two central suns of the days when, in the literary sphere, clear
morning rose upon a world of night and twilight. The cell in which
Brother Martin, the Augustinian monk of Wittenberg, in October, 1517,
drew up the ninety-five Propositions with which he delivered the first
powerful blow against the Papacy; the house and room where Faust and
Gretchen and Wilhelm Meister’s apprenticeship were completed, and
that in which the powerful tragedy of the “Friedlaender” sprang from
the poet’s imagination, have been maintained by pious hands in the
condition in which they were when occupied by those great spirits.
That is also the case with Sans Souci, the château of the Great
Frederick. No. 76 Wilhelmstrasse does not stand under such favourable
auspices. During the lifetime of the former occupant of this house,
and immediately after his removal into the neighbouring palace which
had been built for him, the inner apartments underwent considerable
alterations, as the upper floor was also to be used for offices. Later,
however, and perhaps at no very distant date, workmen will come with
pick and shovel to tear down and cart away these historic walls. The
stones and woodwork which, as a house, once sheltered the greatest
statesman of our time, the windows through which he saw the sun shine
upon his most important labours, will be applied to vulgar uses. The
wall papers which witnessed momentous councils and interviews will be
scattered to the winds, and after the rubbish heaps have been cleared
away, a pretentious palatial building of two or three stories will rise
on the site, and cause the old house to be forgotten.
Reason says it must be so. The little house in which he lived may
disappear, if only the great structure which he erected remains
filled with his spirit. But for those to whom the house has become as
closely identified with its occupants as the shell with its inlying
mother-of-pearl, sentiment also has its claims, and if those claims are
to be discharged, care must be taken that when destruction overtakes
it, our hero’s dwelling place shall at least continue to live in the
printed annals of our race.
No. 76 Wilhelmstrasse, which, during the decade and a half spent by
Bismarck under its roof has been the most distinguished and finally
the most influential Foreign Office in the world, was, both externally
and internally, one of the most insignificant looking and uncomfortable
of buildings. The Prefecture of a French provincial town, such, for
instance, as that of Versailles or Nancy, is, as a general rule, both
more roomy and imposing than the narrow and old-fashioned tenement in
which the Chancellor of the German Empire and the officials of the
Political Department of the Foreign Office were housed for almost
sixteen years. Chosen as the residence of the Minister at a time when
Prussia was only occasionally reckoned among the effectually great
Powers of Europe, it may not merely have sufficed for its purpose so
long as that period lasted, but have been, to some extent, an adequate
symbol of her slight importance in the eyes of the outer world. After
Prussia had taken a higher rank and compelled the world’s attention,
after her diplomacy had developed into fuller activity, it was, if
not materially indispensable, at least fitting and expedient, that
something better should be provided. The fact that this was only
done at a late period is due mainly to the simple tastes of Prince
Bismarck, who, as we have already seen, contented himself throughout
his campaigns with scanty shelter, quite incommensurate with his rank.
The former residence of the Imperial Chancellor was built in the first
half of the last century, and in 1819, when it was purchased by the
Treasury, was in the possession of Alopaeus, the Russian Minister of
that time. It is situated not far from the Wilhelmsplatz, and nearly
opposite to the palace of Prince Charles. It is flanked on the one side
by a palace which belonged to Prince Radziwill until about four years
ago, when, having passed into the possession of the German Empire, it
was transformed into a residence for Prince Bismarck, and the Imperial
Chancellerie, while on the other side is the building formerly occupied
by Decker’s printing establishment, which has also been for some time
the property of the State. Behind the house is a spacious garden,
which reaches as far as the Königgrätzer Strasse--the only beautiful
feature of the whole residence. Looked at from the front, No. 76
Wilhelmstrasse is a grey stucco house of moderate size. To the left on
the ground floor is a carriage entrance, while to the right extends a
row of eleven windows. On the first floor there are thirteen windows,
and above a small flat gable projects from the tiled roof, beneath
which are four pilasters in low relief, with Corinthian capitals
rising between the middle windows. There is no other ornamentation of
any kind. Whoever wishes may add to the picture, according to his own
fancy, a few Chancery messengers with leather portfolios; Leverstroem,
the “Black Horseman” (who acts as the bearer of hurried messages,
inquiries and invitations); or one or other of the Ministers or foreign
representatives stepping out of his carriage to pay the Chancellor a
visit.
If we pull the bell of the outer door it opens for us, only to close
immediately behind our backs. We find ourselves in a gateway which
opens on a small passage between two walls, behind which a portion
of the garden is visible. On the right there is a window, behind the
panes of which a watchful eye studies our appearance. Further on we
come to the steps of a stone staircase, and a landing with a chessboard
pattern in red and white; then a yellow folding screen before a glass
door between two grey Doric columns. On either side right and left of
the staircase crouches a sphinx--mute, deep-gazing, and doubtless
profoundly wise, which the stranger may regard as an intimation that he
stands on the threshold of a mysterious region, inaccessible to most
mortals. The watchful one awaits the visitor outside the small door,
which opens on to the landing behind one of the sphinxes, scrutinises
him closely, and inquires whom he wishes to see. This is Herr Linstedt,
the Porter of the Foreign Office.
Let us suppose that the stranger is in a position to satisfy this
strict, though polite, janitor as to his right to visit all the
mysterious chambers behind the screen (which, by the way, Prince
Napoleon on his visit to Bismarck is understood not to have been
able to do without some delay), and let us further suppose that our
stroll through the building takes place in one of the three years from
February, 1870, to March, 1873. These are among the most important
years of the last decades; and since then, as already indicated,
alterations have been made both in the arrangement of the rooms and
in the _personnel_ employed there. Finally, it may perhaps be well
to remember before entering, and to bear constantly in mind, that
this is not the office of the Imperial Chancellor--a misunderstanding
which to my knowledge was formerly very frequent, and which may occur
occasionally even now; but the Foreign Office, or, to be still more
precise, the first or political department of the Foreign Office,
which works immediately under the control of the Imperial Chancellor.
The Imperial Chancellerie, properly so called, is now located in
the palatial building, Nos. 1 and 2 Wilhelmsplatz; while during the
period here referred to it was also rather poorly housed. The Imperial
Chancellerie, which is to a certain extent the Ministry of the Interior
for Germany, at that time under the control of Herr Delbrück, was, and
is, both actually and for purposes of business, about as distinct from
the Foreign Office as is the Ministry of War and the Admiralty.
An ominous twilight prevails in the chambers behind the screens. A
door to the right leads into the room occupied by the deciphering
clerks. To the left a rather broad staircase, which receives its light
from a small cupola decorated with green and gold arabesques, leads
to the first floor, on which is situated the official residence of
the Imperial Chancellor. For the present we pass by these carpeted
stairs in order to continue our inspection of the lower regions. A
few paces further on, and we find ourselves in a small dark passage,
which is lighted with hanging lamps, even in the day time. It ends at
a folding door leading into a large chamber occupied by the Secretary
of State, which looks out on to the back-yard and the garden. On the
left-hand side of the passage a second door opens into the room of the
Chancery attendants. Passing through this to a third door we enter
a small dimly-lighted antechamber, which might--if it were possible
to compare the Foreign Office to the Temple at Jerusalem--correspond
to the Forecourt of the Gentiles, or be described as the space where
the Proselytes of the Gate collected together. In other words, here
the minor officials of the Ministry receive and despatch business
with outsiders, _i.e._, with persons who do not belong to the Foreign
Office. Behind the folding doors visible to the right and left of this
antechamber is holy ground, unapproachable for the profane world, and
only accessible to the Levites and priests. On the right Secretaries
cipher, decipher, and copy despatches. To the left those who are
initiated and have the right of entry find themselves first in the
Central Bureau, the headquarters of the Secretaries for confidential
correspondence, and then in a small labyrinth of rooms, cells, and
partitions, in which officials of various grades in the diplomatic
hierarchy are engaged with the secrets of the house, mostly seated a
few paces, and sometimes hardly three feet, from each other.
The impression left by this series of chambers is not at all a pleasant
one, especially if the visitor has been previously in the Ministry of
Commerce or the Imperial Chancellerie, and is able and disposed to make
comparisons. In such circumstances one may perhaps think of Faust’s
“drangvoll fuerchterliche Enge”:
“Beschraenkt von diesem Buecherhauf,
. . . . .
Mit Instrumenten voll gepfropft,
Urvaeter Hausrath drein gestopft.”
Such is the oppressive sultriness, particularly when the visit takes
place in the evening, and the steam of a dozen oil lamps is added to
the smell of documents, printer’s ink, and the close air, revolting the
nose and distressing the lungs, that one cannot help wondering how it
is that lamps can possibly burn in such an atmosphere, and that such an
accumulation of evil gases does not lead to explosions and accidents as
in ill-ventilated mines.
This is no exaggeration. Man becomes accustomed to everything upon this
earth, even to eating arsenic and to the poisonous air of overcrowded
rooms. Such rooms, however, do not on that account become any the
pleasanter to live in. Another and almost equally serious inconvenience
to which several of those engaged there have perforce to become
reconciled, is that of having to work so close together in small rooms,
sometimes only divided by a papered partition, through which every
conversation not conducted in a whisper interrupts the course of their
own thoughts, and (I refer of course to the period above specified,
though I quote from my diary in the present tense) the inconvenience is
not diminished by the circumstance that some of the gentlemen employed
there seem unable to speak in a low voice.
The furniture, which includes some fossils from the primeval Alopaeus
period, is made of every kind of wood grown in our forests and gardens,
and constructed in every fashion and style of cabinet-making, reaching
back to the last century. Yellow plum-tree, dark mahogany, common deal,
japanned, polished and merely planed wood, writing-tables, standing and
cylinder desks, document cupboards, open shelves for books, journals
and papers, and, in the furthest chambers of the labyrinth, a few
sofas, each of which almost invariably differs in shape and material
from its neighbour, are arranged along the walls in motley array.
Several of these have the dignity of age. Not the most ancient of these
grey and antique relics is a desk at which some official has, I believe
for thirty years, always sharpened his pencil on the same spot, until
at length his penknife has dug a hole right through the inch and a
half thickness of the wood. These venerable survivals are calculated
to provoke many thoughts both serious and humorous; but there is one
in particular which they all suggested, at any rate to me. How it must
have worried these ancient pieces of furniture, after so many years
and decades of fruitless but comfortable routine, to find themselves
suddenly roused in 1862 by the new spirit that had entered and filled
the house! Can they ever have grown reconciled to that swift, exacting,
imperious and not very considerate genius, even when they saw the
fruits, the immense success, of the organisation which he introduced?
One must assume that furniture has no interest in or understanding of
such matters.
It would be a pleasant addition if I were at liberty to complete
my description of these rooms with characteristic portraits of
their occupants. They would be as statues and pictures in the house
which I have built with words, and it is possible that a couple of
original figures would be found among the number. There are, however,
certain grounds for hesitation, of which I will only mention the
following--that as a rule dignity will not suffer a jest; furthermore,
that a member of the non-official world runs some risk of forming an
incorrect or unfair opinion of an official; and that the latter--if
he is of the right sort--wishes neither to be praised nor blamed by
persons outside his own circle, nor indeed even mentioned oftener than
is necessary. Such an one desires simply to do his duty, and contents
himself with his own legitimate sense of personal worth, which in this
instance is all the more praiseworthy, as those whose portraits I
should here have to attempt are officials of rank and title.
These considerations made me hesitate. Finally, however, others forced
themselves upon me. The picture of the Chancellor’s life must be made
as complete as possible; and the truth, which through machinations in
the press has been in many instances seriously obscured and disfigured,
must no longer suffer violence. I therefore adopt a middle course, and
take from my diary, where they have been preserved till now for the
purpose of private reference, certain of the above-mentioned statues
and pictures, the originals of which have in the meantime either died
or been placed in an entirely false light in the public mind. These
I exhibit partly here and partly in the later chapters. History, to
which these fellow-workers of the Chancellor now belong, must know
how they appear to an impartial observer. To this necessity all other
considerations must give way. Of the other gentlemen I only give the
names, recall their titles, mention in general that they are more or
less richly provided with the usual decorations, and indicate in a few
words some of their principal features.
We had remained in the first room to the left of the dusky antechamber
already described, which I took the liberty of comparing to the
Forecourt of the Gentiles. Under the windows are the writing-tables
and desks of the Secretaries of the Central Bureau, who, if I am
rightly informed, occupy the first rank among the minor officials of
the Empire. _Geheimer Hofrath_ Roland, the Chief of the Bureau, has
his place under the furthest window, in the region of the Councillors
of Embassy. He is an elderly gentleman, who entered at a time when
these positions were mainly or exclusively occupied by members of the
French colony, and when the principal business of the Central Bureau,
namely, the registration of all documents despatched and received,
was conducted in the French language. He is a paragon of registrars,
although just a little brusque, and he might perhaps also be described
as a good calculator, in a certain sense. Nine orders and medals
decorate his meritorious breast, when on festive occasions he dons
his uniform of a lieutenant of the Reserve. Thoroughly well versed in
the etiquette of official intercourse, he would, in writing to the
Minister, never subscribe himself other than “most obedient humble
servant”; to the Secretary of State, “obedient”; to an Ambassador,
“most dutiful”; or to an Envoy, “most respectful.” In writing to Bülow
and Keudell, he signs himself “your most obedient,” possibly because
they are Kassenraethe, or perhaps because of their titles of nobility.
To Bucher and the other Privy Councillors he is only “your obedient,”
to officials of equal rank “most humble,” and to inferiors “humble.”
The next in place and rank is “Hofrath” Hesse, formerly a theologian,
and also advanced in years. Then come Herr Boelsing, also for some time
past a “_Hofrath_,” and the “_Geheim Sekretär_,” Wollmann, who has not
yet been awarded the higher predicate.
I wish again to call attention to the fact that these descriptions and
names refer to the period of 1873.
As already cursorily noted, the Central Bureau is the despatching and
registering department of the Foreign Office. It is the centre from
which all the ideas and orders of the Chancellor, as worked up by the
Councillors in the form of notes, despatches, telegrams, instructions,
&c., radiate out into the world, and it is the point at which all
those coming in from outside, such as documents, reports, and letters
addressed to the Minister personally, or to the Ministry, are opened,
registered according to their contents, communicated to the Chief,
and, after use--so far as it is desirable to retain them--arranged in
bundles and pigeon-holed in the presses which line the walls, until
they ultimately find their way into the State archives.
Adjoining the room occupied by the _Geheim Sekretäre_, is a narrow,
one-windowed cell, with book shelves, newspaper cupboards, and other
furniture, including the patient writing desk above mentioned, with
its counterpart to the proverb that “Constant dropping wears the
stone,” which has made the clearest and most lasting impression upon
my memory, as it was assigned to me as my place of work. Next to this
little chamber, which at the same time served as a thoroughfare to the
larger room of the Secretaries, was a still smaller one, not more than
two good paces in breadth, which was divided from the former by a thin
wooden partition papered over. Within these narrow confines two _Räthe_
(Councillors), the antipodes of each other, Lothar Bucher and Aegidi,
were from the summer of 1871 driven to seek elbow-room and a few feet
of space to move about in, and, what is still stranger, they managed to
find it. A full account must be given of the first mentioned of these.
One day, when the secret history of the Bismarckian era can be written,
the name of this little, unpretentious man in the modest cell will have
to occupy a prominent, and perhaps, indeed, the first place among the
Chancellor’s fellow-labourers. And with justice! I do not exaggerate
when I assert that of the assistants who co-operated in the work of
our political regenerator, Bucher was in every respect the most gifted
and the best informed, while at the same time he was unquestionably
the man of strongest character, conscientiousness, unselfishness and
loyalty among them. He was a man of genuine distinction, and with his
clear and fine understanding, his wealth of knowledge, his skill in
political affairs, and his great power of work, he was, in short--to
borrow the words in which our master once spoke of him to me--“a real
pearl.” Space fails me to show this at due length, and indications and
outlines, with a few illustrations of his worth, must suffice in some
degree to give an idea of this rare character. His name will recur
repeatedly in the diary, which will, as far as possible, make up for
what may be lacking here.
Adolph Lothar Bucher was born at Neustettin, on the 25th of October,
1817. When he was two years of age his family moved to Koeslin in
Further Pomerania, where his father, a Saxon of the Electorate, and
much respected as a philologist and geographer, was Professor and
Pro-Rector of the Gymnasium or High School. Here the boy received his
earliest instruction and his first conscious impressions of the world
and life. The fact that his father was a friend of Ludwig Jahn’s must
have had some influence on his riper youth. The subjects for which he
showed the greatest aptitude at school were mathematics and natural
philosophy; and as the time for choosing a profession drew near he
first wished to become a sailor and afterwards an architect. His
parents on the other hand preferred one of the learned professions; and
he decided to adopt the study of the law, for which purpose he went to
Berlin University. Here he found in progress the well known conflict
between the historical and philosophical schools, between Savigny
and Gans. He threw in his lot with the latter, and occupied himself
diligently with the study of Hegel, their chief master. Subsequently,
however, his inclination for philosophy cooled down, and he devoted
himself exclusively to jurisprudence. From 1838 to 1843 he was engaged
in the chief Provincial Court at Koeslin, and in the latter year was
appointed Assessor in the Court at Stolp, which town returned him
as its representative to the Prussian National Assembly in March,
1848, and a year later to the Parliament which had in the meantime
been created. Up to 1840 there had practically been no public life
in Prussia in the present sense of the words. The new representative
from Further Pomerania was a jurist, whose education had been in the
main confined to civil law, and who had had no experience whatever
of affairs of State. Moreover he had read Rotteck and Welcker in his
leisure hours, and had with his inborn thoroughness assimilated their
views on history and politics. It was therefore almost a matter of
course, particularly when the revolutionary spirit is taken into
account, which at that time swept like a stormy west wind through the
German States, shaking all the trees and loosening every joint, that
Bucher should have taken his seat upon the Left benches and devoted
his gifts as a jurist and as a speaker to the service of Radicalism.
It should be observed however that he did not belong to the Waldeck
party, which despised the rules of polite conduct, and just as little
to those who delighted in the art of pathetic oratory. Speaking of
him in his “_Denkwuerdigkeiten_” General von Brandt says: “I have
never heard any one speak with more talent and moderation than Bucher
on this occasion (the debate in Committee on the so-called _Habeas
Corpus_ Act). His blond hair and dispassionate attitude reminded me
strongly of pictures of St. Just. Bucher was a ruthless leveller of
all existing institutions, rank and property. He was one of the most
consistent members of the National Assembly, and was determined to
take every step which seemed to lead towards the attainment of his
object, namely virtue as the principle, and fraternal affection in the
conduct of affairs. With no knowledge of society and devoted to sterile
legal abstractions, he was fully convinced that the salvation of the
world could only be secured by the sudden and violent destruction of
the existing State and social arrangements. He helped to organise the
public opposition, and in particular to spur on the ambitious and
turbulent fraction of the National Assembly to seize a Dictature. The
ironical contempt with which he treated the existing authorities and
evinced his hatred of the old constitution of the State, his dogma
of the sovereignty of the people, whom he intoxicated with their own
Radical chimeras, together with the ability which he displayed for the
rôle of a demagogue would have enabled him in time to surpass all the
members of his party in his strictly logical endeavours.”
In Parliament Bucher was particularly active in promoting the various
measures of reorganisation. He played an especially important part as
the reporter on the motion by Waldeck, calling upon the Ministry to
raise the state of minor siege which had been declared against Berlin
on the 12th of November, 1848. He found no difficulty on this occasion,
when he again spoke mainly as a jurist, in proving the illegality of
the measure, as there could be no doubt that it was impossible to
justify it by Article 110 of the Constitution, which only came into
force three weeks later, and the more so as this article only dealt
with the suspension of certain fundamental rights in case of war or
revolution. Neither the one nor the other existed in Berlin on the 12th
of November, and the Minister had not only suspended the fundamental
rights, but had subjected citizens to the jurisdiction of courts
martial, of which there was no mention in Article 110, and for which
older laws also contained no provision. The resolution passed by the
House on that occasion led to its dissolution, followed on the 4th
of February by the so-called Refusal of Taxes Trial.... The special
hatred of Bucher in the higher circles, as evinced in the course of
this trial, was due to his above-mentioned report on the illegality of
the state of siege. The proceedings ended in the acquittal of most of
the accused. Bucher and three others were, however, found guilty and
sentenced to three months’ confinement in a fortress, with the usual
additions, namely loss of civic rights, and, for officials, dismissal
from the service of the State.
This turn of affairs, and still more the vexations with which he was
threatened by the police after the termination of his imprisonment,
decided Bucher to go abroad. He settled permanently in London. Here
began for him a period of enlightenment, which resulted in the gradual
transformation of the juridical theorist and idealist into a practical
politician. He occupied himself at first with the study of politics
and political economy, and with the observation of English methods
and customs, whereby he found himself in many respects disappointed
with his former ideals, and filled with repugnance and contempt of
things and persons which he, like other Liberals, had previously
admired. Among the acquaintances which he made here were Urquhart,
and afterwards Mazzini, Ledru Rollin and Herzen. The last three
in particular contributed to his further transformation by openly
speculating in his presence on sundry strips of German territory in
the South, West and East, which were required in satisfaction of
the doctrine of nationalities. This aroused a certain distrust in
Bucher’s mind, which in this respect did not suffer from the disease of
“principle.” His untainted patriotism warned him of the desirability
of prudence. The experience and the convictions which he obtained in
this way were, together with other material, utilised by him in the
German press, and particularly in the _National Zeitung_, to which
he for several years contributed political articles, which attracted
widespread attention by the thorough knowledge of the subjects dealt
with, their wealth and depth of thought, and the highly original views
of which they gave evidence. He also wrote for the same paper some
excellent reports of the London Industrial Exhibition, on English
household arrangements worthy of imitation, and on other practical
matters. He did eminent service in the enlightenment of such Liberal
minds as were not closed to argument by his letters on English
Parliamentarism, a brilliant criticism, which indirectly hit upon the
weak points of Parliamentarism in general, and confuted the current
heresy that the German popular representation should be modelled
in every particular on the British system. He produced convincing
arguments that the English Constitution was not a manufactured article
but a growth, the product of the English State and social life and
character, and further that Constitutional arrangements cannot
be everywhere the same, but must correspond with the fundamental
character, history and prevailing conditions of each separate country.
To this was added evidence, which was then necessary, but is now no
longer required by any sensible man, showing that the English art
of government, so far as foreign affairs are concerned--when the
ornamental veil of fine phrases is torn off--is nothing more than a
commercial policy of the most self-seeking kind, devoid of all ideal
motives and historical breadth. In these letters the difficulties
and the seamy side of English Parliamentary life and the weaknesses
of their leaders, Palmerston, Gladstone, the “Doctor supernaturalis”
Cobden, and the whole gang of hypocritical and egotistic apostles
of English Free Trade were illuminated by a light of truly electric
brilliancy and clearness. It was a ruthless exposure of a kind that has
rarely been witnessed.[1]
In 1860 Bucher, probably tired of working for the press, thought of
emigrating to Central America, where he had acquired a piece of land
(which was still in his possession twenty years later), in order to
become a coffee planter under his own palms and mangrove bushes. Fate
decided, however, that he belonged to growing Germany, and the amnesty
of that year permitted his return to Berlin. Here he renewed his former
friendship with Rodbertus, and made the acquaintance of Lassalle,
to whom his intercourse soon became indispensable, while Bucher on
his side felt attracted in many ways towards Lassalle. The Socialist
agitator was a very different character to his heirs of to-day, a man
of the highest ability, with whom Bismarck himself did not disdain to
correspond, a respected _savant_ who was highly esteemed by Bockh,
and a resolute patriot who was only led into folly by his boundless
ambition. As a follower of Hegel, he belonged to a different school
of thought to Bucher, but was yet in agreement with the latter in his
belief in the “iron law of wages,” and like him convinced that the
State alone could reform the evils from which the labouring classes
suffered. Bucher’s former political associates on the other hand
belonged to the Manchester school, considering that the true way of
salvation lay in “laisser-faire” and free competition, that is to say,
in the destruction of the weak by the strong. They further swore by the
principle of the _Nationalverein_, and detesting the idea of war for
this purpose, they wished to unite Germany under Prussia by “moral”
means, by a “popular policy,” speeches, and leading articles, and by
athletic, singing and prize-shooting festivals. In this respect also
Bucher, as a practical politician and contemner of phrases, was of a
decidedly different opinion to his friends of the _National Zeitung_,
and the difference in their views led gradually to an estrangement
which was accompanied by an inward approach to Bismarck’s standpoint in
the German question, resulting ultimately in the co-operation of the
two. Bucher had severed his connection with the _National Zeitung_, and
was by no means satisfied with the position which he afterwards took
in Wolf’s Telegraph Agency. He therefore thought of seeking work as a
lawyer, and wrote to the Minister of Justice on the subject. Bismarck
heard of his plans through the latter. He asked Bucher to see him,
and offered him occupation at the Foreign Office, which was accepted
after some little hesitation. Bucher, the whilom Democrat, the former
member of the Prussian party of the Mountain, who had hurled oratorical
bombshells at the Minister, had been cured by a sound understanding,
experience and change of air; and, in 1864, he was already in full and
fruitful activity at No. 76 Wilhelmstrasse, where he continued for two
decades. He did excellent service to the new German world in the most
various ways, as lawyer, diplomatist and publicist, and fully justified
the confidence of him who had chosen him as a fellow worker. In the
years 1865 to 1867 he was chiefly entrusted with the administration
of Lauenburg, a difficult task, as this Duchy when it came into the
possession of Prussia was two centuries behind the times, both in
its legal institutions and in its methods of administration. During
the same period, in 1866, he drew up for his Chief the Constitution
of the North German Confederation (the principal articles of which
agree in the main with that of the German Empire). Bismarck of course
had given him the main lines for his task, which Bucher, by the way,
completed within twenty hours. He was afterwards repeatedly engaged
in the preparation and execution of important political work and
regulations, and discharged with skill and success several diplomatic
missions, including two of universal historical importance. He became
so indispensable to the Minister that the latter took him to Varzin for
several summers while on holiday. During the war with France Bucher was
working with the Chancellor at headquarters from the end of September
up to the preliminaries of peace, and also in 1871 on the conclusion
of the definitive treaty at Frankfurt. He kept the minutes of the
Berlin Congress in 1878. He wrote a great number of the most important
despatches and memorials, as well as a pamphlet on the Cobden Club,
for which he had collected material in England. The Chancellor very
seldom made any alterations in his work. As a matter of fact Bucher had
from the beginning understood him, and easily assimilated his views of
things in individual cases, while he had the further advantage of being
able to take down verbal communications in shorthand.
While in his official life Bucher enjoyed the high esteem and full
confidence of the Chief, whose example was followed more or less
willingly by others, he experienced in later years considerable
bitterness and neglect, principally, but not exclusively, under the
Secretaries of State, von Bülow and Hatzfeldt. He finally asked for
his discharge, not merely on account of age and illness, which were
the ostensible motives. His request was acceded to. He declined the
proposal of the Prince that he should retire into private life with
the title of Excellency, because “he could not then have continued to
stitch on his own buttons, or to stroll about the Jungfernhaide with a
botanist’s impedimenta on his back.” Bucher, who was one of the truest
of the true, paid several long visits to the Prince after the fatal
18th of March, 1890, and helped him to prepare his “Memoirs,” of which,
so long as he was engaged upon them, his valuable assistance materially
enhanced the trustworthiness.
It may be added that Bucher remained unmarried, and that, considering
his position, he had little intercourse during recent years with
his fellows. His friends in diplomatic circles included Schloetzer,
Limburg-Stirum, and Kusserow; and in the financial and industrial
world, Hansemann and Werner Siemens. The bond between him, Victor Hehn,
and myself was our common veneration for the Chancellor and our equally
deep contempt for hypocrisy and place hunting. His character in company
was that of a sober, taciturn man, who was, nevertheless, by no means
devoid of poetic feeling and humour, who could tell many a good story
in an effective manner, and who sometimes talked also in very pleasant
fashion of his canaries and the Alpine flowers in his herbarium. His
ideas and feelings were expressed in a low tone, without being wanting
in energy. A cool head, but a warm heart; still water, but clear and
deep. I have given more time and space to his picture than I had
intended at first, but I believe I shall have thereby compensated for
the mischief done by others to his memory; for I remember that Count
Caprivi’s menials, who had the preparation of the _Reichsanzeiger_,
thought it sufficient to devote three dry lines to his departure when
he passed into eternity at Glion, on the Lake of Geneva, on the 12th of
October, 1892.
I propose to deal with Keudell later. Of Bülow I will only remark that
he is a man of routine, of moderate ability, and is understood to be
not altogether free from an inclination to intrigue. Geheimrath Hepke,
a lean, wizened man in the fifties, is not a very pleasant personage.
He has something in him of the Privy Councillor as he exists in the
popular imagination--great self-conceit, a consciousness that he knows
practically everything considerably better than the rest of the world,
and doubtless also a high opinion of his own rank and title.
Leaving the room where Geheimrath Hepke works, and proceeding to the
right along the adjoining narrow passage, we reach the small room
containing the reference library of the Ministry. Here at a window
which opens on the court another Privy Councillor of Embassy, Count
Hatzfeldt, (afterwards promoted to the position of Minister in Madrid,
then representative of the Empire at the Porte, and in 1880 appointed
Secretary of State under the Imperial Chancellor,) spends a few hours
daily. In the next room we hear the scratching of the ever ready pen
of his older colleague, Abeken, whose gifts and character must now be
dealt with. While the Chancellor himself selected Lothar Bucher as his
fellow worker, Abeken came to him by inheritance. Heinrich Abeken may
be regarded in almost every respect as the type of the official of
the old school. His whole being and inclinations belong to that epoch
in our history which may be described as the literary-æsthetic era,
a time when political affairs were of secondary interest to poetry,
philosophy, philology treated from an artistic standpoint, and other
scientific questions. He enjoyed himself most, and felt himself most
at home, in a circle of ideas which, previous to the appearance of
Bismarck, chiefly attracted the attention of the Court, the upper
classes, the higher bourgeoisie and persons of education. Indeed, he
has hardly ever for a single moment thoroughly thrown himself into
politics. Even at times when the welfare of his country appeared to be
at stake he seemed to be more interested in some æsthetic question than
in measures more closely connected with the sphere to which his office
assigned him. It happened not infrequently that while others were
anxiously awaiting the outcome of a political crisis his thoughts were
occupied by an entirely different subject, so that for instance the
verses of some old or new poet kept running through his head, and were
usually recited by him with much pathos, although they had no visible
connection with the situation of the moment. Abeken, who hailed from
Osnabrück, was born in 1809. His education was conducted by his uncle
Bernhard Rudolf Abeken, the philologist and writer on æsthetics, who
lived at Weimar in Schiller’s time, and who had assimilated the style
of sentiment which then prevailed there. The nephew afterwards studied
theology, and in 1834 held the position of Chaplain to the Prussian
Embassy in Rome under Josias Bunsen. He there married an Englishwoman,
who was taken from him by death a few months later. A friend of Bunsen,
whom he followed to London on his transfer to that post in 1841, and
whose views and aspirations in ecclesiastical matters he shared, Abeken
even at that time devoted himself so far to diplomacy that he drew up
a memorandum on the creation of an evangelical bishopric in Jerusalem.
This idea was regarded with lively sympathy in the most exalted
quarters in Berlin, although, later on, under William I., it would
scarcely have occurred to any one, or have served as a recommendation
for its originator. In this connection we meet Abeken again among those
who accompanied Professor Lepsius on his exploring tour through Upper
Egypt in 1842, when he also visited the Holy Land. He entered the
Foreign Office under Heinrich von Arnim, and there he remained until
his death in August, 1872, notwithstanding the important changes that
had occurred in the meantime, a model of loyalty and attachment, even
though his virtues recalled in many ways those of the venerable old
furniture to which I alluded just now.
The extracts from the diary during the war have already given some
instances of the exceptional and occasionally comic attraction which
everything connected with the Court and other princely circles seemed
to exercise upon Abeken, and the subsequent chapters will contain a few
more. In this respect he was the very antitype of his colleague Bucher,
as also in the fact that he was particularly sociable and talkative. It
was to satisfy the longing which he felt for intercourse with persons
of rank that he used to frequent the circles which made the Radziwill
Palace their headquarters. He was unable to forego these visits
even when the society that collected there formed the centre of the
ultramontane opposition to the ecclesiastical policy of the Chancellor.
Apart from such social gatherings as the above, the old gentleman must
have felt himself most at home at the weekly meetings of the _Graeca_,
a society “consisting chiefly of former _Romans_,” the rules of which
excluded all political discussions, its sole object in addition to its
social aims being of a philological and æsthetic character.
With regard to Abeken’s business capacity and the limitations of his
usefulness I would first recall the circumstance that our Chief,
at the time when he described Bucher to me as a “real pearl,” is
understood to have spoken of Abeken as a “true strawchopper”--a
comparison which is less flattering than appropriate. Unquestionably
Abeken was a very meritorious worker in the routine of the Foreign
Office, but he was by no means such a prominent one as many outsiders
thought. Owing to his long service thoroughly acquainted with all
the ins and outs of official business, he had become a _virtuoso_
in red tape. Provided with an ample store of phrases which, when
he received his instructions, ran from his fingers’ ends without
much thinking, and with a knowledge of several languages just about
sufficient for his task, it was as if he had been specially created
for the purpose of putting into shape the ideas given to him by the
Chief with the readiness of a sewing machine. In addition to this
he was an indefatigable worker, and would deliver in the course of
the day astonishing quantities of well-written documents for the
messengers and despatch bags. But when he had to deal with questions
of importance, he was scarcely in a position to draw for the material
upon his own resources. It was not, however, at all necessary that he
should do so. The ready writer with a good knowledge of traditional
forms was sufficient. It was the Minister’s genius and knowledge of
men and things that provided the substance for his work, and sometimes
also improved the form. He is understood to have worked with more
independence under Bismarck’s predecessor, and among other things to
have drafted the treaty of Olmütz. I have heard it asserted that he
drew up on his own initiative documents of great political importance
under the First Imperial Chancellor, and prepared speeches from the
throne--but this is a baseless legend. On many occasions, however,
when the Minister was out of temper with the King, Abeken acted for
weeks at a time, entrusted as the mouthpiece of his Chief, and, of
course, under instructions from the latter, reported to his Majesty
on current affairs. He also on various occasions accompanied the
monarch, in an official capacity, to bathing resorts, as for instance
to Ems in the early summer of 1870, where he made himself useful during
the last days of his stay and earned the thanks of the Chancellor.
In the adjoining salon his Excellency the Secretary of State, von
Thile, receives the diplomatists whom the Chancellor himself is unable
to see. He suddenly resigned, if I remember rightly, on the 2nd of
October, 1872, and retired into private life. I will, later on, give
some particulars of the motives for this step. He was opposed to the
_Kulturkampf_, and longed for the return of the peace of former times.
He was exceptionally amiable as a superior. For a short time after his
retirement his position was filled by von Balan, the German Minister
at the Belgian Court. A definitive successor was then appointed in
the person of von Bülow of Mecklenburg, who (I am also writing for
the lay public), as Minister of State and Excellency, must not be
confounded with his namesake mentioned above. Count Bismarck-Bohlen
and Baron von Gundlach only put in an appearance here occasionally.
The former, a cousin of the Chancellor’s, was a lieutenant in the
Dragoon Guards and a Councillor of Embassy, and had charge of all sorts
of personal affairs of the Chief, principally such as were of little
importance. He was also the medium for the Minister’s communications
with the Literary Bureau in the Ministry of State, and with Stieber,
the chief of the Berlin detective force. Naturally good-natured he
was addicted to bragging, played the heathen and the _roué_ on a
small scale, and indulged in jokes and puns which were not always
bad; but he never carried weight with any one, even the Secretaries
upon whom he occasionally tried to shift some of his work shrugging
their shoulders at him. All that is to be said of Gundlach, a lean and
sickly gentleman, who afterwards died at Lisbon as Chargé d’Affaires,
is that he put in an appearance daily for half, or sometimes a whole,
hour, glanced at the _Journal des Debats_, _The Times_, &c., chatted
for a while, coughed a little, chatted again, and for these labours
drew an allowance of six thalers a day. For some time after the war
Count Wartensleben, a young and amiable nobleman, who was preparing
himself for the diplomatic service, in which he died of cancer in 1880,
and Count Solms-Sonnenwalde, who had previously been attached to the
Embassy in Paris, and who afterwards acted as Minister first in Brazil,
then in Dresden, and finally in Madrid,[2] passed in and out amongst us
for a time.
It is hardly necessary to point out that notwithstanding the narrowness
and discomfort of the Foreign Office there is plenty of hard and good
work done there, particularly by Bucher and Abeken. The Chancellor
demands it, and gives a good example of it in his own person. The
strictest order prevails from top to bottom, unconditional obedience is
the rule, and, as is right and proper, every one obeys without protest
or contradiction, whatever his own opinion may be. At times one or
other of the distinguished gentlemen who sit here kicks against the
pricks, fancies he should do a little more or a little less, argues
about some special instruction given to him, gnashing his teeth and
clenching his fist--in his pocket. He prudently abstains, however, from
giving expression to his dissatisfaction otherwise than in soliloquies
within the walls of his own room. Everything downstairs moves at the
bidding of _one_ will, that which comes from upstairs, and every one
works to the best of his ability. Whoever does not care to work within
the broader or narrower sphere prescribed for him by the genius who
rules here may take himself off. Discipline must be maintained, and
absolute subordination, so that every wheel of the machine shall work
readily and promptly and in its proper time and place. There must be
no stoppage caused by this or that individuality. Acquiescence is the
first and highest law.
Formerly things were different, but no great harm was done. Those who
are acquainted with the history of Prussia prior to Bismarck’s entry
into office know why. To-day when a fertile mind and an energetic will
preside here, and matters of the greatest moment are at stake, there
is nothing for it but to obey orders. The Councillors have no longer
to offer counsel, but simply to regard themselves as instruments
of the Chancellor’s will, who, like other instruments, Chargés
d’Affaires, Ministers, and Ambassadors, have to use their knowledge and
ability in carrying his ideas and intentions into execution. Strong
self-consciousness is not compatible with the necessity of maintaining
a continuous and homogeneous policy.
This was called “Ministerial despotism” by Count Harry Arnim. I call
it the maintenance of an absolutely essential devotion to duty under
a great leader. Arnim was offended at the expression made use of on
one occasion by the Chancellor: “My Ambassadors must wheel round like
non-commissioned officers at the word of command without knowing why.”
I, on the contrary, consider it quite an excellent description of the
relations which should always exist between the leading spirit of the
Foreign Office and its branches at foreign Courts, especially when
a man of highly original character and quite exceptional ideas and
principles is in charge of the administration. With the kind permission
of the Excellencies and Grand Crosses in question I should not have
objected even if in that expression of the Chancellor’s they had been
described as his senior clerks. The more they subordinate to him
their own views, tastes and wills, regarding themselves as his staff
sergeants, or clerks, and acting accordingly, the better services
will they render, and the better will be their work. If, in addition
thereto, they should prove to be impartial, clear-sighted observers
and diligent reporters, with a sense of what is of importance, and a
distaste for phrasemongering and smart writing (of these attributes,
by the way, the only one with which Count Arnim could be credited was
a desultory industry), they will have done pretty well everything that
can be fairly expected of them.
I ought now to conduct the reader upstairs under the green and gold
cupola to the first floor and there show him the rooms occupied
by the Imperial Chancellor and his family. I prefer, however,
first to pay a visit to the park behind the courtyards and the
smaller outbuildings. It is a stately and pleasant fragment of the
Thiergarten, which formerly extended to this spot, and of which many
fine groups of beautiful old shady trees are still preserved behind
the Wilhelmstrasse, where the nightingales beneath their spreading
branches celebrate the budding springtime and the sunrise. The long
avenue which runs in a straight line to the left, shaded by elm trees
or white beech, and which finishes not far from the further end of the
garden, narrowing more and more in perspective, I always thought to
be specially charming and indeed fairy like. Exceptionally beautiful
in the first days of summer with the green shadows falling athwart
the branches in the foreground while the far end is bathed in a soft
green light, it remains beautiful even in winter, when the fine lichens
and mosses lend a greenish sheen to the stems of the trees. I believe
the garden is one of the Chancellor’s favourite walks, and I hope
that this, at least, will be preserved when the house is pulled down.
A further reason for hoping so is that many a deep plan was thought
out, and many a decision of great moment taken here. The Minister
had often strolled up and down here at a late hour of the evening
awaiting news from the King at times when important measures were under
consideration. Here on the night of the 14th and 15th of June, in the
Year of Victory, 1866, the idea occurred to him of inducing Moltke
to order the Prussian forces to cross the frontier, and thereby the
Rubicon, twenty-four hours earlier than had been originally intended;
and here, in 1870, about the time of the declaration of war, he was
to be seen repeatedly pacing up and down that evergreen avenue in a
meditative mood, swinging a big stick, and from time to time sending
the messenger in waiting to summon one of his assistants in order to
give instructions for despatches, telegrams, or newspaper articles.
Returning from the garden behind No. 76 Wilhelmstrasse, we observe
that the two wings in which the house ends at this side contain only
work rooms, servants’ apartments, stables, &c., and that the courtyard
between them is shaded by a broad branched nut-tree.
Proceeding up the stairs behind the screen in the main building,
and passing through the glass door at the top, we enter a small
antechamber. When the Chancellor is in Berlin, servants in livery and
Chancery attendants in black swallow-tail coats await here the arrival
of visitors and of those who are to be received in audience, or have to
make verbal reports to the Chancellor. A door to the left leads into
a second small antechamber, while another to the right brings us into
a large oval drawing-room, which extends almost throughout the entire
depth of the building. We are told that this was once the ball-room of
the Minister Alopaeus, while it now serves as a dining-room when big
dinners are given, and for the buffets at the well-known Parliamentary
evenings.[3]
From this room we pass into a somewhat smaller one, the four windows of
which open on to the Wilhelmstrasse.... The whole room leaves a bright
and pleasant impression. It is elegant, but by no means sumptuous,
and indeed might be described as comparatively simple. The lack of
pictures, and the entirely white ceiling, gives it a certain emptiness
and loneliness, while the old-fashioned arrangements for lighting it
are not quite in harmony with the remainder of the apartment. In this
respect, also, the Chancellor is more unassuming and indifferent to
luxury and elegance than his colleagues of the diplomatic world. Not
to speak of those who live nearer home, let us imagine how the French
Minister for Foreign Affairs would have his residence furnished by the
State!
This drawing-room is used for receptions, but sometimes the Chancellor
also dines here with his family. This reminds me of a characteristic
remark of his. On the 6th of April, 1878, I had the honour to be
invited to dine with him. Having in the course of the conversation
referred to himself as an “old man,” the Princess remonstrated: “Why,
you are only sixty-three!” He replied: “Yes, but I have always lived
at high pressure, and paid hard cash for everything.” (_Ja, aber ich
habe immer schnell und baar gelebt._) Then, turning to me, he added:
“Hard cash--that means that I have always put my whole heart into my
work: I have paid with my strength and my health for whatever has
been achieved.” The German people should be grateful to him for this,
instead of allowing themselves to be represented in the Reichstag
by men who in their vanity and self-will vie with each other in
ingratitude.
The Chinese Salon is about twenty-two paces in length by twelve in
breadth, and has three folding doors. One of these opens into the
dining-room, another into the second antechamber mentioned above,
and the third into the billiard-room, which also looks out on the
Wilhelmstrasse. The latter is of the same depth as the room just
described, and is about three paces less in length. This room is
full of historic memories, the spirit of decisive conferences. The
decisive interview with the “Duke of Schleswig-Holstein” took place
here in 1864, at which he, with his tenacious self-seeking and
narrow-mindedness, suddenly found himself transformed into a modest
“Hereditary Prince of Augustenburg.” In the last month preceding the
war of 1866 the walls of this chamber listened to a fateful exchange of
views between Herr von Bismarck and the Austrian Minister. Some time
afterwards Prince Napoleon was received here; and in the spring of 1870
the slight figure of Benedetti might be observed waiting in this room
for the Minister with whom he was to enter into negotiations.
If we now pass through the folding doors which open opposite those
leading into the Chinese Salon, we find ourselves in the Chancellor’s
study, a room about eleven paces long by ten broad.
There is no lack of pictures in this room. If we turn to the wall on
the right of the door through which we have entered we observe over a
sofa covered in dark red woollen stuff, a number of portraits in gilt
frames. The uppermost of these is a portrait, either lithographed or
in crayon, of the Emperor in plain clothes, then that of his sister,
the Grand Duchess of Mecklenburg-Schwerin, and two small photographs
of the Emperor in the uniform of a general. In front of this sofa
there lay in 1870 the skin of a white lioness, in whose head gleamed
two bright glass eyes. On the next wall, not far from the sofa, we
find, again in a gilt frame, the portrait of the King of Bavaria in
the dress of a civilian; and under this, framed in black, is a small
water-colour portrait of the King of Italy, as a permanent guest in the
Chancellor’s room. This picture has an interesting history, which will
be given in a subsequent chapter on the Prince’s own authority. Victor
Emmanuel, who is represented in uniform, has written a dedication under
it. Then follows a small mahogany table with books, a carved tobacco
chest, a white earthenware stove and a fireplace, together with a
narrow door, papered over. Turning towards the third door we observe
in a corner a carved pipe-rack, in which are a number of cherry-stick
and jasmin stems and thick unmounted meerschaum heads, without mounts.
Next to these is a cupboard with a mirror, and resting against it the
full-length portrait of a lady, in a carved oak frame. This is the
consort of Prince Charles, who died a few years ago. Behind this hang
a plaster medallion, in a black frame, giving the bust of Moltke in
profile, and above it the Great Elector and the Only Frederick look
down upon us in life-size lithograph half-length portraits framed in
gold. Further on we find a standing desk with maps, which, like all
the furniture in this room, is made of mahogany, and a photograph of
Princess Bismarck, also in a gilt frame. Near this a second papered
door leads into the Chancellor’s bedroom. On the wall to the left of
the door through which we entered is the only oil painting in the room,
a life-size portrait, in an oval gilt frame, of the Prince’s daughter,
in a ball dress. Beneath it on a cylinder desk stands a deer and a wild
boar in cast iron, and a thermometer in the form of an advertisement
pillar, and on a smaller adjoining table lies a collection of gloves
and white and red military caps.
The Minister’s writing-table, which our descendants will doubtless
find in some historical museum, occupies nearly the middle of the
room. It is about two and a half metres long by two in width, and is
so placed that the person sitting at it has his face turned towards
the wall with the oil painting which I have just described. Over it
hangs a red woollen bell pull, which many a time and oft has called
the Chancery attendant before the door, in order to summon me to make
my appearance before the Chief. On such occasions one hurried upstairs
instantly, leaving everything just as it happened to lie, stood before
the Chief at attention like a lieutenant before his general, all ear
and memory, and then rushed off again to his place to commit the orders
received to paper as speedily as possible. It was not permissible to
misunderstand; and questions as to what had been said were, for the
most part, also excluded, while the suggestion that something could not
be done met with an angry retort. It had to be done, and as a matter of
fact was done in most cases. A severe school, but he who would enjoy
the honour of having direct intercourse with a great man, of serving
him and his country, and of learning from him, must be able to overlook
a certain hardness in his nature. In the present instance this was
all the easier, as the Chancellor never bore a grudge, and could be
most amiable when off duty. Moreover, others, and some of very high
position, fared no better. “I am always frightened when I am obliged to
go up to him,” said his Excellency von Thile to me one evening.
Alongside the writing desk and its belongings stand two chairs
covered like the sofa, in one of which the Prince is accustomed to
sit on the appearance of a visitor, while he invites his guest to
occupy the other. At work he uses the oak armchair, with a low open
back, which stands behind the writing-table. On his right-hand side
is an _etagère_, upon the top of which rests the bronze figure of
a greyhound, and some writing paper and envelopes, lower down some
leather portfolios with documents, and quite at the bottom four or
five thick folio volumes. On the left of the writer is another stand,
with some handbooks. On a visit which I paid to the room in 1873, I
found among these books the thick volumes of the “List of Orders” from
1862 to 1868, a number of Petermann’s “Mittheilungen,” Marten’s “Guide
Diplomatique,” a collection of Hymns, “Hymnarium, Bluethen lateinischer
Kirchenpoesie” (Halle, 1868), Gottfried Cohn’s “Constitution and
Procedure of the British Parliament,” Joel’s “Lessons in the Russian
Language according to Ollendorff’s System,” and Schmidt’s “Small
Russian and German Dictionary.” On the green baize cover of the
writing-table usually lies a fold of red blotting paper on which the
Chancellor writes. To the right of this under a glass shade we notice
a gilt clock, on which a painter in Spanish costume sits with a pencil
and drawing board. We also observe on the green cloth a plain white
porcelain writing stand with a little gilding, four or five lead
pencils of the largest variety, such as the Minister now principally
uses, and half-a-dozen quill pens with the feathers cut short, which
are prepared by the artistic hand of Hofrath Willisch, one of the
decipherers, a paper knife, a seal, a couple of sticks of sealing wax,
and a candlestick with two candles.
In 1873 various additions were made: a paper-weight, with a piece of
the famous colossal zinc lion that stood up to 1864 in the churchyard
of Flensburg as a monument of the Danish victory at Idstedt, and which
has now been added to the trophies in the Berlin Zeughaus, and two
other paper-weights made of thick metal discs, one of which had been
cast from an Austrian cannon captured in 1866, and the second from
one of the French cannon taken in 1870; a pen-wiper in black, red,
and white; two columnar cigar-cutters; an ash-tray, in the form of a
large flower like a tulip, which, together with the two objects last
mentioned, have now been removed, as the Prince has given up smoking
for several years past on account of his health. Besides these, some
old Roman bronze lamps with handles formed of green serpents, a
terra-cotta pot with the figures of Massinissa and Sophonisba; and
finally, at that time, a few books lay on the table: the red bound
“Army List,” Hirth’s “Parlaments-almanach,” the Gotha handbooks, a
railway guide, and Henry Wheaton’s “Commentaire du Droit international.”
What tales could be told by that writing-table if it had understanding,
memory, and speech! What secrets, what mental struggles, what
inspiration and illumination, what slow development of ideas, what
sudden energetic decisions; what prayers, perhaps, may those pictures
on the walls have witnessed! How the eyes of old Fritz and of the
great Elector must have gleamed when they looked over the writer’s
shoulder as he drafted bold and far-reaching measures which were to
recast the German world, and with it the entire relations of Europe!
The creative mind that ruled here has departed, never to return. To-day
perhaps some unimportant but pretentious Herr von So-and-so, the
possessor of three high-sounding titles and three times three exalted
orders, makes himself at home in his old workshop, for this part of
the house has also been altered, and what was formerly on the ground
floor has now been shifted upstairs. In our thoughts, however, he
still occupies his old place. The Minister is now far away, but, as we
feel, only for a time. We, at any rate, feel his invisible presence.
We cannot picture to ourselves this historic chamber without thinking
of him as its occupant. We pass through it silently, and hold our
breath as if we might disturb him. We seem to be standing within sacred
precincts. And these must be the feelings of every one, even after
years and tens of years, who brings with him a sense of greatness and
of hero-worship. The house will one day disappear, and with it this
chamber. Otherwise the visitor who might come here a hundred years
hence would be still more deeply impressed than we are to-day, and an
inner voice would whisper to him, “Hush, this place is sacred ground!”
Continuing our tour of inspection through the front rooms, which were
occupied by Prince Bismarck up to 1878, we pass through the papered
door into the bed-chamber. Here the walls are covered with a white
paper. There is but one window with two curtains, one white and the
other of woollen stuff, with a black and red arabesque pattern. The bed
is shut in by a screen, covered with red cloth, and on an adjoining
shelf stand some cloth slippers and a pair of huge wooden shoes, with
the colours of the Empire painted across the instep, a present from
a simple-minded but skilful and patriotic patten-maker. A sofa in
green stuff stands against the wall opposite the bed, and near it a
table and a couple of cushioned armchairs. An old woodcut over the
sofa, representing two knights with horses and hounds, and a white
earthenware stove complete the fittings of the chamber.
As we return to the study previous to paying a short visit to the back
rooms of the residence, we may recall the circumstance that in 1873 a
large portrait of General Grant, in a handsome carved oak frame, rested
on a chair near the sofa in the former chamber, doubtless an indication
of the Prince’s liking for Americans. Their substantial qualities,
their practical character, which, however, neither excludes idealism
nor the power of self-sacrifice in its pursuit, their youthful audacity
combined with far-seeing shrewdness in all their public and private
undertakings, inspired the Prince with a hearty admiration, to which he
frequently gave expression in my presence.
Of the rooms at the back of the house, the windows of which open on the
courtyard with its nut-tree and on the garden, we need only inspect,
and quite cursorily, those in the main building. We enter first of all
a small sitting-room used by the Princess, in which hangs an excellent
picture of Bismarck in his Frankfurt days; and then we pass into a
larger room behind the billiard-room, which contains some oil paintings
of the Prince’s ancestors, amongst others his grandfather, to whom as a
youth he is said to have borne a striking resemblance.
The most interesting piece of furniture is a small mahogany table,
which conveys a faint echo of the historic deeds and events that
fill the stillness of the front rooms into the cosy comfort of these
family apartments. We read on a metal plate that has been inserted
into it: “The Preliminary Treaty of Peace between Germany and France
was signed upon this table on the 26th of February, 1871, at No. 14
Rue de Provence, Versailles.” I may add that the gold pen set with
diamonds which the Chancellor received for the purpose from one of his
admirers in the Grand Duchy of Baden, was really used in signing this
instrument. If I am not mistaken the Treaty with Bavaria, which was the
keystone in the building of the German Empire, was not signed upon this
table. Of course the owner of this otherwise comparatively worthless
piece of furniture, to which the Chancellor had thus given value and
importance, was provided with an exactly similar article.
Adjoining the tea-room is the chamber in which the Prince is accustomed
to take lunch, and where the family also occasionally dines. It lies
behind one half of the Chinese Salon, and like the latter is furnished
with a Turkish carpet, red-cushioned chairs and gilt mirrors, and
decorated with a few oil paintings, including a picture of Frederick
the Great and a portrait of Frederick William III. It may be mentioned
that the rooms just described play a not unimportant part in the orders
of the day for the official world below.
Towards 10 o’clock in the morning, sometimes later, seldom earlier,
one of the Chancery attendants comes into the Central Bureau and calls
out “The Prince is in the breakfast-room.” That is the _réveille_, the
first signal for action of the Chancellor’s little army of assistants,
to whom the departmental secretaries now hand all the despatches
and documents received for him through the post or otherwise. Some
time afterwards the second signal follows: “The Chancellor is in the
study”--a sign that the higher officials who have communications to
make may report themselves to the Chief, and that the others should
hold themselves in readiness to be summoned to him.
Finally, in busy seasons late at night, as a general rule about 10
P.M., those who have been kept at their desks by their work
(--while the Chancellor is in Berlin the faithful Lothar Bucher is
always amongst the last of these) hear the retreat sounded: “The
Chancellor is in the tea-room.” That puts an end to the day’s work, or
to the obligation of sitting booted and spurred, awaiting orders. The
workers put on their hats and leave, the shutters are closed, and the
Chancery servant puts out the lights.
CHAPTER II
FROM OUR RETURN FROM THE WAR UP TO THE TEMPORARY DISCONTINUANCE OF
MY PERSONAL INTERCOURSE WITH THE CHANCELLOR--GLIMPSES OF THE
DIPLOMATIC WORLD--COMMISSIONS FOR THE PRESS
After a few days’ rest we returned again to our former work at the
office, accustoming ourselves to it once more, so that everything
fell again into the old groove. The only difference for me was that
I continued to enjoy the privilege accorded to me at Versailles,
of access to all documents of a political character received by or
despatched from the Foreign Office. Some of these were entrusted to
my diary in the form of short summaries, or longer notices, together
with many of my experiences and observations of that period, and an
anthology of the tasks set to me by the Chief, which, as formerly,
I noted down at once for future use. And now these faded leaves may
themselves speak.
_March 24th, 1871._--To-day, as also during the last few days, read
old and recent despatches and other correspondence. It is reported
from Vienna that Beust has been “much affected” by the telegrams
exchanged by the Emperors William and Alexander, as from these it
would appear as if the forbearance shown by the Austrians up to the
last hour were not voluntary. A wire has been sent informing him that
the telegram of the German Emperor was a purely personal act, and
was despatched without the knowledge of the Minister. M. in Cassel
reported that Madame Guisolphe from Versailles had been with Napoleon
at Wilhelmshöhe; further, that Count Clary, passing as a M. Bertram,
had, shortly before our departure, twice visited Versailles at the
instance of the ex-Emperor, and then returned to Wilhelmshöhe; and
finally, that Count Meulan had also been there on a visit, and that his
communications appeared to afford Napoleon great satisfaction. Horace
Rumbold, the English Chargé d’Affaires at St. Petersburg, is stated,
in a report from that capital, to be vehemently hostile to Prussia as
well as to Russia. According to a despatch sent to Bernstorff on the
17th of March, in which a desire is expressed that Loftus should be
recalled, the latter had declared that England forbade the bombardment
of Paris, and would know how to prevent it through the influence of the
Crown Princess. A communication from Stockholm states that the King of
Sweden had also written to General Brincourt of the French Guards, who
had formerly been in Metz, and was there made prisoner by the Germans,
a letter in which he expressed sentiments of a strongly anti-German
character.
_March 29th._--A letter from St. Petersburg reports that Oubril has
been selected for the Russian Embassy in Paris, and that the Grand
Duchess Hélène wishes him to be succeeded in Berlin by Walujeff,
and not by the francophil Albedinski--also not by Orloff, who is
very sensitive, and whose policy is governed by the treatment which
he receives. The Emperor Alexander will nominate Walujeff if the
Emperor William desires it, and she, the Grand Duchess, is prepared
to communicate his wishes. Field Marshal von Berg, of Warsaw, is
understood to be very well affected towards us.
_April 7th._--Bucher told me this evening that “the venerable” Abeken
drafted the Treaty of Olmütz, which is hardly calculated to add to our
respect for the Herr Geheimrath, who passed through the room at the
time, whistling as he went.
_April 8th._--It is reported from Weimar, with “satisfaction and
pleasure,” that for some time past there has been a marked change for
the better in the political sentiments of the Grand Duke. “While his
Royal Highness has never spoken to the writer on political subjects
since the spring of 1866, and always carefully avoided touching upon
them even at the most decisive moments, turning the conversation to
private matters, he recently at a Court concert spoke to the writer
on the internal affairs of the German Empire, and expressed his warm
approval of the first parliamentary speech made by the Chancellor
against the Ultramontanes.” The report continues: “The Grand Duke
returned to the same subject yesterday at dinner, and spoke in high
praise of the Chancellor, whom he had desired to thank personally the
last time he was in Berlin, but had been unable to find at home.” The
communication concludes as follows: “It is to be hoped that the ice is
now broken, and that our relations with the Grand Duke will improve.”
It was probably on one of the immediately preceding or following
days of April that the Chief gave me the ideas for an article for
the press which I here reproduce: “On the formation of the Centre
Party, in which Savigny rendered considerable assistance, the public
was inclined to believe that the latter, who had been a Government
official up to 1866, wished to continue to support the Government.
In this view, however, the change which had taken place in his
attitude was overlooked. After the first draft of the Constitution
of the Confederation he was thought of for the post of Chancellor of
the Confederation, which, however, would then practically have had
only the importance of a presiding Minister, such as the Austrian
representative had formerly been at Frankfurt. But the Diet amended
the Constitution so as to make the Chancellor of the Confederation
a responsible Minister, and the position became entirely different.
It gave the Chancellor complete control of the affairs and policy of
the Confederation, and it had never been the intention of the King
to appoint Herr von Savigny to such a post. To the latter, however,
this was a severe disappointment, aggravated further by physical
discomforts, the worst of which was the necessity of again removing
from the apartments in the Chancellerie of the Confederation, which he
had already occupied and had arranged very comfortably.”
_April 10th._--Wollmann told me to-day that recently an indignant
communication with documentary enclosures had been received from
Fabrice, reporting that ----, who had been acting as Prefect in a
French provincial town, had been found guilty of serious misbehaviour.
Fabrice had for a long time regarded him as unfit for the post. Now, on
his departure, however, he was found in possession of 41,000 francs,
which he had concealed in some old clothes, together with a number of
silk curtains and chair covers, with which he wished to pack his boxes
on leaving. Finally, when receiving money from the French, he allowed
the latter less than 3 francs 75 centimes for the thaler, which was the
rate at which he paid it over to the Treasury, and put the difference
into his own pocket. Hardly credible, yet W. says that he has himself
seen the general’s letter.
_April 14th._--The Chief wishes to have the sensational stories
published by the _Avenir de Loire et Cher_ and the _Revue des Deux
Mondes_ contradicted in the press, and the real facts related--but
“not in the Berlin papers.” According to these romancers, we took away
with us the silver and table linen from Madame Jesse’s house, and the
Chancellor tried to extort a valuable clock from the poor oppressed
lady. The Minister at the same time gave me the necessary particulars.
The article appeared in the _Kölnische Zeitung_, of the 18th of April.
_April 16th._--Wrote the following article for the _Kölnische Zeitung_,
on information received from the Chief: “Is there not a proverb to the
effect, What is sauce for the goose is sauce also for the gander? For
some considerable time past, the west end of Paris has been bombarded,
and, indeed, without previous notice. A hail of shells has fallen on
the Turkish Legation, and there has been a similar downpour in the
immediate vicinity of the American Legation, so that Mr. Washburne
found himself obliged to remove to another part of the city. That
is done on behalf of a Government to whom these diplomatists are
accredited, yet, lo and behold, they make no complaint. Nor apparently
do any of their colleagues. If we Germans had no memory, we should
consider this silent resignation quite proper, as no one who takes
up his residence in a fortress is justified in protesting if he has
to share its fate, a rule which applies to diplomatists as well as
to all other mortals. But, having a memory, we may be permitted to
ask why did the diplomats residing in Paris shriek and protest so
loudly against our bombshells, when the majority of those gentlemen
were no longer accredited to any one, and therefore had no official
character? We refer to the declaration of eighteen foreign Ministers,
Chargés d’Affaires and Consuls-General, dated the 13th of January in
the present year, denouncing the bombardment of Paris by the German
army, and complaining that the citizens of neutral States were being
wounded and exposed to constant danger. It was further urged that the
bombardment had been begun without previous notice, thus depriving the
diplomats in question of the opportunity of warning their _protégés_.
Feeling their responsibility, they joined in a resolution, which was
unanimously adopted, in which they referred to the principles and
usages of international law in support of their demand, that measures
should be taken to enable them to bring the persons and property of
their countrymen into a place of safety. Nothing whatever of this kind
has taken place now. Shall we try to solve the riddle by assuming that
personal partisanship was the motive of the complaint, partisanship
against Germany and for France?”--I then quoted the names of the
diplomats who had formerly protested and were now silent.
_April 17th._--The Chancellor wishes to have the following inserted in
the _Kreuzzeitung_, with reference to an article in the _Standard_,
as reproduced by the _National Zeitung_: “The rumour as to a desire
being felt here in Berlin, that France and England should no longer be
represented in the capital of the German Empire by Ambassadors, but
only by simple Ministers, has afforded the _Standard_ an opportunity of
arguing in favour of such an alteration, as it ascribes the existing
usage mainly to the love of pomp and magnificence peculiar to the
Second Empire. We do not know what truth there is in the rumour in
question, but the grounds which lead the English newspaper to regard
it as probable seem to us very far fetched. Another consideration,
however, lies much nearer to hand, namely, whether the old diplomacy,
with its formalities and struggles for precedence, which have delayed
many a congress for weeks, can under any circumstances maintain
its position at the present stage of development of international
intercourse. A speed is now required in the transaction of business
which was not dreamt of in former times, and railways and telegraphs
furnish the means of achieving it. The prerogative which is put forward
in support of the maintenance of Ambassadors, namely, their personal
access to the Sovereign, is to our thinking largely outbalanced
by the mediæval pretensions in the matter of precedence, which a
diplomatic representative cannot forego so long as he bears the title
of Ambassador, but which nevertheless render him anything but welcome
at the Court to which he is accredited, to his colleagues, and to the
Government of the country.”
_April 18th._--Bucher brings me down the following sketch for an
article for Brass (_Norddeutsche Allgemeine Zeitung_): “Revolutions
usually proceed too slowly for the taste of the revolutionaries. Their
aspirations fly far in advance of the sluggish reality, and many a
soldier of liberty has already had to console himself with Lessing’s
observation, according to which there have been at all times, men who
had a just idea as to the future of the human race, but who made the
mistake of thinking that changes could be produced in months and years
for which history required generations and centuries. One of the most
remarkable features of the drama which is now being played in France
is that the development of affairs proceeds too rapidly for most of
the revolutionists, events outstripping the thoughts, wishes, hopes
and interests of individuals. On the 12th of March, a popular assembly
was elected by universal suffrage throughout the whole country, and a
government established by that body. On the 18th of March, the red flag
was in all seriousness hoisted in Paris. Garibaldi, on whose appearance
before a representative European mob at Geneva some years ago the Alps
bowed down their heads in veneration, and who a few years previously
had been fondled by the highest circles of the British aristocracy,
found himself obliged to decline the leading part for which he had been
cast in the drama. It is now the turn of the Poles. The friends of the
Poles in London, and the diplomatists of the Hôtel Lambert in Paris,
who have been working for that cause for forty years past, cannot
bridge the gulf which separates them from General Dombrowski. According
to a communication published yesterday, Count Ladislaus Plater will
not hear of any solidarity between the Polish emigrants and the Paris
Reds--each side must remain responsible for its own actions. Will this
communication, however, cause the world to forget that the bulk of
these Poles in every country have stood on the side of those parties
that fight against the State and undermine social order, and that the
fact of their having done so has been proclaimed both by the Polish
emigrants themselves and by others as one of their titles to fame? On
the contrary, we are convinced that in Count Plater’s protest, the
world will recognise an indirect acknowledgment that this has always
been the case, and will see in the events on the Lower Danube a new
proof that up to the present no change has taken place in this respect.”
_Evening._--Called to the Chief, who wishes to have the following
inserted in the _Norddeutsche Allgemeine Zeitung_:--“A meeting of
Catholics of all ranks and professions, which has been held at Munich,
has passed a resolution begging King Lewis to use every legal means
to avert the dangerous consequences of the dogma of Infallibility, to
prohibit its propagation in public educational institutions, and to
take speedy and energetic measures for regulating the relations between
Church and State in harmony with the Constitution. The petition which
was drawn up was signed on the spot by some two hundred persons, and
is now being circulated in various places for the purpose of obtaining
fresh signatures. Similar petitions are being prepared in most of the
Bavarian towns. It was to be expected from the beginning that this
movement would extend from the learned classes and the clergy to the
general public. The fact that this has occurred at the present moment
may unquestionably be attributed to the course taken by that party in
the German Reichstag which claims to monopolise the name of Catholic.
Its members have now had a proof that they made a mistake when at a
political meeting, which was summoned on a purely sectarian basis,
they formed themselves into a party which, dismissing all political
considerations, assumes an attitude of aggression towards the other
parties, and of defiance towards the Federal Government. The first
lesson which these gentlemen received through their defeat in the
Reichstag does not appear to have led them as yet to a recognition of
their error, as instead of seeking for its cause in themselves, they,
like all those who have a lust of power, try to make others responsible
for it, and pronounce the allied Governments to be guilty of criminal
neglect in not rushing to their assistance. Perhaps the movement in
Bavaria will convince them. If not, future events will do so. The
logic of facts, which wreaks vengeance upon them, will not cease with
the present step. The effacement of all political character on the
part of the Clericals must bring about an alliance against the latter,
between all other parties having political aims, whatever differences
may exist amongst them; and the attack which this non-political party
has undertaken to make will lead the political groups to adopt the
necessary means of defence against future assault.”
According to a report from Munich, the influential Cabinet Councillor
Eisenhart, and the Ministers Von Lutz and Von Schlör, manifest a
leaning towards the Döllinger movement, and if the latter should
develop a tendency to form a community of “Old Catholics”--that is to
say, of those who do not accept the dogma of Papal infallibility--the
Government would be prepared to protect them in their rights of
property. Read a letter from Switzerland, which has been sent to our
Minister at Berne with the remark that it has come from a shrewd
observer. The letter says that the Germans were themselves in fault
for the disorders at the Peace Celebration in Zurich. They had bragged
of successes for which they had not fought; and, indeed, up to the
present, they had been mere parasites. If the “respectable” Swiss press
now confirm the reports of these Germans who put everything in a false
light, that is due in the first place to the Liberal party, which wants
to make capital out of the affair against the democratic element, and
in the second place to the Gothard party, which is acting with the
former, and which fears that for some reason Germany may withdraw from
the promotion of the Tunnel project.
_April 20th._--We hear from Vienna that Beust is trying to draw nearer
to the Hohenwart and Klerhalm Ministry, as there is now a power in the
public life of Austria which is stronger than the Imperial Chancellor,
and which, although it now spares him, could at a later moment bring
about his fall. Many things which now happen probably have their origin
in the Cabinet of the Emperor, and are therefore due to Herr von Braun,
who is married to a Frankfurt lady, and who is in regular intercourse
with the ex-Senator Bernus, who, in turn, has frequent meetings with
Frese. Among the drafts is an instruction to W. in Munich, dated the
18th instant, which runs as follows: “In my telegram of the 7th I
referred to the attitude of the Clericals in the Reichstag, where their
hostility to the Imperial Government is becoming more evident from
day to day. At first it might have been expected that the party which
was being formed, even if it had a strongly Catholic tendency, would
not subordinate all political questions to sectarian differences, but
would, to some extent, join with the Imperial Government upon the basis
of Conservative principles and the honourable promotion of the common
national interests, supporting it in the same way as the strictly
orthodox wing of the Evangelical Church has done, without sacrificing
their independence. In consequence of this expectation, the Government
had observed a friendly attitude towards the party, and in the debate
on the Address had avoided any rejoinder to the plea openly put forward
for German intervention in Italy, in order to leave free play to the
expression of the various aspirations and views. That debate, and still
more those that followed on the introduction of certain fundamental
alterations in the constitution of the Empire, showed clearly that
the Clerical Party had developed into a close organisation on a
purely sectarian basis, and were prepared to sacrifice all national
and political interests to those of their creed. The result is that
they have made opponents of all the other parties, and particularly
of those Catholics who remain faithful to the national cause, finding
no support on any side except among the Hanoverian Separatists and
the Poles. I greatly regret these tactless and inept proceedings,
which aggravate the strain of sectarian differences. I learn that the
Clerical Party regards the failure of its efforts to find support in
the Federal Council as a sort of declaration of war on the part of the
Government. The allied Governments, on the other hand, find that the
aggressive tendencies of this party, which is only a continuation of
the attitude long since adopted, and, unfortunately, still maintained
by the Clerical press, naturally affects their position, and must force
them into taking defensive measures of a more effective character, and
oblige them on their side to assume the aggressive. The uncompromising
attitude of the Clericals greatly promotes the Döllinger movement, and
helps to win sympathy for it in circles which previously held aloof
from it, where the course taken is regarded as confirmation of the
assertion of Döllinger and his friends respecting the incompatibility
of Clerical and Ultramontane tendencies with the demands of a national
commonweal.” W. was to speak confidentially to Bray in this sense. I
find from one of W.’s reports that this has been done. The Bavarian
Minister has, indeed, expressed his agreement with the foregoing
statement, but the chief cause of his regret is that the foolish course
taken by the Clericals in the Reichstag has rendered it impossible for
the Government to co-operate with them, a policy which would, in his
opinion, have been desirable, and will now oblige it on principle to
oppose them. Döllinger, in his opinion, had also gone too far.
_April 21st._--This morning the Chief wished to have an article written
for the _Kölnische Zeitung_ calling attention to the contrast between
the intellectual impotence of the French and their self-conceit, and
to the circumstance that in recent times they have always had to
trust to foreigners for their salvation--a theme for which he gave me
the ideas. The article ran as follows: “The forces at the disposal
of the insurgents number about 120,000. In addition to these may be
reckoned some 10,000 or 12,000 more or less convinced Republicans who
have come from abroad, from the provinces, from Belgium, and from
England; and perhaps an equal number of criminals and misdemeanants.
A large proportion of the National Guards, who are only serving under
compulsion, long for the moment when they shall be obliged to lay
down their arms. The remainder consist of workmen who prefer the pay
of the Commune, the daily excitement and amusement of chasing former
gendarmes and policemen, to a peaceful return to their workshops. That
cannot last long. It would be unnatural if, among these thousands of
idle workmen and insurgents under duress, a disgust for such a life
did not make itself felt, together with a surfeit of the hardships of
the soldier’s trade, and a loosening of discipline. For the moment,
indeed, Dombrowski, who enjoys a certain popularity, succeeds in
holding them together. This is a new symptom of the extraordinary
intellectual poverty and weakness of will which characterises the
Frenchman of to-day, and particularly the Parisian. They boast of being
the centre of civilisation, the focus of the intelligence of our time;
and yet, lo and behold, in the recent crises they have always selected
foreigners for their leaders, and have sought their salvation abroad!
After the fall of the Empire they allowed themselves to be tyrannised
by Gambetta. At the same time they placed their hopes in Garibaldi,
another Italian, who would now be Dictator in Paris had he desired it.
Instead of Garibaldi, they must now depend upon Poles of the notorious
guild of ‘barricade heroes’--such as Dombrowski, Okolowitch, &c.;
while, finally, there is an almost universal wish entertained by the
party of order, who are dissatisfied with the lack of energy manifested
at Versailles, that the Germans--again foreigners--should undertake
the restoration of law and order.” The following is an almost literal
reproduction of the Chancellor’s own words: “Scarcely another people in
the whole world would condescend in such a pitiful way to borrow its
heroes from abroad. With the exception of these Parisians, who boast
of being the cream of civilisation, but who in reality are merely the
redskins of the pavement, as empty-headed and weak-willed as savages,
none would submit to be driven by energetic, although otherwise
insignificant, foreigners towards ends that are in every respect
opposed to their own interests. Truly a repulsive and most pitiable
degeneracy!”
_April 24th._--Called to the Chief this evening, and received
instructions and materials for an article in the _Kölnische Zeitung_,
which ran as follows: “If the French ship which came to Glückstadt
to convey 40,000 French prisoners of war back to their country was
obliged to return without having effected its object, the reasons were
very clearly indicated by the Imperial Chancellor in his last speech
in the Reichstag. According to the Preliminary Peace, the prisoners
were to be surrendered; but, on the other hand, the French Government
was not at liberty, until after the signature of the final treaty, to
station any troops between the Seine and the Loire, with the exception
of 40,000 men in Paris. In consideration of the embarrassment caused
to the Government of M. Thiers by the Communist rising, no objection
was raised on the part of Germany to the collection of a force of
over 40,000 men near Versailles; and, indeed, this measure was for a
time endorsed by the liberation of a large number of prisoners. The
Germans were, however, under no obligation to do this. On the contrary,
their obligation ceased so long as the French Government was not in
a position to fulfil its share of the undertaking to establish and
maintain a neutral zone between the Seine and Loire. The concessions
made on the German side in the matter of the liberation of prisoners
were voluntary concessions, mere acts of a complaisance dictated by
our own interest, the continuance of which depended entirely upon
circumstances, upon the good will manifested at Versailles, and upon
the confidence which may be reposed in Berlin, in the loyalty to
its treaty engagements, as well as the energy and capacity of the
Versailles Government. But there was also another consideration.
Notwithstanding the order issued by Favre, all the German prisoners in
the hands of the French have not yet been sent back, although their
liberation should have taken place immediately after the Convention
of the 28th of January. This is doubtless due to the independent
position of the French Minister of War, as well as of the Chief of
the Admiralty, who have shown a reluctance to discharge strictly
and speedily the engagements entered into by Favre and Thiers for
the release of some fourteen hundred German officers and soldiers,
who are still held as prisoners, as, amongst other matters, for the
surrender of the merchant vessels that had not been condemned before
the conclusion of the Preliminary Peace. Can the Versailles Government
fairly expect us to make further concessions when it has itself
contumaciously neglected the fulfilment of its own obligations for
fully three months?”
_April 29th._--The Minister wishes the following explanation of the
“double face” of the Paris Commune inserted in the press: “Many reports
from Paris, and all those originating with persons who have access to
the Government at Versailles, allude only to one of the tendencies
which have contributed to the revolution in Paris and the foundation of
the Commune. They represent it, namely, as the work of the cosmopolitan
revolutionary spirit and as an attempt to realise socialistic and
communistic chimeras. The truth of this is not to be denied. It is a
cosmopolitan revolutionary spirit which united under the communistic
flag MM. Dombrowski, Okolowitch, Stupny, Landuski, Burnaki and other
Polish ‘heroes of the barricades,’ together with the Garibaldians
and the crowd of Belgian and English members of the International,
and which won for them the sympathies of Bebel and Schraps in the
Imperial Diet. It is the grossest form of Communism that has united
these champions of revolt, with fifteen to twenty thousand liberated
criminals and the rest of the dregs of modern civilisation. But in
addition to the fantastic and criminal cravings of which these are the
representatives and tools, there is another element involved in the
present Revolution that should never be lost sight of. This movement,
which is thoroughly well founded, and is supported by order-loving and
sensible citizens, aims at a more reasonable municipal organisation by
the curtailment of an unnecessary and burdensome State guardianship.
This tendency is explained by the history of France. The tyrannous
municipal policy of Hausmann, which had a highly prejudicial effect
upon the interests of the Corporation of Paris, is a striking example
of the evils referred to. If the Parisians were given a municipal
constitution approximating to that of the Prussian towns in the
Hardenberg period many thoughtful and practical men in Paris who are
now opposed to the Versailles Government would be satisfied, and would
be no longer inclined to encourage the Revolution by their passive
support.”
_April 30th._--Yesterday and to-day read a number of interesting
documents treating of negotiations with Cluseret, the present general
of the Commune, and took note of them for future use. In the first of
these, dated the 10th instant, Fabrice was instructed by telegraph to
say in reply to Cluseret that he would listen to any overtures which
the latter might desire to make to him, and bring them to the knowledge
of the Chancellor. The telegram then continued: “If he should then
call upon you it might be possible, without actually negotiating, to
lead him to say how the Commune would propose to raise the money for
us. You might also be able to bring home to him the helplessness of
the whole affair, and in that way form an opinion as to the prospects
of an attempt at mediation between Paris and Versailles. In reply to a
despatch of the 21st of April, in which Fabrice says that the Commune
has no money, and that in order to raise some it has already seized
upon the property of societies and individuals, the Chief said that the
general should nevertheless sound them as to the surrender of Paris to
us, but only for purposes of information and report. The idea that the
Commune could be really considered solvent had been entirely foreign to
the telegram of the 10th instant. It was only a reconnaissance for the
purpose of ascertaining the intentions and resources of the holders of
power in Paris. Fabrice reports from Soissy on the 27th instant that
Holstein, who had remained behind with him, had had a meeting with
Cluseret, and that the Commune was disposed to pay a sum of 500,000,000
francs, of which 300,000,000 was in hand, in the form of securities
belonging to the city, while the remaining 200,000,000 could be raised
by the sale of the Octroi dues. In return for this the Germans would be
required to abstain from taking any part in the stoppage of supplies,
and not to deliver any of the forts occupied by them to the Versailles
Government. A desire was also expressed that we should endeavour to
bring about an understanding as to a _modus vivendi_ between the two
belligerent parties. There was a twofold basis upon which this could
be effected. One was that the city should be disarmed, but should not
be occupied by the troops of the Versailles Government, and that it
should be granted a communal administration, together with security
against a recurrence of Hausmann or Pietri Budgets. The second was
the dissolution of the present National Assembly, which had exhausted
its mandate, and a fresh appeal to France, whose decision would be
accepted by Paris. Cluseret had described the Socialist and other
excesses as a phase of this ‘drôle de mouvement’ which had now passed
away. He treated the military siege of the city as an impossibility,
but begged, in the event of Versailles being, in spite of all human
probability, victorious, that they should not be permitted to destroy
Paris. This, as well as the expectation that we might mediate, was only
a desire on their part, and not one of the conditions of payment. The
Frenchman then observed that negotiations with us would subject him to
less suspicion in Paris than would negotiations with the Versailles
Government. He further promised to release all German prisoners as
soon as he was informed who and where they were, and also to move at
once for the liberation of the Archbishop, whose imprisonment was an
inheritance from the first phase of the movement. Finally, he repeated
that the only important points were our neutrality and the abstention
from interference with their supplies, as from a military standpoint
the Versailles people caused him no anxiety.”
The Chief replied on the same day, that from this it appeared, if
Cluseret’s views could be accepted as authoritative in Paris, that
mediation between the latter and Versailles was not hopeless; those
views being more moderate than he had expected, particularly with
regard to disarmament. Fabrice might try to ascertain what Favre
thought of the first alternative. In the meantime our attitude should
be made to correspond with Cluseret’s expectations by observing
neutrality, and taking no part in the maintenance of the cordon round
Paris. A despatch setting forth the reasons for this course would be
sent to him, Fabrice, that day. The telegram concluded: “The demands of
the French negotiators in Brussels with respect to the five milliards
and the Eastern Railway show _qu’on se moque de nous_.”
These telegrams were supplemented by a further communication dated
the day before yesterday, which said that Fabrice should keep up the
relations that had been established with Cluseret, and should try to
ascertain whether he was of opinion that in case of the disarmament
of the city and its non-occupation by the Versailles troops it could
be garrisoned by our soldiers. If that were the case it would be
desirable to make a serious endeavour to mediate with Versailles.
Communal independence, after the fashion of the Prussian municipal
regulations, was not in itself an unreasonable demand, if no efforts
were made to secure communistic adjuncts. Perhaps it would be possible
to sever the reasonable communal movement from the international one.
If in doing this we succeeded in occupying Paris with the approval of
the two parties, guaranteeing communal independence until the French
had come to an understanding among themselves, and intervening with a
strong hand in restoring domestic peace in France, we should improve
our own position and gain fresh securities against possible bad faith
at Versailles. In these circumstances Fabrice was to avoid taking sides
in any way against the Parisians.
The despatch mentioned in the last telegram of the 27th of April, which
was to be forwarded by courier on the same day, began by referring to a
telegram from Fabrice, according to which Favre begged in a formal Note
that the French troops might be permitted to pass through our lines
over the Northern Railway and force their way into Paris; further,
that the German military authorities should call upon the insurgents
to disarm the enceinte, in accordance with the Convention of the 28th
of January; and, finally, that the French army might be permitted to
pass through the district and gate of St. Ouen. It runs as follows:
“The French Government requests us to permit the passage of their
troops through St. Ouen. This lies within the neutral zone, where the
presence of both armies is forbidden by the Convention of the 28th of
January. In order to enable us to agree to this we should be convinced
that any arrangements we may come to with the French Government would
be carried out by the latter. This conviction has been shaken by the
dilatoriness of the French in the fulfilment of previous obligations,
and by certain indications of a tendency to place an arbitrary
interpretation, contrary to their true sense, upon stipulations that
are now in force. The French Government is in arrears with the greater
part of the money payable for the maintenance of our troops, with
the release of German prisoners of war, and with the issue of clear
and peremptory instructions to the Governors of the Colonies and the
Commanders of the naval stations in Eastern Asia for the suspension
of hostilities. The disposition to put a construction upon agreements
which they never had, as well as to extend and override them without
an understanding with us, is betrayed by the collection of 140,000
troops, where they are only justified in having 100,000; in the attempt
to reduce the war indemnity by making payments below par; and in what,
to my astonishment, appears to be the manifestation of a desire for
the commencement of the evacuation of the districts occupied by us.
If the French Government should really assert that we are bound, upon
the payment of the first half milliard, and before the conclusion of a
definitive peace, to any sort of evacuation, that circumstance would
destroy all my confidence in its loyalty, as during the negotiations no
other view was ever held than that a definitive peace must precede any
evacuation by us of this side of the Seine.
“It was then supposed that the conclusion of a definitive peace would
take place previous to any payment by France. M. Thiers expressed his
intention to commence his financial operations after a lapse of two
months at the earliest, and considered that the definitive treaty would
be concluded in from four to six weeks. There was no question that the
whole present occupation was regarded as a guarantee to us for the
conclusion of the definitive peace; and the terms clearly show that
all the evacuation yet to take place was subordinated to the final
peace, and that the payments only affected the various stages of these
evacuations. The sentence following these stipulations, according to
which the evacuation is to take place after the conclusion of peace
and after the payment of the first half milliard, was not contained
in the original text. M. Thiers wished to have it concluded, and M.
Favre considered it superfluous. I declared myself in favour of its
inclusion, as on the day before I had agreed that a comparatively
large and important stage of the evacuation should be made dependent
upon this first payment, which might be reckoned on the basis of the
proportion between the entire territory occupied and the whole five
milliards. M. Thiers kept me to my word, which I acknowledged; but
there was never any question of the evacuation of this side of the
Seine before the ratification of the definitive treaty of peace.
“Should the French entertain any doubt on this point your Excellency
will explain to M. Favre that I would rather advise his Majesty to
_immediately_ renew hostilities than submit to such a falsification of
the spirit in which the Versailles negotiations were conducted.
“The decision of his Majesty with respect to our expected co-operation,
direct or indirect, will depend, on the one hand, upon military
considerations which are still under discussion, as well as upon
the contents of the French official overtures announced in your
Excellency’s telegram No. 196. On the other hand, we must take
advantage of the present situation with the object of removing every
uncertainty which the French may endeavour to read into our agreements.
Should your Excellency really have occasion to suppose, as would
appear to me from the contents of your reports of the 22nd and 23rd
instant, that the French intend to interpret the treaty of peace as if
the sentence in Article 3--_L’evacuation des départements--s’opèrera
graduellement après la ratification du traité de paix definitif_--were
modified by that which follows it, separated only by a semi-colon:
_après le versement--la rive droite_, in such a way that the words of
the first sentence, from _après_ to _definitif_, would be rendered of
no effect for the territory in question, your Excellency will please
demand from the French Government, in the form of an ultimatum, a
clear explanation upon this point. Were this to be refused I should
lose all faith in its intention to honourably fulfil its treaty
obligations, and it would then become desirable to renew the military
operations as early as possible. We will not permit ourselves to
be cozened out of our present position, but will, on the contrary,
hold fast to it until the definitive peace has been concluded to our
satisfaction. We have made these stipulations in order that we may
be able to bring pressure to bear with this object. So long as the
obligations undertaken, but not yet fulfilled, by France with respect
to the indemnity and the prisoners of war remain unfulfilled, and so
long as the above-mentioned doubt as to the intentions of the French
Government respecting the interpretation of the preliminary peace and
the conclusion of a definitive treaty is not removed, I must advise his
Majesty against every form of support for the Versailles Government;
and instead of any such support, I must recommend that a demand be at
once addressed to the French authorities to reduce the number of their
troops in accordance with the terms of the treaty, or to be prepared
for a renewal of hostilities.”
_May 1st._--According to a communication of yesterday’s date, from
Fabrice, Colonel de la Haye had said to him, that probably a memorial
from Thiers would be received, and not the Note from Favre, which had
been announced, and that Favre had repeatedly declared that France
was now fulfilling the obligations which she had undertaken, would
continue to do so, and was prepared to conclude peace, and to recognise
the preliminaries as merely intended to lead up to it. In return, he
asked for permission to attack Paris by way of Epinay, and the Northern
Railway line, through St. Denis, and that the Commune should be called
upon, in accordance with the Convention, to withdraw its troops from
the enceinte. The colonel requested Fabrice to inform the Chancellor of
this. Should the latter decline, the French Government would be able
to say, in the presence of Europe, that it had discharged its duty to
the best of its ability, but that Germany prevented it from offering
an effective resistance to the insurrection. Favre declared that he
had exhausted all his resources, and that it was now necessary to know
whether Prussia wished to favour the Government or the Commune. De la
Haye had expressed a strong desire that Fabrice should not communicate
this statement to the Chief, before the receipt of Thiers’ memorial.
Fabrice, first of all, begged the Frenchman to hasten the despatch of
the letter, but, also before that was done, to explain to Favre the
significance and consequences of the demand which he expected us to
make upon the Commune for the disarmament of the enceinte, a point
upon which Favre did not, at the moment, appear to be quite clear. To
this the Prince replied immediately, that we were not _bound_ by any
Convention to help the French Government, although we were justified
in demanding from it the disarmament of the enceinte, and eventually
enforcing the same, if we found it to be in our interest. The latter,
however, was not the case. We had no interest in overthrowing the
opponents of the French Government at the cost of German blood, so
long as that Government did not carry out the stipulations of the
preliminary treaty, but sought, on the contrary, to alter them to
our prejudice. With the object of dissipating the mistrust that had
arisen in this way, by means of a personal discussion of stronger
guarantees, or of a fixed term for the payment of the five milliards,
the Chancellor finally proposed to Favre that they should meet at
Frankfurt or Mainz on any day he chose to select. As I saw later, Favre
telegraphed that he would be in Frankfurt on Friday, and the Chief
replied that he would arrive there on Saturday--perhaps because he
considers Friday unlucky.
_May 2nd, evening._--On the instructions of the Prince wrote an article
for the _Kölnische Zeitung_, which was dated from Lagny, and was based
on the foregoing despatch and other information. It was to be submitted
for approbation upstairs to-morrow, before being despatched. It ran
as follows: “The conduct of the French Government in the matter of
the execution of the preliminaries of peace is quite enigmatic, not
to use the stronger term of prevarication. In the position which it
occupies towards the insurrection in the capital, which is growing
more and more serious, it stands in urgent need of the good will of
the Germans, of their indirect assistance, or, at least, of their
neutrality. Yet up to the last few days it has shown itself extremely
remiss in the fulfilment of the treaties concluded with us in January
and March, quibbling in a very suspicious way over their most important
stipulations, seeking in Brussels, as we hear, to enforce views which,
if adopted in the definitive treaty, would bring about a change, by
no means favourable to Germany, of the basis secured by us in the
preliminary peace at Versailles. Moreover, it would appear that these
unacceptable proposals are brought forward merely with the object of
protracting the negotiations, and, in the interval thus gained, of
securing, through the suppression of the insurrection of the Paris
Communists, a position which would perhaps permit them, with some hope
of success, to demand easier terms from those who have the control
of our policy. M. Thiers’ Government only paid the maintenance money
in a tardy way, and under the pressure of threats from the Germans.
It temporised with the liberation of the German prisoners who still
remain in France, and it shirked in like manner the just demands
of the Germans for the surrender of the prize vessels that had not
been condemned before the conclusion of the preliminary peace. There
is reason to believe that it collected more troops near Versailles
than had been agreed to in Berlin in view of so desperate a conflict
with a powerful insurrection. It expressed an opinion that we were
bound to evacuate the forts of St. Denis and Charenton--not after the
ratification of the definitive peace, but after the receipt by us of
the first half milliard. Finally, it caused proposals to be made in
Brussels respecting the payment of the five milliards which were in no
sense justified by the preliminary treaty, and which, if accepted--a
thing utterly inconceivable--would delay the payment to a late period,
and, besides, would leave Germany only four-fifths, and perhaps only
three-fifths, of the war indemnity guaranteed in the agreement of
the 26th of February. It is not to be wondered at if these and other
similar facts have shaken the confidence which was felt at first on
the German side in the loyalty of the leading French statesmen, if
suspicion has begun to be felt, and if some disinclination exists to
continue the favours which have already been extended to the French
Government in dealing with the insurrection--favours which the latter
sorely needed, and, it seems, formally asked for--until mistrust
has been dispelled by explanations of an unequivocal character, or,
perhaps, entirely removed by fresh guarantees. It is reported that
the Chief of the Executive has been left in no doubt upon this point,
and it is now stated here that M. Favre, who is understood to have
given least ground for want of confidence, will in a few days have a
conference with Prince Bismarck, for the purpose of giving explanations
and coming to an understanding. It will take place, as we hear, at
Frankfurt. It is to be hoped that this meeting will clear up the
situation and hasten the conclusion of a definitive peace.”
_May 3rd._--The foregoing article was returned to me unaltered from
upstairs, and is now on its way to Cologne. Among the documents
received, the following is of importance: F. reports from Soissy, on
the 1st instant, that on the previous day Cahn, who is now attached
to the Swiss Embassy, was authorised at the instance of Cluseret to go
through the French prisons to find what Germans were detained there, in
order that they may be set at liberty. Cluseret had also stated that
he had proposed the liberation of the Archbishop. It was true that
part of the Committee was opposed to this measure, but the life of
his Eminence was nevertheless perfectly safe. A meeting with Cluseret
was arranged for on the 1st instant. Cahn, however, came instead, and
reported that Cluseret was now replaced by Captain Rossel as Minister
of War for the Commune. Cahn was then instructed to see the latter, and
ask him whether he maintained the decision of his predecessor as to the
liberation of the German prisoners, and to seriously warn him against
any ill-treatment of the Archbishop. The telegram adds that this will
give the Commune an opportunity of entering into relations with us. If
they do not avail themselves of it, doubtless an anti-German intrigue
will have had something to do with the fall of Cluseret. The supply of
provisions for Paris is seriously retarded on the north side, owing to
the exceptional vigilance of the French administration, which is very
well informed.
According to a report from St. Petersburg of the 26th of April,
the King of Denmark has written to the Tsarevna, asking her to beg
the Emperor Alexander to bring up the question of North Schleswig
in Berlin. The Grand Duchess did not give her father’s letter to
the Emperor himself, but applied to the Empress, who afterwards
communicated its contents to him. Although the Emperor Alexander had
said nothing on the subject to R., he nevertheless observed that he
greatly desired to have a talk with the Emperor William, and hoped
to see him in June either in Berlin or at Ems. The Grand Duchess
Hélène informed R. of this, and asked what reply she should give to
the Tsarevna, who had repeatedly inquired whether he had not said
anything on this affair. The Grand Duchess was of opinion that our
Government, whose German sentiments were doubted by no one, could now
in its hour of triumph more easily make concessions than before. The
matter might one day become unpleasant, and counter-concessions of a
commercial character (?) could now be demanded from Denmark, which
would secure the position of individual Germans in the territory to be
ceded. R. replied that Germany would be prepared to make concessions,
but that Denmark would not be satisfied with what could be granted.
The reason of the Emperor Alexander’s great anxiety to see the affair
settled is that he knows how eagerly the Danish Court stimulates the
anti-German sentiments of the heir to the Russian throne. The same
authority reports that the French Government, through the Marquis de
Gabriac, their present representative in St. Petersburg, has complained
to Gortschakoff that we are no longer as friendly as we were, and
requested him to mediate between France and ourselves. This request
was, however, declined, attention being called to the obligations
undertaken in the preliminary peace, the fulfilment of which was the
right means of securing the good will of Germany. At a Court ball the
Emperor Alexander also observed to the marquis: “_Remplissez d’abord
loyalement vos engagements et après je serai votre avocat, si vous
aurez des raisons de plainte. Aujourdhui ces raisons je ne les vois
pas._”
_May 4th._--The Chancellor, who leaves for Frankfurt to-morrow, wishes
the _Kölnische Zeitung_ to write somewhat as follows on the object
of the journey: “The personal conference between Prince Bismarck
and the French Minister for Foreign Affairs, the necessity of which
has been felt for some considerable time past, will have begun by
the time these lines go to press. To-morrow morning at 8 o’clock the
Imperial Chancellor, accompanied by the Councillors of Embassy Bucher,
Count Hatzfeldt, and the Attaché Count Wartensleben, will leave for
Frankfurt, where Jules Favre will probably have already arrived.
Apparently the French have come to understand that their interests
urgently require the removal of the suspicions which have arisen in
regard to their good faith since the arrangement at Versailles. We
ourselves must also know exactly where we stand with them. It is
necessary to hasten the conclusion of a definitive peace. Some progress
must finally be made in that matter, and France must cease to imagine
that we will allow ourselves to be kept dangling in suspense, or to
be imposed upon and manœuvred into an unfavourable position. She must
respect our rights and not endeavour by pettifogging subterfuges to
whittle down, or perhaps, indeed, disown the consequences of the
preliminary peace. It may be taken for granted that the principal
subjects to be dealt with at Frankfurt will be the manner of payment
of the war indemnity of five milliards of francs, the surrender of
the German merchant vessels which were not condemned by the Prize
Courts before the signature of the preliminary treaty, the position of
the Eastern Railway--which, after the Versailles arrangement, can no
longer be regarded as an open question, although it has been treated
as such by the Government of M. Thiers--and finally the regulation of
the frontier. On the German side, however, it will be sought first of
all to clear up the situation, and hasten the negotiations for peace,
which have been brought to a standstill through the unjustifiable
demands of the French. It is to be hoped that the Frankfurt
negotiations will open the eyes of those members of the French
Government who have not yet succeeded in thoroughly understanding the
position of affairs, and in recognising the legitimacy of the claims
based upon it from the German standpoint, and their necessity from the
French standpoint. In all probability they will not fail to receive a
serious and unequivocal reminder of this necessity from our side.”
_May 6th._--Again a few comic episodes to break the monotony of these
grave affairs. Prince Peter of Oldenburg, who seems to be a very
ancient gentleman, writing from St. Petersburg, sent the Chief a
memoir which he forwarded to the Emperor on the 1st of April (not as
a joke for All Fools’ Day), in which, after proclaiming his strictly
monarchical, legitimist, conservative and religious principles, he
argues, in an extremely prolix and nebulous fashion, in favour of
perpetual peace, and begs the Chancellor to summon a Conference for the
Abolition of War. This _magnum opus_ ought to be laid in its author’s
coffin. Wollmann says that Abeken is in the habit of keeping the
envelopes of letters from the King in order, as he is reported to have
said, “that the handwriting of his Imperial and Royal master should
not be trampled upon by muddy shoes.” He is said to have whole bundles
of these relics in his possession. Very touching! Bucher afterwards
confirmed the fact that Abeken had actually delivered himself of the
above remark. He appears to have acquired this tender sentimentality
during his stay in the East. He ought to have been Councillor of
Embassy to the Dalai Lama.
_May 14th._--The Chief is again here. Count Wartensleben, who was with
him at Frankfurt, told me to-day that he had been out driving with
the Chancellor several times outside the town, and while they were
walking about in the woods the latter gave him numerous particulars
of his negotiations with the Frenchmen. “Once,” said the Count, who
by the way is a very pleasant young man, “in speaking of the German
negotiators at Brussels, he remarked to me, ‘It is very unlucky for
those gentlemen that we cannot conclude our business there.’ (Possibly
on account of the gratuities in the way of orders.) ‘I am particularly
sorry for poor Balan. But what can one do? The snipe must be shot where
it rises.’ Another time (it was after the first conference with Favre
and Pouyer-Quertier) he looked very fagged and worried, and on my
asking him about it he replied that the French had proved exceptionally
obstinate. He told me then how he managed to secure himself an ally
against them. He said, ‘I proposed to Favre to bring M. Goulard to the
Conference as he was a member of the National Assembly. Favre was at
first greatly surprised at this suggestion, and would not hear of it.
I pointed out to him, however, that it would be to his own advantage.
Goulard would feel flattered and would be grateful to him, and would
furthermore as one of the negotiators support him, Favre, in the
National Assembly. Favre thereupon consented.’ But it was also of great
advantage for the Chief (continued Wartensleben), as when Favre finally
consented, the little gentleman in the white necktie and high stand-up
collar was also grateful to him for being admitted to the negotiations,
and when the two others were inclined to refuse something he always
spoke in favour of giving way--it could be managed, he would himself
take the responsibility for it, he thought that one really might agree
to it. Eventually Favre thanked the Chief formally for his advice to
include Goulard.”
_May 15th._--On the instructions of the Chief, wrote to Brass
respecting an article in No. 113 of the _Norddeutsche Allgemeine
Zeitung_, that the Prince did not consider it proper for a journal
which was praised in another paper to reproduce this praise, and he
positively prohibited all such misconduct in future.
_May 17th._--Yesterday and to-day again read a number of telegrams
and other documents received and despatched, which threw light on
the Frankfurt negotiations and recent events in Paris. The Chief
had from Frankfurt addressed an inquiry to Fabrice as to whether he
believed that progress had been made in the fusion between the Comte
de Chambord and the Princes of the House of Orleans, and whether it
had a prospect of success. Count Arnim thought it had. The Republican
form of government in France was more to our advantage, and therefore
he would not oppose it unless he were compelled to. A telegram to
Moltke on the 18th instant informed him that the Chief hoped to bring
about the conclusion of a definitive peace at Frankfurt. Some of the
conditions would, however, be that we should assist as far as possible
in promoting the speedy occupation of Paris, which would then be in
our interest, without exposing our men to danger, and in particular
that we should consider the question of the passage of the French
troops through our lines, of calling upon the Commune to evacuate the
enceinte, of cutting off the supply of provisions, and of immediately
liberating 20,000 prisoners of war for use in Algeria and the larger
towns of the south. In case it were possible to secure at Frankfurt
a peace which should receive the approbation of the Emperor, Moltke
was requested to take the necessary preparatory measures for the
above purposes. A short telegram of the same day, addressed to Thile
and which was to be communicated to Delbrück, says that on the two
preceding days the Chief was engaged in negotiations for fifteen
hours, and had sent Favre a “strong ultimatum.” Another telegram
reports to the Emperor that, according to the French Ministers, the
stability of the present Government will in a great measure depend
upon the speedy conclusion of the definitive treaty of peace. On the
11th a further telegram was sent to Moltke saying that, from Fabrice’s
reports, the French generals, believing they could themselves dispose
of the Communists, would endeavour so to arrange matters that they
could dispense with our co-operation. But in that case also it would
be desirable to mass our troops near Paris, as we could thus bring
pressure to bear upon the French National Assembly in connection with
the ratification of the treaty which would be discussed in about ten
days, by exciting the apprehensions of that body as to the decision
which we might take if the treaty were rejected.
Again a comic interlude between the serious scenes of the drama.
Fabrice sends a report from Lieutenant von Mirbach, of the Guards,
at St. Denis, which reached him through General von Pape, with the
extremely naïve marginal note: “Most obediently submitted for kind
consideration with the object of promoting the accession to the French
throne of Prince Frederick Charles.” The document in question was to
the following effect. Persons of all ranks and conditions, and quite
recently an Attaché of the American Embassy, had inquired whether it
was true that Prince Frederick Charles had been selected as the Regent
of France. As far back as the winter a party had been formed with that
object. Merchants, bankers, manufacturers, many citizens of standing
and repute, “including even noblemen,” wished to offer the throne
to the Prince, and were sure of the support of their friends, their
employees, and of a part of the press. “Influential agents and leaders
of the National Guard, and even some important members of the Commune,
are understood to be well disposed towards this plan. The American
inquired whether a deputation from this ‘Prussian’ party would be well
received.” The writer had been informed by the “rich M. Vincent,” the
Commandant of the National Guard in Versailles, and by M. de Bastide,
that the same scheme had been discussed in that town. Obviously some
one has been playing off a joke on the lieutenant, for, although we
live in an age of miracles, it would be a miracle of miracles if a
French party were now found to desire for their ruler a nephew of our
old Master, after the efforts made by France to prevent the election
as King of Spain of the Prince of Hohenzollern, who is only a remote
relative of the Emperor William.
The Commander-in-Chief of the Third Army Corps in Compiègne has
been informed that a conference took place on the 11th instant at
Soissy between General von Schlotheim and General Borel, the chief of
MacMahon’s staff.
“MacMahon desires to deliver the main attack on Paris on the west front
of the enceinte, from the Bois de Boulogne or Billancourt against
the bastion of the Point du Jour. In order to prevent the insurgents
from continuing their resistance in the city from point to point, he
wishes, at the same time--that is, during the same night--to endeavour
to surprise the north front, and seize some positions in the north of
Paris. Ten or twelve thousand men would be employed for this purpose,
who would start in the evening from Gemevilliers, and march by way
of Villeneuve, La Garonne and St. Denis, as also through Epinay,
St. Denis, and Aubervilliers, towards the gates of La Chapelle and
La Villette. With the assistance of some of the commandants of the
National Guard, with whom an understanding was being entered into, and
by taking advantage of the railway, and of the numerous conveyances
which still frequented the main roads, it was considered possible to
bring small detachments of trustworthy troops right into the city.
In case the attack were repulsed, MacMahon binds himself to withdraw
all the troops employed by him along the same route, on the same day,
behind the rayon on this side, that is to say, behind the left bank
of the Seine. By this means the proximity of French and German troops
for any length of time would be avoided. Permission could hardly be
refused for the French troops to march through St. Denis, although
they are on no account to be allowed to tarry or post reserves there.
General Borel was obviously desirous of preventing all co-operation
on the part of the German troops and of the forts occupied by us, and
gave it clearly to be understood that he regarded such direct support
as undesirable on political grounds. He did not believe the insurgents
would venture to pursue the storming parties in case the latter did
not succeed--an opinion which is also shared here--and he positively
denied that the French Commander-in-Chief intended to bombard the north
front, or to proceed to a regular attack upon it if the surprise were
to fail. As, according to these overtures, the French were prepared to
forego our co-operation, and our own forces in and behind the forts
are quite sufficient, I have, as already reported in a telegram of the
10th instant, given up the idea of a concentration of further troops
outside Paris. In accordance with the wishes of the French Government,
I consider it desirable in the first place to avoid everything that
would attract the attention of the insurgents to the north front, and
thereby endanger the success of the surprise. At the same time we
consider it necessary to avert, as far as possible, all accidental
losses to our troops should the insurgents, after repelling an attack,
open fire with their artillery on the retiring French columns. In
the event of his Majesty the Emperor and King afterwards expressly
ordering the German troops to co-operate in the attack on Paris, I
venture to express the humble opinion that, in view of the situation at
the present moment, when the resistance is already organised and the
insurgents are accustomed to fire, a simple bombardment of the enceinte
would scarcely secure our object. It might then be desirable to proceed
against the nearest gates and bastions with a battering train posted on
the plateau of Romainville, and probably an occupation of the enceinte
would only be attended with decisive success after we had advanced as
far as Buttes Chamont, as this position commands the greater part of
the northern half of Paris.”
Bucher informed me this evening that Professor Aegidi of Bonn has
entered the Foreign Office as Councillor in charge of press matters,
and is to undertake the appointment of agents, journalists, and other
such gentlemen. He added: “Something has already been said in the
newspapers on the subject. One newspaper contained a note, which had
doubtless been provided by Aegidi himself, to the effect that he would
replace Abeken, who had begun to grow old and weak. That ruffled our
friend very considerably, and he grew as red as a turkey-cock as he
remarked: ‘In such circumstances one can only wish to retire at once on
his pension.’” Bucher further stated that Aegidi had been recommended
by Keudell, whose cousin he had married, and who had previously secured
him the position at Bonn after he had failed in Hamburg. In conclusion
Bucher said: “Keudell has already appointed many useless people and
expended large sums upon them. For example, some time ago he took up a
Dane, whom he employed as an agent and richly remunerated, but who did
absolutely nothing.” I recalled the case of Rasch, and B. said that he
too had advised against employing him, describing him as a conceited
blockhead to Keudell, who nevertheless sent him to Garibaldi with
20,000 thalers.
A telegram of the 15th instant from Fabrice states that the French
had demanded in a despatch that the cordon drawn round Paris should
be made complete so far as the German troops were concerned, as it
was important that the leaders of this criminal undertaking (the
Commune) should not escape the hands of justice. In reply to the French
Government, Fabrice said that Borel had come to no understanding
with the Third Army Corps respecting a blockade of the city. If the
cordon was to be drawn at an early date, it would have to be preceded
by an arrangement of that kind. The Chief telegraphed at once that,
according to the understanding arrived at in Frankfurt, we were bound
to completely isolate Paris as soon as the French desired it, to permit
the Versailles troops to march through our lines, and to call upon the
Commune to withdraw from the enceinte. We were not bound, however,
to emphasise this demand by force of arms. But the three points in
question must be carried into effect by the Commander-in-Chief, as we
should otherwise commit a breach of the agreement entered into with the
French Government.
It previously appeared from a pencil minute by Abeken on a report from
Fabrice that we had offered, or that the French had demanded, something
more than this, namely, in addition to the complete isolation of the
city and the passage of the French troops through our lines, we should,
in case the French Government asked for our support, give it in the
shape of an artillery attack upon the enceinte, and, if the French
storming parties were to fail, use all our forces to prevent a pursuit
on the part of the Parisians.
_May 20th._--According to a report from Stuttgart of the 17th instant,
von Wachter, the Würtemberg Minister for Foreign Affairs, had remarked
that King Charles now considered Würtemberg not to have been properly
treated in connection with the Frankfurt treaty of peace (on the
previous day he had known nothing about it), and he appeared to feel
hurt at this. The Würtemberg Minister at Munich has reported that
the treatment of Bavaria in connection with the conclusion of peace
is greatly blamed in competent circles there, and that Count Quadt
has been instructed to give expression to this dissatisfaction. It
is doubtless Bavaria, therefore, that has altered the sentiments of
Würtemberg.
Count von F., who has been in London, has informed Balan that the
French Ambassador to the English Court, as well as the Duc de Grammont,
have attracted a great deal of attention by their want of tact. The
former had remarked to the Count in a reproachful tone that the
Socialists in Paris had been principally recruited in Belgium. Grammont
predicted the approaching return of Napoleon to France, and added, “_Et
alors on va bientôt mettre fin à cette ridicule chose qu’on appelle la
Belgique._” Prince Napoleon, on the other hand, had observed to the
Count that the neutrality of Belgium was an advantage to France during
the last war. Baron Baude, the French Minister in Brussels, had stated
in the presence of the English Minister d’Anethan that immediately
after the Versailles troops had taken possession of Paris the National
Assembly would proclaim the Comte de Chambord as King.
_May 24th._--To-day read and noted down the draft of a despatch by
the Chief respecting the International, and joint action on the part
of the Governments against this organisation of the Socialist party.
This is to be utilised in the press. The despatch is dated the 7th
instant, and is addressed to Schweinitz in Vienna. Drafted at first by
Abeken, the Chancellor struck out all but eight or ten lines, and then
completed it in his own hand. Thus transformed it reads as follows:
“The events that have occurred in Paris during the last few weeks
and days, have disclosed in the most unmistakable fashion the common
organisation of the Socialistic elements in European countries, and
the dangers with which the State is threatened by that organisation.
In Germany the influence of the Communistic working class associations
is evident in the large centres of industry in our western provinces,
and particularly in the manufacturing districts of Saxony. Herr Bebel,
a member of Parliament, who is said to receive pecuniary support
for his agitation from the funds of the late King of Hanover, has
in the Reichstag given open expression to the criminal intentions
of his party. Certain symptoms would go to show that in Austria,
and indeed in Vienna itself, this agitation is making way among the
workers. If your Excellency considers that the desire, and indeed the
necessity, of opposing these movements of disaffection is felt by the
Imperial Austro-Hungarian Government, please initiate a confidential
discussion of ways and means. In my opinion, the first step would be an
exchange of views respecting the extent and direction of the Socialist
organisation, and the recognition of the principle that Socialist
menaces to life and property, such as have been carried into execution
in Paris, belong to the category of ordinary crime, and not to that of
political offences.”
I here add the contents of some other documents on the same subject
received and despatched later.
Writing on the 3rd of June, R. reported that the Emperor Alexander
said to him that he intended to discuss with the Emperor William and
the Chief the question of the means by which the European monarchies
could be protected from the Socialist danger, and in particular from
the International. In his opinion all the Governments of Europe should
unite and assist one another in the struggle against this enemy. The
Emperor will have a memorial on the subject drawn up by the Minister
of Justice, in which, in particular, evidence will be adduced with the
object of proving that the members of these Socialistic associations
should be treated, not as political offenders, but as ordinary
criminals.
During the second week of June, Bucher was much occupied in studying
the International; and despatches drawn up by him were sent to
Florence, Brussels, Vienna, and London. These were intended to pave
the way for a joint intervention of the Governments against the
agitation of the Communists. That addressed to Brassier St. Simon was
dated the 9th of June, and that to Bernstorff the 14th. The following
passage occurred in the former: “However much the ultimate aims of
the revolutionary elements may differ in various countries, according
to the conditions of the latter, yet their immediate purpose is in
every instance the same, namely, the overthrow of the existing order
in the State. It therefore follows that all existing Governments have
a common interest in opposing them. When the State is defeated by the
revolutionary movement in any one country, as was the case in Paris for
two months, its power will be reduced in all other countries, and that
of its opponents proportionately increased.”
On the 12th of June, the Chief’s answer, in which he gave an account
of the steps already taken, was despatched to R. He had first sent the
enclosed despatch to General von Schweinitz, and afterwards caused
the latter to speak to Count Andrassy, who (perhaps in consequence
of a private request on the part of the Chief) had already mooted
the subject confidentially, in the same way as he had done to Count
Beust. He (the Chief) then had copies of the despatch sent to the
representatives of the Empire in Brussels, Florence, Dresden, and
London, with the addition in each instance of some further observations
more applicable to the special conditions of the country in question.
In Brussels he had had attention called to the fact that Belgium,
on account of its geographical position and its condition in regard
to languages and industry, was most exposed to danger; that in the
year 1868, on the occasion of the first International Congress of the
Working Classes, Belgium was the scene of the first proclamation
of Communism; and that, according to the statement of the leaders
of the Paris Commune, Belgium had been chosen as the next field for
their practical operations. In Florence he pointed out that the great
associations which kept up disturbances in Italy, if they did not
follow the same ends as the Communists, were still at one with them in
their immediate task, namely, the overthrow of the existing Government
and form of State, and were intimately associated with them, as was
evident from the appearance of the Garibaldians in Paris. In Dresden
it was pointed out that the industrial districts of Saxony furnished
the largest contingent of Socialist members to the Reichstag. And,
finally, in London it was shown that there the Communist associations,
which had in the fifties given rise to criminal trials in Germany and
France, together with the international union of the working classes,
an offspring of that association, were founded in London, which was
their official centre.
Count Waldersee (at present interim representative of Germany at
Versailles) has been instructed to inform M. Jules Favre, in connection
with his circular of the 6th instant, of our readiness to co-operate.
All these communications contained as an enclosure an article from _The
Times_, apparently based on official information.
About the middle of June Beust suggested that a “Note” should be sent
asking for information respecting the Socialist organisation. The Chief
believes that Beust’s proposal contemplates “blue-book lucubrations,
which would only hamper the attainment of the real object in view,”
as it would give warning to the Socialists and furnish the European
press with a theme for denouncing new “Karlsbad resolutions,” and, to
judge from the bias displayed in other complicated compilations of a
similar character, the Austrian Chancellor would not be above making
capital out of it for the benefit of his own popularity. The Minister
was therefore to inform him that we were prepared, without any official
demand on his part, to furnish him with the results of our observations
upon the connection between the Communistic parties. A letter, dated
the 26th of June, and addressed to S., contains the following further
remarks: “I find him (Baron von Gablenz) much more disposed to meet
our views in the matter of joint action against this danger (the
Socialistic agitation) than has hitherto been the case in Vienna. He
was of opinion that the Emperor Francis Joseph was very favourably
inclined towards the understanding we had suggested.... I have not
concealed from him, however, that Count Beust’s desire to see this
suggestion embodied in the form of a ‘Note’ has, to some extent, cooled
our zeal.”
B. reports, under date of the 1st of June, that Baron d’Anethan is
in perfect agreement with the proposal of the Chief for an exchange
of communications on the extent and direction of the Socialistic
agitation, and also as to the recognition of the principle that
Socialistic threats against life and property should be included
in the category of ordinary crimes. He furthermore considers it
absolutely necessary that the Governments should unite in establishing
an international principle, and, acting on that basis, should proceed
against the revolutionary agitation with inexorable rigour. The Belgian
Minister strongly condemned the attitude of England, and expressed the
apprehension that it would be difficult to procure the adhesion of the
English Government to a common understanding.
There are grounds for believing that the motive for raising the whole
subject was less the danger of the Socialist organisation (which,
however, was strongly emphasised by me in the press under instructions
from the Chief, and afterwards on my own account in the pamphlet _Zur
Geschichte der Internationale_, Leipzig, 1872) than the opportunity
which would be thereby afforded of bringing all the Powers together for
the consideration, in common, of _one_ question; and, in particular,
of producing a _rapprochement_ between two of them. In other words,
the main object of the manœuvre was to maintain the antagonism between
Russia and France--the land of the Commune, by exaggerating the danger
of the International, and to win over Austria.
I now return to the chronological order of my diary, observing at the
same time that some of the most important notes and instructions which
I received from the Chief at that time cannot be reproduced, as the
slips upon which they were written have been mislaid.
_May 30th._--The _National Zeitung_, commenting in an exceptionally
violent and discourteous tone upon an article in Brass’s paper, spoke
of “the Mamelukes of the _Norddeutsche Allgemeine Zeitung_,” of a
“coarseness and boorishness, that can only be explained by the habits
of literary menials,” and of the “tone of the Imperial Chancellor to
which the anti-Parliamentary press, watching his every gesture, and
exhibiting the zeal of a retriever, barks in eager response.” The
Chief wished to have a reply written to this article, somewhat to
the following effect. It was not necessary to enter into the attacks
made upon the newspaper. The specimens quoted from the organ of MM.
Bamberger and Lasker would suffice to show that persons who gave
vent to their own irritation in that style were hardly entitled to
complain of the manner in which others expressed themselves. But
when the article charges the Imperial Chancellor with adopting an
unseemly attitude towards the Reichstag, whereas his attitude has been
eminently prudent and patriotic, when it accuses him of “domineering
over men,” and of “demanding blind submission,” it may well be asked
what part of the verbatim reports has given rise to these invectives.
(From this point on dictation.) “We, who have not left these reports
unread, as the author of this philippic would appear to have done,
fail to find anything in the expressions of the Imperial Chancellor,
but a declaration, for which he gave his reasons, that the motion
under discussion was unacceptable, and that if it were maintained
he could not undertake the responsibility for the administration of
Alsace-Lorraine, during the period of provisional government. If any
one discovers, in what he said, anything which would appear to justify
in any way the charges in question, we would ask him to remember
that a tone of bitterness and violence was _first_ adopted by the
Reichstag, and exactly by that party which takes credit for prudence
and patriotism--and in general not without justification. We at least
fail to recognise as models of prudence and patriotism, the sallies
of Herr Bamberger in the last debate, in which he fell upon the Post
Office officials. ‘When all is said, we are curs,’ and ‘Look out for
the whip,’ were some of the flowers of rhetoric with which he presented
the Government--and Herr von Hoverbeck’s feats of eloquence on the same
occasion leave us in the same difficulty.”
_May 31st._--Wrote to Brass to-day on the instructions of the Chief
respecting the leading article in No. 124 of the _Norddeutsche
Allgemeine Zeitung_, which struck the Prince as too vehement in its
attack upon the National Liberals. I recommended greater moderation
and dignity. In reply, Brass excuses himself on the ground that he
received that article from an official source, and was, therefore, in a
dilemma--which is very probable.
A letter is to be sent to Vienna to-day, saying that Favre had stated
at Frankfurt that a proposal from Beust in favour of the Pope had
been submitted to the Versailles Government. This was made in such a
form as to give rise to the inference that it was in harmony with the
intentions of the Emperor William, as it referred to intimations from
Count Bray, and Bavaria would not, presumably, adopt a policy on that
question which deviated from that of the German Empire. S. is then
requested to make guarded inquiries as to whether the Bavarian Minister
for Foreign Affairs has taken any, and if so, what, steps in that
direction. Of course, there was no doubt as to Bray’s personal views in
the matter, but only a desire that, should he have actually taken such
steps in Vienna, no room should have been left for misconception as to
the personal and individual character of his action. The German Foreign
Office had had no share in it, and “we have,” the letter concludes,
“avoided, up to the present, expressing any opinion on the Roman
question, or on the attitude of the German Empire towards it.”
_June 5th._--Wrote an article, dated from Darmstadt, for the _Kölnische
Zeitung_. The Chief gave me the information. The article ran as follows:
“However much our new Ministers may adapt themselves to circumstances,
it is nevertheless no secret that the feeling in the spheres above
them still continues unfavourable to the new state of things in
Germany, and that it is sought here to preserve as much as possible
of the old arrangements without causing too great offence. Whatever
the spontaneous initiative of the powers that be fails to do in this
direction is supplied by the very considerable influence of Prince
Alexander, who is still associated with those circles in Vienna which
in German affairs have learnt nothing and forgotten nothing, and which
now as formerly exercise a kind of co-regency that makes itself felt in
many different ways. A case in point is the maintenance of the Legation
in Vienna, which has long since lost all importance, particularly since
the foundation of the German Empire through the Versailles Treaties.
We hear on good authority that the present holder of that office,
Heinrich von Gagern, the whilom President of the Frankfurt Parliament,
requested several months ago to be allowed to retire from his post,
at the same time recommending that it should be abolished, but he
received a negative answer. He is now understood to have repeated his
request and recommendation to the new Minister for Foreign Affairs,
and--as we are informed--Herr von Lindelhof was not unfavourably
disposed, particularly as there is no prospect of the representative
body continuing to vote supplies for this post, which has become
purely ornamental, as a necessary item of expenditure. In the highest
quarters, however, a different view prevails, which is evidently due
to the Prince, and if Gagern is permitted to resign he will have a
successor. It is understood that in these circumstances the prospective
successor would be von Biegeleben, the Prince’s intimate friend, a
statesman as Ultramontane as could be found in the Episcopal Palace at
Mainz, and as anti-Prussian as could be desired anywhere. I report
this merely as a symptom of the sentiments prevailing in competent
quarters here. Given adequate power, mischief can be wrought even
without a Legation, but when that element is lacking, all diplomatic
posts become merely ornamental, not to say ridiculous.”
_June 7th._--According to a communication from Bernstorff of the 3rd
instant, Brunnow reports that Napoleon has greatly aged and become
very infirm. He speaks with gratitude of our Emperor and without
hatred of Prussia; while, on the other hand, he is strongly incensed
against Thiers and Favre, who will be overtaken by the just vengeance
of Heaven for having brought about the overthrow of the Empire. Their
punishment has already commenced in the severe conditions to which they
have been compelled to allow the country to be subjected. According to
this report, the Emperor did not express any hope of his restoration.
The Empress, however, is full of courage, and has great expectations.
The Bonapartists share her views. Some of them look forward to a
restoration of Napoleon; and others, though a minority, to the regency
of the Empress. Hopes are entertained that although Germany might
not give any direct assistance to a restoration, it would moderate
the conditions of peace if Napoleon were re-elected. In case of a
plebiscite also, Germany might be helpful in the occupied provinces.
Some are in favour of a national vote, as they feel sure of the rural
population; while others are for violent measures, relying upon 180,000
soldiers. In their opinion, the main point is that neither the Comte de
Chambord nor any one of the Orleans has any prospect of success.
The following communication was sent to Fabrice on the 4th inst.:
“As the Government of which M. Thiers is the head has concluded a
definitive peace with us, it is in our interest, and in that of our
international position, to recognise only the present Government in
France, so long as no other Government has been evolved out of it in
a legal way which would secure for the future the execution of the
Treaty of Peace, and the maintenance of the present relations between
the two countries. The present Government is bound by its past, and
by its entire position, to fulfil its obligations towards us, and
it therefore finds a support in Germany. Any other Government which
may seize power in an irregular way may possibly seek its salvation
by sacrificing to popularity the treaties concluded with us, and in
that manner force us to renew the war. We have, therefore, not only
an interest in the maintenance of the present Government, but also
the right to withhold our recognition from any violent change in the
form of government, however brought about, and to make our decision
dependent upon the guarantees provided for our treaty interests. It
must, furthermore, be remembered that everything calculated to disturb
order, which is scarcely restored as yet, must prejudicially affect
the power of France to meet its obligations towards us within the
periods laid down in the treaty, whoever may be at the head of affairs,
and that we must therefore desire to avoid every crisis which would
lead to a renewal of civil war. You will please express yourself in
this sense to the French Government, and make it clear to them beyond
all question that in those portions of the country which we occupy
we shall recognise no alteration in the form, and no change in the
principal holders of power, which does not arise out of the existing
situation in the regular way, and in accordance with the laws now in
force. We are giving evidence of the confidence which we repose in
the present Government by rapidly reducing the German forces in the
occupied districts. Should new movements in France force us to doubt
the maintenance of the peace which has been concluded, your Excellency
is aware that within fourteen days we could again put the same army in
the field which we had in France last winter.”
_June 11th._--Fabrice telegraphed the day before yesterday to the Chief
stating, _inter alia_, that the rapid withdrawal of our troops outside
Paris and elsewhere before the payment of the first half milliard was
obviously exercising an influence upon the temper and behaviour of the
population, whose attitude would grow more and more confident, if not
hostile, as the evacuation proceeded. Washburne had confidently advised
prudence, and in speaking to Holstein had described the sentiments
of the Parisians towards the Germans as doubtful, adding that the
Government lacked the power, and perhaps the will, to counteract this
tendency, and that the protection of the Germans in Paris depended
solely upon the German garrisons still in the neighbourhood. No
reliance could be placed upon the future development of affairs in
France. The first two milliards would be paid in order to give Germany
a sense of security. The balance of three milliards, however, would
not be paid--as had been openly stated by personages in authority,
not soldiers--while, on the other hand, there was a determination to
recover the ceded territories.
The Chief thereupon telegraphed to the Saxon General yesterday
that neither were we bound nor did we intend to reduce the zone of
occupation, and that we should certainly not evacuate the forts before
the date specified in the Treaty of Frankfurt. If we reduced the
number of our troops in the occupied districts, it was not that we
trusted France, but only that we had confidence in our own rapidity of
mobilisation. It was possible that the French would not carry out the
treaty of peace in full, and even that they intended to attack us, but
as soon as the mobilisation of the French forces rendered the latter
eventuality probable, or if there were a wilful delay in the payments
to be made, a force of 600,000 could, within a fortnight, be put into
the field between Metz and Paris. He, Fabrice, should permit no doubt
to exist upon this point. It was cheaper to strengthen our forces
outside Paris as required than to leave them there for an indefinite
period. There was no disposition to conceal the possibility of a
renewal of the war, but on the other hand such a renewal was not feared.
_June 19th._--This morning read a number of telegrams which have
been exchanged between Waldersee and the Chief, from which it would
almost seem as if it might come to hostilities if the French only
had sufficient power. On the evening of the 15th instant their
troops stationed near Lilas pushed forward their outposts to within
twenty-five paces of ours, and on ground that belonged to us. The
Chief, upon advices to this effect from Waldersee on the 16th instant,
immediately instructed him to demand the punishment of the officers who
had been guilty of this breach of existing arrangements, adding that
our men had received instructions to attack the French troops posted
within rifle range of them if the latter did not withdraw in the course
of the day. He would also immediately advise the King to withdraw the
orders for the recall of all our troops until satisfaction had been
received. A telegram to the like effect was at the same time despatched
to Favre. It concluded as follows: “_Les protestations du commandant
allemand contre cette violation des stipulations en vigueur sont
restées infructueuses. Je regrette vivement un incident qui trouble
les relations de confiance mutuelle qui commençaient à naître._” The
Frenchmen were greatly frightened by this _Quos ego_, particularly
MacMahon, who immediately ordered the withdrawal of the troops from a
position in which they had no right to be.
Favre has declared that Pouyer-Quertier cannot pay the first half
milliard before the 15th of July, as the Ministry of Finance has been
destroyed (by the Communists). Moreover, the restoration of order,
mentioned in Article 7 of the treaty, has not yet been completed. In a
telegram sent to Waldersee the day before yesterday the Chief described
these observations as “impudent,” and instructed Waldersee to tell
Favre that if the money is not paid on the 1st of July, France will
have failed to fulfil its obligations under the article in question.
Waldersee further reported the day before yesterday that he had
presented his credentials to Favre, and was then received by Thiers.
His reception by both gentlemen was exceedingly polite and amiable.
A 6 per cent. voluntary loan of two milliards, with a 15 per cent.
payment on account, was to be placed on the market on the 26th of June.
With the money raised by this means, and with some other funds at the
disposal of the Government, a payment of 375 million francs would
be made. Thiers assured him that with the best will in the world he
could not promise him the complete payment of the first half milliard
before the 10th of July, as nobody could foresee at the present moment
how the subscriptions would go. He, Waldersee, had, however, insisted
upon the 1st of July, as otherwise we should be driven to question
the good will of the French, and moreover--owing to certain financial
arrangements--we required the money at that date. Thiers replied that
he both desired and hoped to be able to begin the payment on the 1st,
but it was a physical impossibility for him to collect the whole sum
before the 10th. Waldersee had not stated that the proposal would be
accepted in Berlin.
The Chief thereupon telegraphed the same day that the proposal of
M. Thiers was incompatible with the 7th Article of the Frankfurt
Treaty of Peace, and could not, therefore, be accepted without
counter-concessions. The telegram continues: “Besides, the
understanding at first was that the occupation of Paris should be
taken as the term for this payment, and it was only in consequence
of a concession made by us out of complaisance that the expression
‘_rétablissement de l’autorité_’ was inserted in the French draft of
the treaty. Furthermore, through an oversight, the payment of the
following 125 millions was fixed in the French draft at sixty days
after the payment of the 375 millions, instead of thirty days, or sixty
days after the occupation of Paris, as M. Pouyer-Quertier himself
had proposed. In the presence of the unconciliatory attitude which
the French negotiators now manifest, we see no occasion to show them
any favour without counter-concessions. If, therefore, the French
Government does not make the payment provided for by the treaty on the
1st of July, we must regard it as a failure to fulfil its obligations
under Article 7. I beg your Excellency to leave M. Favre in no doubt
upon this point.”
_June 20th._--Again an amusing interlude provided by the diplomatic
world. Von K., a Russian envoy abroad, has addressed to the Emperor
Alexander a long memorial dated the 25th of May, or the 6th of
June according to our calendar. This document, which deals with the
Socialist parties and agitation in Germany, includes the following,
among a number of other extraordinary whimsicalities: “Wuttke (Our
Leipzig Professor and Puzzlehead), _un des piliers républicains en
Saxe, a dit dernièrement assez haut pour être entendu à Dresde: ‘Dans
cinq ans il n’y aura plus de princes.’_” Most wonderful and admirable
knowledge of affairs and men! Wuttke, a pillar and prophet of Saxon
Republicanism! And this is the sort of stuff which a diplomatist
reports with a serious face!
_June 22nd._--Under instructions from the Chief utilised in the press
the main ideas of a memorandum written by Bucher on the Paris Commune,
and the reasons why it was not supported in the provinces. This
document, which was dated the 17th instant, was forwarded to Vienna.
(...)
The following appears in the _Volkszeitung_ to-day: “We have been
requested to publish the following letter: ‘Desiring an audience of his
Serene Highness Prince Bismarck, I addressed him as he was passing in
the street, for the purpose of obtaining permission to present myself.
Hardly had I spoken to the Prince before two detectives laid hold of
me by both arms and wanted to arrest me. In spite of my protest that I
was under no obligation to accompany two civilians, and moreover that
I had committed no offence, I was dragged through the streets to the
police station in the Taubenstrasse. I was then taken in charge of a
policeman to the Molkenmarkt, where I was kept in custody for the whole
night, being liberated at 11 o’clock next morning, with the remark that
my arrest was doubtless due to a misunderstanding. I leave the whole
affair to the judgment of the public. H. L. Back.’”
_June 23rd._--Called this morning to the Chief, who showed me the
above letter. He was in good humour, and while dressing he gave me the
following account of the incident. “As I was leaving the Reichstag
on my way home an exceptionally greasy individual, evidently a Jew,
came up and said he wished to have an audience of me. I declined,
but he remained at my side and kept on talking to me, I would surely
not refuse a German writer such a request, as he had something of
importance to communicate to me. Yes, but I do though, I replied, I
never give audiences to German authors. He continued to follow me,
however (with the fly-like persistence, obtrusiveness and foolhardiness
of the young Jew), and while he kept on talking he pressed so close to
me that he trod on one of my spurs, breaking it off. I wheeled round
and was about to chastise him physically, when the two policemen took
him in charge. He really was exceptionally greasy, one could have
scraped the pot-house fat off him.” Wrote a paragraph on the subject
for the papers.
Called again to the Minister later on, and received instructions for
an article on certain pretended revelations of a M. de Vallon in the
Versailles Assembly, which had been commented upon in the _National
Zeitung_. He read through and corrected this article before it was
sent off. In giving me the information, he said: “Favre has here
made several erroneous statements. He gave an inaccurate account of
the facts in his speech of the 19th instant, in which he referred to
Vallon’s assertion that he, Favre, had told him I had been disposed
at Ferrières to conclude peace on the cession of Strassburg and its
environs. He declared that at that time there had been no negotiations
respecting peace, though M. de Bismarck had, indeed, told him that it
would be possible to negotiate on the conditions indicated by M. de
Vallon in the National Assembly. Say, with reference to that point,
that the French Minister for Foreign Affairs had thereby given evidence
of a defective memory. Or, better still, say: It is quite conceivable
that all the details of several long interviews have not been retained
with equal clearness by all those concerned in them. According to the
reports now before us, the question of the armistice occupied the
first place, as a means of preparing the way for peace through the
convocation of a National Assembly; but the peace itself was also
discussed. M. Favre himself says this in his report of September last
to the Government of National Defence, describing the occurrences at
Haute Maison. There we read: ‘After I had made known the intentions of
the French Government by means of a circular, I desired to ascertain
those of the Prussian Minister. It seemed to me out of the question
that two nations, without first ascertaining each other’s views, should
continue a war which, notwithstanding its advantages for the victor,
would be a cause of great suffering. Brought about by the will of one
individual, this war had no longer any _raison d’être_ when France had
again become her own mistress. I vouched for her love of peace, and at
the same time for her resolve not to accept any conditions which would
transform this peace into a short and threatening armistice. M. de
Bismarck replied that if he were convinced of the possibility of such a
peace, he would sign it immediately.’
“On this occasion M. Favre also ascertained the conditions put forward
by Germany, and these were by no means restricted to the cession of
Strassburg and its environs. M. Favre’s above-mentioned report goes
on to say: ‘On my pressing him very strongly with respect to the
conditions, he told me plainly that the security of his country imposed
upon him the necessity of retaining the territory which would guarantee
the same. He repeated several times: Strassburg is the key of the
house. (I said _our_ house.) I begged him to speak still more plainly.
That is useless, he replied, as we cannot come to an understanding;
that is a matter that can be settled later. I requested him to do so
immediately. (The following is given in italics in the article.) He
then said to me that the departments of the Upper and Lower Rhine
and a portion of the Moselle department, with Metz, Château Salins,
and Soissons (incorrect, it was Saargemund which was mentioned) were
indispensable to him, and that he could not forego them.’”
About the same time, probably shortly before the above article was
written, the following communiqué was prepared for the _Norddeutsche
Allgemeine Zeitung_ under instructions from the Chief, who also saw
and corrected it before it was sent to the press. He struck out the
portions within brackets, although they were almost literally his own
words: “Reports reach us daily of bad treatment and serious prejudice
to their rights to which the Germans in France, and particularly those
in Paris, are subjected. Bankers dismiss German clerks who have served
them long and faithfully; manufacturers announce that they will no
longer employ German workpeople; even academies and institutions,
centres of French learning (and, as one would wish to think, of French
wisdom), indulge in anti-German demonstrations, and decline in future
to elect any corresponding members from among the German citizens
of the Universal Republic of Letters. All these, more or less petty
expressions of bitter resentment, may be merely regarded as symptoms
of a feeling which is of significance for the future, and against
which we must secure ourselves. But the French, and particularly the
Parisians, have gone further in the petty warfare, which they carry on
in continuation of the great war now concluded. Incited by an unbridled
press, they have permitted themselves to adopt towards those Germans
who have returned to France, either to put their affairs in order, or
to reopen business, an attitude which would be regarded by civilised
nations as improper, even in time of war. They have prevented Germans
from opening their shops, and have wrecked German establishments. They
have prohibited other Germans from attending the Bourse, and have
arrested harmless German subjects, simply because they were Germans.
That is not an affair of the _future_, but of the immediate present,
and demands immediate redress. We have concluded peace, and we honestly
and sincerely desire to maintain it, but of course, on the assumption
that the French people preserve this peace, which was sought for and
demanded by their Government. If the offences in question are not
(speedily and thoroughly) checked, and if the French Government does
not protect peaceful and law-abiding Germans, we must, in the interest
of German subjects, and in view of the honour of Germany, decide upon
the reprisals to be exercised. We should not be surprised if, then,
for every German illegally arrested and not released immediately upon
representations being made, arrests of French citizens were ordered in
those districts of France which we temporarily occupy. We should not
consider it out of order, if the evacuation of certain departments were
postponed until these passions had calmed down, and indeed, according
to circumstances, these regrettable occurrences might lead to fresh
action against Paris, which is the seat of the evil.”
_June 24th._--Wrote the following article for Brass from materials
supplied by the Chief, whose attention was called to the matter by
an article in the _Schlesische Zeitung_, on “Napoleon and the Men of
the 4th of September”: “Trochu’s attempt to exculpate himself before
the bar of public opinion has failed conclusively. His speech only
confirmed the fact that he had betrayed the Emperor by using, in
order to bring about his fall, the forces entrusted to him. It was
principally through the men on the 4th of September that he came to
the head of affairs. He was chiefly responsible for the continuation
of the war from that date. And in addition to his treason came his
incapacity. He was constantly giving assurances that he had plans which
would infallibly succeed, and yet when they were carried out not one
of them was really successful. When he finally, however, with brazen
impudence charges the Prussians with having supported the Commune and
with complicity in the scenes of terror enacted since the outbreak
of the Socialist conspiracy, it may be pointed out (1) that German
policy would have incurred no reproach before Europe if it had shown a
certain readiness to meet the Commune during the first weeks following
the 18th of March, when it had not as yet disclosed its true nature,
particularly as there appeared to be very little good will and very
considerable equivocation on the other side; (2) that there has been
no question of any kind of complaisance on the part of the Germans
towards the Commune, to say nothing of an understanding or of support,
and that, on the contrary, everything which was permissible in the
circumstances was done to assist the Versailles Government in its
preparations to suppress the rising, and during the fighting itself. It
is therefore to be expected that the members of the French Government,
who are better informed, will contradict the assertions of the General,
which if not mendacious are at least utterly erroneous. We still await
such a correction. If this disavowal were not made we should consider
it desirable that the matter should be taken up on the German side and
that those diplomatic documents should be published which show that
assistance was really given and in what manner, and that this was done
at the wish and request of the Versailles Government.”
_June 30th._--During the last few days again read a number of
interesting documents despatched and received. Tauffkirchen, the
Bavarian representative at the Curia, reported from Rome on the 21st
inst. that the Pope had spoken to him on the previous day of the danger
by which society was threatened by the Communists. “They are,” he said,
as he drove away some flies from his table, “like these insects. It is
no use to kill a few, still less to drive them away. General measures
must be taken to prevent their entrance and propagation.” Respecting
the removal of the Italian Government to Rome, a recent despatch says
that if the King proceeds thither the foreign representatives will
follow him in accordance with diplomatic custom. If the Minister for
Foreign Affairs were to reside there without the sovereign, it would
then depend upon the requirements of business whether, and for how
long, an envoy would go to Rome for purposes of personal communication.
France and Austria had instructed their representatives to follow the
Minister to Rome, irrespective of the circumstance whether Victor
Emmanuel went there or not; in that case, however, they were to take
leave of absence, leaving a substitute in charge. A despatch from
Waldersee, dated the 25th instant, contains the following sentence:
“It is not in the interest of the Empire that the different Federal
States should maintain separate envoys abroad. We may, however, await
their gradual disappearance as a work of time, and as the result of
the Budget debates in the several States.” According to a report from
Tauffkirchen, Prince Löwenstein-Heubach, who has gone to Rome on behalf
of the Clericals, threatened Cardinal Antonelli with the consequences
of any disavowal of the Centre party in the Reichstag.
_July 2nd._--The Chief asked me yesterday if I had not, in accordance
with his instructions, informed Brass[4] that he should cease his
attacks upon the French Government. I replied: “Yes, several times,
both by letter and verbally.” He then said: “That must be put a stop
to. But I believe he is paid by Napoleon.” To-day he wished me to send
Brass the following article, for which he gave me the ideas. “There has
been much discussion of the question, whether the war indemnity imposed
upon France by Germany is too high, and whether the former will be able
to bear the burden of those five milliards. Some answer the question in
the affirmative, some in the negative, while others remain in doubt.
Now, however, we may consider the point as settled, by the programme
which M. Thiers has submitted to the National Assembly, first, as
regards the loan and the financial position of France, and then with
respect to the future of the country in general. Undoubtedly France
is obliged to exercise greater economy than she has hitherto done.
She must increase the productiveness of her resources, and administer
them with the utmost care. Notwithstanding this, M. Thiers has no idea
whatever of reducing the army or the navy, which nevertheless offer
the largest field for economies. On the contrary he desires to bring
both up to the highest figure they have yet reached, and to keep them
at that point, and what is more, he wishes to have the army reinforced
by a reserve of 900,000 men. This clearly proves to us that the idea
of France being entitled to dominate Europe has by no means been given
up in Government circles at Versailles, and that now, as formerly,
they hold fast to the statement in which M. Thiers during his autumn
tour expressed the hope and self-confidence of the French politician:
‘_L’Europe ne veut pas changer de maître._’ Indeed, now that the French
Government thinks of submitting the same military Budget, and the
French seem to consider that they can bear their old military burdens
even under more unfavourable conditions than prevailed formerly,
the indemnity demanded must be regarded rather as too low than too
high. Moreover, France is nowhere endangered or threatened, and these
formidable armaments can therefore only betray aggressive aspirations,
the expression of which must be looked upon as a direct threat to her
neighbours. On both these grounds there ceases in our opinion to be any
moral obligation to show indulgence in the matter of the indemnity.”
_July 5th._--This afternoon Keudell brought down from the Chief an
article which appeared in the _Norddeutsche Allgemeine Zeitung_ of the
2nd inst., which began with the words “Der Telegraph.” The Chief had
written on the margin, “This article is contrary to the instructions
given. The Minister of the Interior is to be written to respecting
a warning to the editorial staff, or the withdrawal of all favours.
Strict daily supervision necessary.” Keudell said the Chancellor was
furious with Brass, and almost believed that he was paid by Napoleon to
make mischief between ourselves and Versailles. He then begged me to
write the necessary letter to the Minister of the Interior.
The article of the 2nd of July was the last which I wrote for the
Foreign Office from the direct personal instructions of the Chancellor.
From that time forward the direct intercourse with the Chancellor,
which I had hitherto enjoyed, was transferred to the new “Press
Councillor,” Aegidi, who had been here for some weeks, but had not been
received by the Prince until eight or ten days after his arrival, and
who, even then, was not employed immediately.
I did not know at the time what was the reason of the change, and
Bucher also was unable to explain it. He was afterwards of opinion that
Aegidi was introduced by Keudell, who intended to leave the Foreign
Office and take an appointment abroad, in order that he might be kept
informed of what was going on here. It would be his business also to
see that the press men should not cease to accord him that recognition
which he, as Personal Councillor, Treasurer and Administrator of
Pensions, was accustomed to receive from time to time, but that it
should, on the contrary, continue to flow in a stronger and deeper
stream. I cannot say whether the former surmise was correct. I will
show later on, when I come to deal with Herr von Keudell himself, that
the other point did not remain any mere suspicion. For the present I
will only remark that the censer, which used to be swung before the
latter in the press, was much more frequently in use after the arrival
of his _protégé_ in Berlin, and that the smoke of the incense recalled
in a very suspicious way Aegidi’s own style. (...)
James Ludwig Carl Aegidi, a Protestant, son of a doctor in Freienwalde,
was born in 1825. He studied law at Königsberg, Heidelberg and Berlin,
and was married to a Fräulein von Senden, a cousin of Keudell’s....
A few days after Aegidi’s arrival Keudell, speaking of him to me,
credited him with “exceptional scientific knowledge, relations with
almost all literary circles, and the tact which was desirable for
mediating between the Chief and the daily press.”
The following chapters will show the nature of those relations and
this tact. Let one proof suffice for the moment. Some months after
the appointment of the new Councillor the following was to be read in
the _Spenersche Zeitung_, with which he had exceptionally intimate
relations: “A Berlin correspondent of the _Pester Lloyd_, recalling
the circumstance that the _Norddeutsche Allgemeine Zeitung_, which
is regarded as a semi-official organ, received some sharply worded
_démentis_ during the summer of the present year, draws attention
to the fact that for a short time past the journal in question has
again come to be considered as official in the highest sense. The
correspondent writes that, ‘Since Professor Aegidi, who is at the same
time one of the most eminent and respected of German professors of law
and a spirited publicist, has been in charge of the press department
of the Foreign Office, much more attention has again been paid to the
newspapers. He has taken care, in particular, to maintain a certain
continuity of views in the official press. The _Norddeutsche Allgemeine
Zeitung_ has again become the principal official organ, and since the
1st of December all the leading articles published under the heading
“Political News of the Day,” dealing with foreign affairs, the affairs
of the Empire, the relations of the Federal States to the President of
the Council, as well as those on Church and State, may be considered
as the direct expression of the views held by the highest officials of
the Empire.’ The correspondent states he is informed, on trustworthy
authority, that for the most part Professor Aegidi himself edits the
‘Political News of the Day,’ utilising for the purpose the information
which he receives direct from the Chancellor.”
The Chief was beside himself at this article. Aegidi was summoned
before him, and returned--as a gentleman in the Central Bureau
remarked--looking quite crestfallen and red in the face. He denied
that he had prompted the communication in the _Pester Lloyd_. We soon
ascertained, however, that it had emanated from one Julius L., a writer
of the lowest rank and the most unenviable reputation, who had formerly
served Keudell, and was now intimately associated with Aegidi.
I ought, perhaps, to have now tendered my resignation. Certain
considerations, however, prevented my doing so for some time. There
was still something for me to learn, and I soon observed that I could
yet do good service. It was also conceivable that my old relations
with the Prince might be restored, as a man of Aegidi’s character,
with his self-seeking, mercurial exuberance of zeal, and his almost
Jewish vanity, would sooner or later render himself impossible. I
therefore remained, and fell in with the wish of the Councillor to
“enter into friendly relations with him,” so far as that was possible.
Subsequently, however, when he attempted to give me instructions, as
a kind of superior, I once and for all entered an energetic protest
against such presumption, and declared that I could only carry out
such instructions as he could assure me were the direct expression
of the Chief’s desire, thus taking up a position towards him, not of
subordination, but of equality. I did well in deciding to remain yet
a while. I learnt a great deal more, as I still had access to the
documents received and despatched, and became more and more intimate
with Bucher. The hoped-for opportunities of serving the Chief at the
same time as the representative of Keudell’s interests, and without his
knowledge, occurred more frequently than I had expected, although my
personal intercourse with the Chief was not renewed for the time being.
CHAPTER III
THE LAST TWENTY MONTHS IN THE FOREIGN OFFICE--DOCUMENTS RECEIVED AND
DESPATCHED
_July 28th._--Count W. recently sent papers marked “Contracts,” adding,
“these have been fetched on the instructions of Herr von Düring, and
are intended for Herr von Meding in Thun.” I suspected immediately that
the gentleman referred to was the ex-Government Councillor Meding,
formerly in charge of press affairs under the Guelphs at Hanover, the
patron of the _Situation_ in Paris, who had now given up the cause of
George V. in consideration of a respectable _douceur_, or a pension
from the Guelph Fund. I thought to myself that it is doubtless to him
and to his comrades that v. R. referred when he inquired the other day
whether he should pay their money to the Hanoverians in Thun.
In this supposition I was on the right track. I see to-day among the
latest correspondence received a letter from Government Councillor O.
Meding to the Imperial Chancellor, dated from Thun, on the 22nd of
July, in which he reports that non-commissioned officers and men of
the Hanoverian Legion in Africa, which has now been disbanded by the
French Government, have arrived at Geneva in charge of the former
Hanoverian Lieutenant Kreiss. According to Meding they wish to go to
Austria, in order to take service there, as they were told in France
that Austria was preparing for war. Meding further reports that they
were employed last year by MM. Malortie and Adelebsen for the formation
of a volunteer corps, but were first interned in Rouen by the French
Government, and afterwards shipped on board a vessel for Algeria under
an escort of gendarmes.
I here add some extracts from other documents dealing with the same
matter. On the 27th of July the same true friend of King George reports
that those people are in Zurich, and manifest great bitterness against
the King, who--as may well be the case--had not kept his promise to
provide for them. Kreiss had received from Hietzing an assurance of
a pension of five hundred thalers and an appointment as groom of the
stud of the Archduke William, but desires, nevertheless, to remain at
Romanshorn for the present. Commissary Ebers has gone to Zurich to
collect any documents in the hands of these people respecting their
entry into the French service. The communication concludes as follows:
“I have given the address of the Hanoverians in Paris, which has been
previously mentioned, to Beckmann, the writer, in order that he should
hand it over to the Councillor of Embassy von Keudell. The other papers
formerly in Paris have been brought here by Commissary Ebers, and I
will shortly report on the historic material contained in them, and
request your Serene Highness’s orders on the subject.” Later, on the
16th of September, von R. telegraphed from Berne, asking whether the
next quarterly instalment should be paid to the “Hanoverian pensioners
in Switzerland.” On the 28th of the same month an affirmative answer
was sent, signed by Thile, who added, however, that those gentlemen
should return to their homes, and assist there in influencing the
population in favour of the Government. The Parisian papers have been
received. The first contract with them was signed as early as the 24th
of September, 1870, v. R. should report whether Count Mengerssen was to
be included among the pensioners.
Wollmann told me this morning that the widow of the painter Bouterweck,
a Prussian lady, has written from Paris to the Foreign Office, stating
that several pictures owned by her late husband, which she had had in
her house at Bougival, and which did not even belong to her, had been
taken away by the Prussian troops. They were paintings by old masters,
among them a Hobbema. She had ascertained that a Captain K., of the
47th (doubtless the 46th) Regiment, had packed them up and sent them
away, and she now requested that they should be returned to her. They
are certainly not in the possession of Captain K., but it may be that
First Lieutenant ---- has them, as the story goes that he has been sent
packing on account of a consignment of flotsam and jetsam in the way of
furniture, which he forwarded to his mistress....
_August 23rd._--The following suggestions for the semi-official press
were sent by the Chief to Thile, who handed them over to me: “The
domestic complications in the cis-Leithan half of Austria-Hungary give
rise to frequent misconceptions abroad, too much importance being
given to the national aspect. The issue turns upon governmental and
constitutional questions, and the relations of the various parties,
rather than upon the struggle between the Germans and the Slavs. It
is mainly a fight between the Conservative and Liberal elements. The
German landed proprietors support the Slavs because they themselves are
conservative or reactionary; and among the leaders of the Slav party
and those who are promoting the compromise there are a great number
of prominent aristocrats who do not understand a word of Bohemian or
any other Slav language. Men like Thun and Hohenwart are in the first
place conservative, and are only Bohemian in so far as they regard the
Slavs as useful tools for advancing the views of the aristocracy and
of the Church. That they further the Slav national movement at the
same time, and even apparently adopt its principles, is due to the
fact that the Slav peoples prove themselves to be more capable and
willing instruments of aristocratic, absolutist and clerical tendencies
than the German element. The latter, owing to its entire education
and to the circumstance that it includes the real bourgeoisie and
prosperous middle classes of Austria, gravitates unmistakably towards
Liberalism. It is in this way that the struggle assumes a national
character. This condition of affairs will be more readily understood by
comparing it with similar occurrences in Germany and elsewhere, where
the reactionary as well as the democratic and revolutionary groups,
irrespective of nationality, have thrown in their lot with kindred
parties in other countries (Poles and Frenchmen) for the purpose of
forwarding their party schemes against their opponents at home.”
“The Federalist-Conservative party in Austria has selected two
other elements as allies and--as it hopes--tools. Both of these are
in themselves equally hostile to Liberalism and Conservatism, and
desire for their part to use the Conservatives as instruments, hoping
ultimately to out-general them. These elements are Ultramontanism on
the one hand, and Socialism on the other. The latter, in the person of
the Minister Schaeffle, has been able to extend its ramifications even
into the present cis-Leithan Cabinet, and from that point of vantage
democrats like May, Frese and others, who are opposed to every form of
national as well as State organisation, will be utilised for momentary
party purposes. From its nature Ultramontanism is equally hostile to
every national element, and particularly to the German. The attitude
of their organs in Germany and abroad shows clearly that the German
nation cannot conclude any honourable peace with them. On the contrary,
both elements, the Ultramontane and the Socialist, are the born foes of
Germany.”
_August 30th._--Abeken, under instructions from the Chancellor, has
sent Thile a _résumé_, dated the 20th inst., of the conversation that
took place between the Emperor William and the Emperor Francis Joseph
on their journey between Welk and Ischl, from the particulars furnished
by the former. The abstract runs as follows:--
“When their Majesties had taken their seats in the carriage the Emperor
of Austria began immediately by expressing the satisfaction with which
he followed the great and successful achievements of his Majesty the
Emperor and King and of his armies. The conversation then turned on the
distracted internal condition of France, and from that to the danger
with which all Governments were threatened by the International and by
the communistic and socialistic movements with which it was associated.
His Majesty mentioned the last communication on this subject from the
French Government, dated the 16th day of July, with which the Emperor
of Austria also seemed to be acquainted. When his Majesty remarked
that in addition to a number of fine phrases it also contained one
practical suggestion, namely, that the Powers should if possible meet
in conference to consider the causes of, and come to an understanding
as to the means for averting, the threatening danger, the Emperor
of Austria replied that this was a good idea, which must be carried
into effect. The Emperor Francis Joseph referred to the domestic
difficulties with which he was confronted, but expressed the hope that
he would be able to overcome them. He hoped shortly to be able to
bring about a compromise with the Czechs. Everything was ready, and
the proclamation was to be made on his birthday, the 18th of August,
which it was hoped would satisfy Bohemia. He did not give any further
particulars of the measure.
“The Emperor Francis Joseph observed that the excessive demands of the
Germans in his Empire gave him a great deal of trouble. Towards the
close of the conversation the Emperor William took an opportunity of
telling him that if he succeeded in meeting the legitimate demands of
his German subjects, their thoughts would certainly not turn away from
Austria towards Germany. He had made a similar remark to the Emperor
of Russia with respect to the Baltic Provinces. The Emperor of Austria
considered that his Majesty had every cause to be satisfied with the
attitude of the Imperial and State Diets in recent times, to which his
Majesty assented in general, although some few differences had arisen.
His Majesty then recalled the circumstance that the Emperor Francis
Joseph had once said to him at Teplitz that in twenty years’ time
Constitutions would be things of the past. Ten years had now passed by,
and it did not look as if his prophecy would be realised within the
next decade.
“The question of the Roman Church was also incidentally referred to.
The Emperor Francis Joseph said it was to be regretted that the Pope
had brought the question of infallibility before the Council, whereupon
his Majesty replied that if a Catholic Sovereign expressed himself in
that sense it was all the easier for himself, from his own standpoint,
to agree with him. The Austrian Emperor did not say what his Government
proposed to do in the matter.”
His Majesty was highly pleased with the cordiality of his reception by
the Emperor Francis Joseph. The Archduchess Sophia had previously left
Ischl, as had also the Grand Duchess of Mecklenburg-Strelitz, who, as
his Majesty remarked, had just completed her cure.
_August 31st._--At noon to-day, Aegidi handed me the following, as
coming direct from the Chief, who urgently desired its publication in
the _Kölnische Zeitung_. “In the vehement attacks to which General
von Manteuffel was formerly subjected, and even in the articles first
published by the _Frankfurter Zeitung_, it was possible to credit the
writers, although partisan and hostile, with honest conviction. It is
obvious, however, that in the latest attack (_Frankfurter Zeitung_, No.
214) we have to deal with an absolutely unprincipled calumniator, who
knows nothing whatever either of General von Manteuffel, or of any of
the facts at issue. Nor can it be any longer supposed to have emanated
from some malcontent officer with an official or personal grudge
against General von Manteuffel, after the writer has made himself
ridiculous by the puerile insinuation that the attraction of oysters or
women induced the general to undertake his expedition to Dieppe. Every
one who has even a slight knowledge of the general knows that he is, we
might almost say, lamentably ignorant of the pleasures of the table,
and that so far as the fair sex is concerned, even before marriage his
conduct was always of such an ascetic character as to render suspicion
ridiculous. From the latest article in the _Frankfurter Zeitung_ it
would seem probable that the writer belongs to a class which does
little credit to the press, namely, the broken-down officers who had to
be cashiered during the 1848 period. His judgment in military affairs
is no better than his knowledge of oysters; for, with regard to the
latter, he is not even aware that among gourmets the Dieppe oyster
is known as the poorest of European crustaceans--big, leathery, and
bitter, like the brazen audacity of his own calumnies.”
_September 8th._--According to a report from London ---- are very much
annoyed that the visit of the Crown Prince has taken place in London,
and during the London season, and especially that his reception was
marked by such unmistakable signs of good will on the part of the
population. Even society and the press recognised the importance of
the Prince. The Crown Princess also made a pre-eminently favourable
impression.... The Prince of Wales and his Danish consort were
themselves more civil this time, and even put in an appearance at the
German Legation.... The Royal Family is once more beginning to be
afraid of France, and inclines toward Napoleon, who has always been
“England’s friend,” whereas the House of Orleans for some unknown
reason is looked upon as hostile.
_September 21st._--Aegidi said to-day he understood that Waldersee had
been “blundering,” having accepted from the French bills of exchange as
of equal value to ready money in the payment of the war indemnity. He
added: “We have lost in this way more than a hundred thousand thalers.
That comes of entrusting such high posts to military men.” This
piece of wisdom probably comes from Keudell. A short time ago, under
instructions from the Chief, I announced that Waldersee’s recall was
not due to any dissatisfaction with his management of affairs, but only
to the more peaceful relations between Germany and France, which no
longer required the services of a military representative.
_September 22nd._--This afternoon Bucher told me that Arnim had shown
great want of skill in negotiating the arrangement with regard to the
Customs of Alsace-Lorraine. He went to work as if he were empowered to
act on his own account, without reference to Berlin. It was a piece of
good luck that the French took it upon themselves to insert an extra
paragraph, or we might have fallen into the trap. Arnim is incapable,
as are also his attachés, Holstein, and the Lieutenants of Hussars,
Dönhoff and Stumm. Holstein is otherwise quite a capable man, but he
has no real knowledge of State affairs. Bucher concluded: “I have had
to give Arnim clearly to understand his position.”
_September 25th._--Eichmann, our Minister in Dresden (who, by the
way, is, according to Bucher, a vain, self-satisfied and rather
insignificant gentleman), reported the day before yesterday that
Friesen had told him that Beust, in speaking to Von Bose, the Saxon
Minister in Vienna, about his interview with Bismarck at Gastein, said
that the political views of our Chief fitted in with his own as did the
key to the keyhole, and that the Emperor Francis Joseph had observed
to Count Bray that his views had met those of the Emperor William half
way, and that a complete understanding had been arrived at between them.
A despatch given in Benedetti’s book, _Ma Mission en Prusse_, forms a
companion piece to Rasch’s mission to Garibaldi. From this despatch,
which was sent to Paris on the 10th of November, 1867, therefore not
long after the battle of Mentana, we obtain the following information.
When Garibaldi was about to invade the States of the Church, he wrote
a letter to Bismarck, in which he begged for substantial assistance
for his enterprise both in the way of money and arms. For safety’s
sake he had sent the letter by a confidential messenger, who handed it
over to the Chief. The latter appeared to entertain some mistrust, as
Garibaldi’s handwriting was easily imitated. Anyhow, he informed the
messenger that he had at his disposal no money for which he was not
bound to render an account to the Diet, and made several other remarks
to the effect that of course France could not permit an incursion
into the States of the Church, and that he regarded the enterprise
as hopeless. Benedetti’s disclosure was immediately followed by one
emanating from the Chief. As soon as France set about its preparations
for an armed intervention in Italy, the Cabinet in Florence telegraphed
to its representative in Berlin, instructing him to ask Count Bismarck
if, and to what extent, Italy might reckon upon the support of Prussia.
This was done; and the answer was, that in coming to the assistance of
the Pope France had a just cause for intervention, and that Prussia
could not be expected to lend its support to an incursion into the
territory of a sovereign with whom she entertained friendly relations.
_September 29th._--On the 26th instant the Bavarian Minister, H., told
W. that the time had arrived to think about introducing obligatory
civil marriage. According to the Council of Trent the sacramental
element in marriage consisted in the declaration of the bride and
bridegroom, before the priest and witnesses, that they desired
henceforth to live together as man and wife. How would it be, however,
if the Pope, who has now become infallible, were induced to declare
that the sacramental element consists in the performance of the
marriage rites by the priest? In reply to the inquiry whether he was
aware that something of the kind had been proposed at Bonn, he said no,
but that the idea was in the air. According to W., Professor Schulte,
who has been fully initiated into the former Austrian Concordat
negotiations, stated that the Emperor Francis Joseph could easily be
induced to agree to the dissolution of any religious order in Austria,
with the single exception of the Jesuits, to which he would certainly
not consent.
_October 7th._--Aegidi brought instructions from the Chief that in
future Austrian affairs were to be treated differently in the press. In
the official newspapers, as also in those that are regarded as having
a remote connection with us, the greatest consideration must be shown
towards the Hohenwart Ministry, while in the others all the concrete
measures taken by it against the German element must be criticised and
condemned in the sharpest possible terms.
_October 15th._--A report from Stuttgart of the 12th instant states
that the Baden Legation there has been abolished, and that Herr von
Dusch, who is very popular at the Court of King Charles on account
of his conciliatory character, has already presented his letters of
recall. Von Bauer, the Würtemberg attaché at Karlsruhe, has also
been recalled, and the Würtemberg Legations in Paris and Berne will
likewise be done away with. Probably the Italian envoy to the Court at
Stuttgart will also be withdrawn, and henceforth England will only be
represented there by a Chargé d’Affaires. “What Frenchman will come?”
asks the report in conclusion; and answers, “Certainly not St. Vallier.
Grammont’s communications in _l’Ordre_ have made a very painful
impression at Friedrichshafen.”
_October 22nd._--Stieber sends the Chief a report, dated the 20th
instant, which begins:--“In accordance with your Serene Highness’s
verbal permission I beg to submit the following particulars respecting
the Vienna _Vaterland_, Obermüller, and the party connected with
that paper. It was founded by Count Leo Thun, and was taken over
from him in 1870 by Dr. Puffka of Posen and Heinrich von Huster.
Thun now subscribes and writes very little for the paper. It has,
on the other hand, many contributors in Westphalia. The present
editor, Obermüller, (a Hessian, who formerly edited the fanatically
particularist _Saechsische Zeitung_, in Leipzig, and at the same time
gained for himself a not very enviable reputation as the author of some
extraordinary works on the Celts,) has stated in letters (which Stieber
appears to have seen and made extracts from): ‘The Saxon Federalist
nobility has, up to the present, been far less generous towards the
newspaper than the Bohemians, notwithstanding the fact that the sole
salvation of the former lies exclusively in a _rapprochement_ with
the Czechish-Polish-French party, which is in process of formation.
A meeting of the Saxon Federalist nobles has therefore been convened
at Bautzen for the 16th of October, in order to raise the annual
subvention from 800 thalers to at least 1,200.’ Obermüller writes
further: ‘It is quite clear to every one, friend as well as foe, that
Beust is now entirely on the Prussian side.... Beust has lost all
credit with the Emperor, and is now trying to maintain his position
with the assistance of Prussia, which will be of little use to him in
the long run. Here they desire first of all to remain on tolerably good
terms with Prussia, and for that reason Beust is retained, in order to
mask the situation.’” Stieber thinks the writer is not badly informed,
as Clam-Martinitz and Co., who used his office as their rendezvous,
have doubtless given him the necessary information.
According to a report from Stieber of yesterday’s date the “meeting
of nobles” at Bautzen has taken place. The only persons who put in an
appearance were Stolle, the (Catholic) Councillor of Consistory, as
the representative of the Dresden Patriotic Society, and the lawyer
Fischer, as the delegate of the Leipzig Patriotic Association, which
sent the _Vaterland_ a contribution of 300 thalers for the current
quarter, in support of its efforts in favour of a Federal policy in
Germany.
In the evening saw an announcement from Munich, dated the 13th of
October, and the draft of a reply, which I noted for future use. Lutz
expressed his anxiety that “the Government may after all be unable to
hold its own against the Ultramontane party.” The Minister’s opinion
and desire is therefore that the ecclesiastical questions should be
brought up for discussion in the Imperial Diet also, and that in
existing circumstances the Imperial Government should adopt an attitude
which would support and strengthen the Bavarian Ministry in its
struggle with the Ultramontanes. The Chief replied that he approved the
cautious tone maintained by the writer of the report, and instructed
him, in case the Bavarian Ministers should again reopen the subject in
the same sense as Herr von Lutz, to point out that the Federal Council
was the proper place for the discussion of that question, and that we
should be most willing to consider any proposals which the Bavarian
Government might have to submit there.
It would appear from a draft which I have read that Beust has sent
in a memorial on the International and the measures to be taken in
connection therewith, and that this has been submitted by the Chief to
the Minister of the Interior.
_October 30th._--G. writes on the 25th instant from Lisbon that he is
assured by one of the foreign Ministers accredited there, that Count
Silvas, the diplomatic representative of Portugal in Berlin, in the
spring of 1870 telegraphed to Lisbon the news of the candidature of
the Prince of Hohenzollern, and that it was in this way the French
Government first became acquainted with the affair. According to
reports of the 21st and 22nd instant, Andrassy has set forth to the
Emperor Francis Joseph in the course of a long audience the dangers
to which he would expose himself if he were to take the anti-German
side, “as was done in the unfortunate rescript.” “The genuine loyalty
of which the German Government now gives such clear proof, would,”
said the Count, “be then unable to stay the course of events. The
Austrian Germans would turn to the German democrats, and these would
tear the national banner out of the hands of Prince Bismarck, and carry
it forward until the whole German race was united.” Furthermore, the
Austrian Envoy at the Court of Baden reported that Prince Gortschakoff
had not concealed at Baden-Baden his satisfaction at the concessions
promised to the Czechs, and had in general expressed sympathy with the
demands of the Austrian Slavs.
To-day on my pointing to the article in the _Frankfurter Zeitung_ in
which the Radical journal calls attention to the services of Count
Solms, who was formerly attached to the German Embassy in Paris, and
complains of the neglect to which he is now subjected, Bucher said
that certainly before the outbreak of the war Solms had formed a much
sounder opinion of the situation and sent better reports than Werther,
but that the Chief was indisposed to believe him, being of opinion that
he was a man of no judgment. He afterwards fell into complete disgrace
for having accepted, during the campaign, a position in the Crown
Prince’s suite, instead of acting upon the suggestion of the Minister
that he should work with us.
_November 2nd._--Count Bismarck-Bohlen came into the Bureau to-day to
take leave of us. He is going to Venice, and then probably further on
into Italy, where he will remain until July. He told me that he had
tendered his resignation, but had only received--six months’ leave.
He will therefore continue to draw his salary in return for laborious
idleness. Bucher says he wanted to retire because his request for a
higher official title had been refused.
_November 8th._--This morning Wollmann showed me a letter of the 6th
instant from W., stating that in pursuance of a rescript of the 2nd
instant the _Süddeutsche Presse_ was henceforth not to receive any
subvention. Fröbel, the editor of the paper, is however to get further
sums of 2,000 and 7,000 florins for the year 1872, in all 9,000
florins, as compensation.
Aegidi told me to-day that the article “From German Austria” in the
_Preussische Jahrbücher_ was written by him, and was “almost entirely
from notes dictated upstairs.” What constant cackling over every egg!
The little man with the swelled head then called my attention to a
report by the Consul in Rio Janeiro on the slave law, which is printed
in the _Reichsanzeiger_, to which he had sent it. He then observed that
he would continue to supply them with such matter, and thus develop the
journal into a “great political organ.” I said to him in that case he
would perform a miracle, as it was like calling upon the lame to rise
and walk. I did not believe however that miracles took place in our
day. He replied: “Oh, yes, I know it will be a hard job, and indeed
I have already had trouble enough with an article which I dated from
Constantinople. But I shall manage it.” I said nothing, but thought to
myself. “Much good may it do you, little coxcomb!” I heard afterwards
that he complained to Abeken that in the _Provinzial-Correspondenz_
Hahn had expressed satisfaction at the decline of anti-German feeling
in Paris. “He should leave foreign politics alone,” he said. He
evidently did not know that Abeken himself had inspired the article. An
hour later, when he brought me his _Norddeutsche Allgemeine Zeitung_
article against the _Provinzial-Correspondenz_ he insisted that Abeken
had intentionally brought the matter up. _Vanitas vanitatum, vanitas!_
But ludicrous at the same time, most ludicrous!
_November 9th._--In reply to my inquiry, Aegidi admitted that he had
sent the _Sternsche Correspondenz_ the contents of a report by Balan
on the Brussels Ministry and the “Roi Jésuite,” asserting at the same
time that the Chief had said it should appear in a paper which was not
regarded as semi-official. But the clever little man had carefully
selected a news agency which is universally regarded here as of an
exceptionally official character, and which competes with the Literary
Bureau, to Doerr’s serious discomfort.
_November 13th._--A report from St. Petersburg, addressed to the
Emperor William and dated the 8th instant, which reached here
yesterday, through safe hands, states: “His Majesty the Emperor
graciously communicated to me the letter which your Imperial Majesty
sent through Prince Frederick Charles. The passage respecting the
meeting at Salzburg was specially emphasised by the Emperor, who
remarked that what your Majesty had said as to the efforts of the
press to represent the good understanding between the two Powers as
being at an end was unfortunately too true; but that this, as I knew,
could exercise no influence upon his sentiments. The Emperor also gave
me the memoir of the Grand Duchess Marie on the negotiations with
Count Fleury to read. This document, which is probably the work of M.
Duvernois, and was handed to the Grand Duchess by Fleury for her use,
the Tsar considers to have been skilfully drawn up. The advocate of
the dethroned Emperor pleads his case cleverly in trying to convince
the German Emperor that the indemnity is in danger so long as the
present state of things continues in France; and that Germany should,
therefore, strongly urge a plebiscite as the sole remedy. He then went
on to say that Fleury constantly spoke of a strong Government, which
was only to be had under the Empire. But who would guarantee that, with
the return of the Empire, it would be possible once more to find the
strong hand to which Europe certainly had reason to be grateful at the
beginning of the fifties? If the French wished to hold another general
election in order to decide upon a definitive form of government,
by all means let them do so. That was their affair, and not that of
foreign Powers, which had nothing to do in the matter.
“It was in this sense that the Emperor spoke with regard to Fleury’s
proposals. In my opinion his Majesty will pay very little heed to
proposals for a Bonapartist restoration. The trouble taken by his
illustrious sister to interest him in this, her favourite scheme, is
likely to be wasted.”
_November 16th._--We hear from a well-informed source at Lemberg
that the society “Opielka Narodowa” (National Protection), which
has undertaken to establish and maintain the connection between
the numerous emigrants from Poland and their old homes, under the
control of Valerian Podlewski, is constantly increasing in numbers
and influence. A branch society for Eastern Galicia has been founded
in Cracow under the leadership of Byglewski, the president of the
so-called Siberian Committee, which provides for the Poles who return
from Siberia, and which is now to be affiliated to the Opielka. The
society has already established branches in twenty-six districts.
The Opielka Narodowa exercises strict supervision over the emigrants
resident in Galicia, and is in direct communication with all the
emigrant committees in England, France, Belgium, and Switzerland, thus
forming a connecting link between them.
_November 19th._--It is reported from Munich that Prince Otto’s health
is going from bad to worse; that it is, therefore, doubtful whether he
will be fit to succeed, and that consequently the King has again made
approaches to the family of Prince Luitpold, having twice paid them a
visit in the evening, an unusual thing for him to do. Abeken’s draft
of a report respecting the dismissal of Beust, which was despatched to
P. on the 13th instant, says that the Chief had not expected it from
the impression he had derived during the interviews at Salzburg. “For
the present he can only attribute the turn affairs have now taken--the
resignation of the Austrian Chancellor following upon the real victory
which he had just won--to that ‘Father Confessor’ policy (_Beichtvater
Politik_) which has always been powerful in Austria, and he must take
it that the influence of the confessional upon the Catholic monarch,
rather than considerations of a political nature, led him to sacrifice
his Protestant Minister to the Clerical party, as a compensation for
the defeat which they suffered through the dismissal of the Hohenwart
Ministry.” A communication forwarded to R. yesterday speaks in the
same sense, and then adds: “Probably Councillor von Braun has also
been active in this direction. I have previously mentioned to you that
he was well known to me at Frankfurt as an accommodating and active
instrument of the Clerical party.”
_November 30th._--Arnim was instructed in a despatch of the 27th
instant to secure redress in Paris for the impertinence of which
the French representative in Rome was guilty towards the Bavarian
envoy there. This despatch runs: “According to a report from Count
Tauffkirchen the French Ambassador in Rome and his wife have been
so impolite to him and his attachés that Tauffkirchen has asked to
be allowed to call Harcourt personally to account. Before I grant
him permission to do so I would ask you to secure the despatch of
the enclosed instructions to Harcourt. Failing that, we will revenge
ourselves upon the innocent Gabriac, and let Tauffkirchen loose on
Harcourt.” A telegram from Rome of yesterday’s date reported that the
Frenchman (doubtless under pressure from Versailles) had apologised for
his rudeness to Tauffkirchen.
_December 7th._--Von R., writing from Berne on the 4th instant, sent
in the autograph answers of the “Hanoverian pensioners” to a circular
of the 10th of October, in which they were called upon to make a
declaration respecting the place of residence which they would select
for the future.
_December 9th._--Among the documents received is an exceptionally
interesting communication from Vienna respecting an interview with
Andrassy. The following is an extract: “The Count called upon me
yesterday shortly after his return from Pesth. He is highly pleased.
Up to the present, he said, as Hungarian Premier, he had only the
support of the Deák party. Now that he is Minister for Foreign Affairs
the whole country is on his side. I observed that certainly he was
supported by the whole power of Hungary, but that on the other hand he
would be influenced by the wishes of Hungary. Count Andrassy replied
that even the Left, with the exception of a few followers of Kossuth,
were in agreement with his policy of peace. I reminded him of the
traditional friendship of Hungary for the Poles, but he strongly
contested the existence of any dangerous tendencies in this direction.
Returning to the subject of previous conversations, I acknowledged
that the Polish idea, as expounded by Count Andrassy, seemed to
me legitimate, namely, severance from France and the abandonment
of the agitation against Russia, in order to stay the process of
extirpation--in short, a conservation of the Polish nationality as a
means of counterbalancing future pan-Slavist tendencies. At the same
time, however, I again expressed my doubts as to whether the Poles
would be sensible enough to accept these views, and asked whether
it was not a fact that they were only entertained by a few Polish
emigrants. He replied in the affirmative, and then informed me that
although Prince S. Czartoryski had been betrothed to a Princess of
the House of Orleans (the twenty-six-year-old daughter of the Duc de
Nemours), he had received concurrently with this news an assurance
that the projected union would not affect his policy. Passing to the
Danubian Principalities the Minister said he had received trustworthy
reports from Bucharest and elsewhere to the effect that Cousa,
Bratiano, Ghika and Cogalniceano had combined to bring about the fall
of Prince Charles. The _Prince étranger_ was to be deposed, and Cousa
reinstated, and with him French influence. The railway affair, and
the pressure exercised at our instance from Constantinople, increased
the difficulties of Prince Charles, whom he, Count Andrassy, desired
to support. I repeated that we did not ask Austria to exercise any
pressure on the Prince, but only to use its influence with the Ministry
and the Chamber.”
A report addressed to the Chief from Paris on the 7th of December
contains the following particulars respecting Beust’s visit and the
French _revanche_ idea:--“Count Beust called upon me on his way to
London, having first had an interview with M. Thiers. His impression
of the Government here was that, even in foreign affairs, it was not
so judicious as was generally believed. I did not conceal from the
Count the view which I have already expressed to your Serene Highness,
namely, that the President of the Republic wishes, above everything
else, to avoid all foreign complications. Count Beust, with whom M.
Thiers seems to have talked a great deal of hypothetical politics,
maintains his opinion that at Versailles there was too much disposition
to seek out all sorts of complications. I refrain for the moment
from commenting upon this statement, which was obviously made with
a purpose. I have to-day received a communication of a similar kind
from a French source, that is to say, from the Vicomte de Calonne,
who formerly served our interests, though with little success. He is
doubtless in possession of a great deal of information with which I am
not yet acquainted. Possibly his present move is intended to reopen
the old relations. The Vicomte asserts that Thiers has one idea which
governs his whole policy, namely, that of _la revanche_. Although
he may not show it, it is firmly rooted in his mind. M. Thiers has
inaugurated--not unskilfully--a press campaign which is to keep the
_revanche_ idea alive. I do not deny that, from my own observations
made some days before I had seen M. Calonne, a distinction should
be drawn between the utterances of the President and the language
of his journals. While M. Thiers and M. Casimir Perier expressed
themselves grateful for the recognition of their loyalty contained
in Herr Delbrück’s speech, the official papers assumed an offended
air, and journals apparently of a more independent character, but
also possibly influenced from Versailles, represented the Minister’s
speech as a proof that Germany had not ceased her provocations to
war. To this extent M. de Calonne’s communication is in harmony with
other indications. He, however, somewhat diminished the value of
his information by disclosing himself as a voluntary agent of the
Legitimists. He expressed a wish that we should give the latter our
moral support, as without a restoration neither peace nor order could
be reckoned upon in France. I was able to point out to M. de Calonne
that, next to the Bonapartist journals, the Legitimist press was the
most violent in its crusade against Germany, and that the restoration
of internal order was France’s own affair. Our interest in the matter
was purely selfish, the only consideration for us being how best to
_tirer notre épingle du jeu_. He could, therefore, see for himself
what was our attitude towards internal questions, which, moreover,
were still very unripe. M. de Calonne was not very pleased with these
remarks, and expressed himself to the effect that we were on the eve
of great crises, that France would fall to pieces, and that Thiers
would by his policy prepare for a revolutionary war, if a definitive
government, the traditional monarchy, were not speedily re-established.
“I have not considered myself justified in withholding the statements
of Count Beust and the overtures of M. de Calonne, whom I had hitherto
hesitated to receive. It is not impossible that M. Thiers may have
spoken to Count Beust in a sense different to his remarks to me. M.
de Calonne, whatever his personal significance may be, is in any case
confidant of the monarchist circles, and an organ of their public
opinion. The views of both gentlemen are confirmed by the circumstance
that M. Thiers is raising a larger army than that maintained by the
Empire. Casimir Perier, indeed, assures me that the Government cannot
dispense with this strong force if it is to maintain public order.
But even if that be so, who can guarantee that a gendarmerie of over
500,000 men may not suddenly become a field force, when circumstances
permit?
“All these considerations might lead me to apprehend that I have
reposed too much confidence in the intentions of the President of the
Republic. Nevertheless, I do not consider myself to have any reason
for in any way altering my previous view of the situation. Even if M.
Thiers should permit himself to entertain vindictive combinations, and
even if he thought of ultimately employing this great army to some
other purpose than the war against the International, none of these
dreams could take a definite shape before the year 1874. We, as well
as M. Thiers, are for the moment only concerned with the next six
months; and for these six months, and indeed for his whole lifetime, M.
Thiers cannot desire warlike complications, because in spite of all his
frivolity he cannot doubt that the first cannon shot fired would put
an end to his own Government. What would happen afterwards is another
question, the decision of which would probably no longer lie in the
hands of the present President.
“It has become quite clear why Count Beust took Paris on his way, while
every political consideration should have induced him to avoid this
city. M. de Remusat, speaking of his interview with Count Beust, said
to me: ‘_Il a commencé par dire le plus grand bien du Comte Andrassy;
il a fini par en dire tout le mal possible._’ Herr von Beust spoke
of his own experiences as if he himself did not rightly know why he
had been dismissed. The first consequence of his dismissal and of the
idle talk to which it had given rise was that it became necessary to
lean much more towards the Left than would have been the case had he
remained. It appears to me that the fallen Austrian statesman has in
general _not_ made a very good impression here. He is thought to have
affected too much unconcern with regard to all those questions with
which he was officially connected. I first learnt from Herr von Beust
that Prince Metternich, after all delicate hints had proved fruitless,
was recalled at the express desire of M. Thiers. Nothing has yet been
decided as to his successor; and Count Beust is of opinion that the
appointment will be postponed for some time, as a means of marking the
dissatisfaction felt at the course adopted towards Prince Metternich.
The departure of Prince Metternich (whose sole merit consisted in the
possession of a singular sort of wife, for whom Paris no longer offers
a sphere of activity) is not regretted here.”
_December 16th._--With reference to the foregoing the Chief considers
Beust’s visit to Paris “a further characteristic symptom, affording
fresh grounds for a grateful appreciation of the value of the official
changes that have in the meantime taken place in Vienna. In the present
circumstances it should have been evident to him and to every other
statesman who regarded the matter from an impartial standpoint, that
the right course was to take the shortest and straightest route to
his new post, and rather to avoid such meetings as Count Beust had
sought. Only the desire to get himself talked of and to pose before
the world even in the smallest personal concerns could have misled an
otherwise intelligent man to attract so much attention, and secure so
much publicity to his movements. It is impossible to foresee into what
courses an influential Minister may not be betrayed by such weaknesses,
which destroy all confidence in his trustworthiness. Count Beust has
once more proved what good reason we have to be satisfied with the
change that has taken place in the control of political affairs in
Vienna, a change which gives promise of a more business-like and less
personal, and therefore steadier and more serious, policy.”
_December 25th._--To-day sent an article to the _Kölnische Zeitung_,
which was based on a despatch of Arnim’s of the 17th instant. Arnim
wrote:--“According to private accounts, which have reached here from
Stuttgart, the Würtemberg Court intends to appoint a Chargé d’Affaires
in the person of Herr von Maucler. Improbable as this news appears to
me, I cannot but point out how very regrettable such a decision on the
part of King Charles would be. Of course at a decisive moment the
presence of a Würtemberg Chargé d’Affaires would make no difference,
but it would unquestionably increase the disposition of the French
towards a new war by at least two per cent. Then there is the further
consideration that a Würtemberg Chargé d’Affaires would lead to the
appointment of a French envoy at Stuttgart, who would find it easy
to discover people who are dissatisfied with the new order of things
in Germany. Estimating the total loss of the German army in the last
war at 100,000, and supposing that a new war were to cost only 50,000
men, the Würtemberg Government would thus be making itself responsible
for the loss of 1,000, if it unwittingly contributed to encourage a
French renewal of hostilities. Similar reflections should be made in
Munich. Rudhard, the Chargé d’Affaires accredited here, whose attitude
is perfectly modest and correct, gives no ground for complaint. The
fact, however, that he and I meet in M. de Remusat’s antechamber is
sufficient to give rise to false notions. The attention with which
the French follow the symptoms of Particularism in the South German
Chambers shows what great hopes they repose in the possibility of
dissensions in the German Empire. The French cannot be judged by the
same standard as other nations. They have no sense of proportion, and
attach importance to matters that in reality have no significance. In
a madhouse the merest trifles may lead to a revolt, and even if it be
suppressed it may first cost the lives of many honest people. The small
German Courts should think of this, before they, for vanity’s sake,
send agents to Paris.”
_Evening._--Read a report of the 14th instant from Berne respecting the
impressions gathered by Colonel Ruestow (the well-known writer and Red
Democrat) during his recent stay in Paris, as communicated by him to
an intimate friend. He declares that he also conferred with the French
Minister of War and with several officers of high rank. According to
him, the _revanche_, and--however absurd that may sound--a speedy one,
has been firmly resolved upon. Not only the army but all classes and
sections of the population are filled with this idea and imbued with
this spirit. Their reckoning is made for the year 1873 or 1874. The
condition of the army, of which Ruestow closely inspected five corps,
he declares to be worse than he had ever known it. Drunkenness and
indiscipline, as well as socialistic tendencies, were universal, while,
on the other hand, Bonapartist sympathies were far more widespread
than was to be reasonably expected. The army and the people agreed
in a common and equal dissatisfaction with Thiers and the present
Government. R. thinks Ruestow’s views are not without interest, as
“that renegade” is well-known in Paris, and familiar with circles which
give some insight, both political and military, into the real condition
of French affairs. R. himself, who is a vain visionary, cannot be
regarded as a good observer.
_December 26th._--To-day read two St. Petersburg reports of the second
week of the present month, and partially utilised them for the press.
It is stated in one of these, that on the occasion of a gala dinner at
the Festival of St. George on the 8th inst., when the Emperor Alexander
strongly emphasised his friendship for Prussia, and expressed a hope
that later generations would also entertain that feeling, the heir
to the throne observed to his neighbour at table, “_Dieu veuille que
celà se fasse!_” A second passage runs: “I was anxious to hear what
Gortschakoff would say to me respecting the speech made by the Emperor
on the 8th inst. It confirmed what I knew already, namely, that the
Emperor had not taken any one into his confidence beforehand. He asked
Gortschakoff if he was satisfied, and the Imperial Chancellor replied
that he was pleased to observe the words ‘ordre légal’ in the speech.
If the Emperor had previously asked his advice on the matter, he would
have urged the insertion of these words, as it would be of advantage
that Europe should know that both Powers were at one respecting
the maintenance of law and order.” The report then continues: “The
Chancellor never likes the Emperor to deal with politics in an
extempore fashion, and without consulting him. In the present instance,
this feeling was again perceptible; but he had no option in speaking to
me but to express his great satisfaction at the Imperial utterances.
He added that the Russian press already commented upon his Majesty’s
words with approval, and hoped they would be well received in Berlin,
which has been the case. At the same time, so far as I can ascertain,
opinion here in St. Petersburg is very much divided on the subject.
Our friends applaud. Others, who, since the war, have been oppressed
with the foolish apprehension that victorious Germany would soon fall
upon Russia, now breathe more freely. Yet another section pull wry
faces at this formal proclamation of Russo-German friendship. A serious
blow has been dealt at all the attempts of this party to disturb the
friendship by exciting mutual suspicion. After such words as those we
heard on the 8th of December, the reading public will no longer credit
what they say, as such a frank statement by the Sovereign cannot be
without influence in Russia. They now seek to indemnify themselves by
turning the Tsar’s friendship for Prussia into ridicule. The visit of
the Prussians is referred to as the German ‘butter week’; exception
is taken to the presentation to Count Moltke of the general staff’s
map of Poland on the occasion of his visit to the general staff; the
Field Marshal and the officers who accompanied him, although they were
very careful in what they said, are accused of having betrayed their
contempt for the Russian military organisation, and further rubbish of
the same kind. These malicious stories may doubtless, here and there,
fall upon fruitful soil; but, in my opinion, they will not succeed in
effacing the good impression made by the Prussian visitors.”
What is here said of the Russian press was confirmed by a series of
cuttings, probably emanating from Julius Eckart, of Hamburg. These were
handed to me by Bucher on the 15th of December, under instructions
from the Chief, and an abstract was sent by me to the _Norddeutsche
Allgemeine Zeitung_.
In the meantime I had begun to prepare my article on the International.
Bucher called my attention to the volumes of documents in the Central
Bureau which contained useful material for this purpose, and instructed
the Secretary to place them at my disposal. Here I also came across
Beust’s memorandum which is mentioned in my diary under the date of the
22nd of October, and extracted the most important passages. From the
style it would appear to be written by Beust himself, or, at least,
to have been revised by him. Notwithstanding its somewhat florid
phraseology, it is a document of unusual interest, particularly in view
of the Constitutionalism which it affects. I was unable to discover in
it any great ideas or new methods.
The Austrian memorandum was followed by a Prussian one (see diary under
14th of April, 1872); and, to my knowledge, preparations were made
for a commission, composed of the representatives of both Governments,
which was to discuss the question. I am not aware what further steps
were taken in the matter.
_January 2nd._--According to a report from London, Beust had an
audience of Napoleon at Chislehurst on the 23rd of last month
(December), and afterwards said to Bernstorff that the Emperor had
not by any means given up the hope of returning to France. In reply
to Beust’s question whether he entertained this hope for himself
personally or only for his dynasty, the answer was that he himself
expected to ascend the throne again.
_January 5th._--Werther reports from Munich that Howard, the strongly
anti-Prussian English Minister at the Bavarian Court, has been
recalled, and on taking leave had an interview of three-quarters of an
hour with King Lewis, the length of which was all the more striking
as the Italian representative, Greppi, had remained with his Majesty
only a quarter of an hour. That the Minister for Foreign Affairs only
heard of this audience after it had taken place is significant of
the condition of affairs in Munich. Howard is succeeded by Morier,
former Chargé d’Affaires at the Darmstadt Court, with whom our Werther
is on a friendly footing. I may add that a short time ago Bucher
brought me some ideas from the Chief for a Munich letter, which was
to be inserted in a “non-official newspaper,” and which, if I am not
mistaken, appeared in the _Kölnische Zeitung_. It ran as follows: “Sir
Henry Howard, the English Envoy here, who, if I am rightly informed,
usually devotes his leisure to diplomatic chatter of an anti-Prussian
description, is now charged with the doubtless very welcome duty of
representing French subjects in Bavaria. His first act in this new
capacity was to invest M. Hory, the former Chancelier of the French
Legation, who had remained behind for the purpose of spying, with
the character of Chancelier of the English Legation. This conduct on
the part of the representative of generous Albion has aroused great
indignation here. Sir Henry, the representative of the Queen of
England, who bears the title of Defender of the Faith, is moreover
strongly Catholic.”
_January 8th._--A report addressed to the Chief from Berne, dated
the 6th instant, states that Rohrschütz, the Würtemberg Consul in
that town, under instructions from his Government, asked Welti,
the President of the Confederation, whether Switzerland would be
disposed to enter into a convention with Würtemberg for the mutual
care of the sick. Welti replied that it would be more in accordance
with the general interest to avoid Particularist treaties, and that
Switzerland would therefore prefer to conclude such an arrangement
with the German Empire. It would be more advisable for the Consul to
submit his suggestion in the first place to the German Minister. The
report concludes as follows: “The official communication made to me
by the President of the Confederation characterises sufficiently the
petty efforts of certain circles in Stuttgart, and tends to show the
expediency of defining my relations here, so far as Würtemberg is
concerned, with unmistakable precision.”
A characteristic article written by me on the instructions of the
Chancellor and based upon his suggestions, which was sent to the
_Kölnische Zeitung_, appears to belong to this or the following
week. It was based upon an official communication from the Chief,
intended--after certain excesses of anti-German feeling--to call the
attention of the French to the real significance of the situation. It
says, _inter alia_: “Two peoples dwell in France, the French and the
Parisians. The former loves peace. The latter writes the newspapers,
and seeks to pick a quarrel, which the other then has to fight out.
Both, however, should clearly remember how near the German army is at
Château-Thierry.
“If the Parisian moral code culminates in the categorical imperative
of revenge, the nation cannot be too strongly reminded how speedily
the Germans could reach Paris from Reims, now that Metz, Strassburg,
Verdun, and Toul no longer stand in their way. It would also be well
if the various French Pretenders would bear in mind the position
and treaty rights of Germany. The Government in office will in the
circumstances save itself from disappointment by not counting upon
any special consideration at the hands of Germany. It is entirely
in the interest of peace that countries and peoples should know
exactly how they stand with each other. The occupation of the French
departments, conceded to us by treaty, is for us a defensive position
from which we can only retire, in so far as we are obliged to do so
by treaty, when we are perfectly satisfied respecting the sentiments
and intentions of France. The policy and disposition of France since
the conclusion of peace does not inspire that confidence which would
justify us in renouncing any advantage of our present strong defensive
position. In France a war of revenge is being incessantly preached
from the house-tops, and a Government which has added to the military
budget eighty to a hundred millions more than it reached under the
Emperor Napoleon can lay no claim to a reputation for peacefulness.
If France maintains that the war indemnity is excessive, and at the
same displays lavish extravagance in preparing for another war, it
may be fairly said that the despatch of the 7th instant, with its
expression of regret that the German hopes for the re-establishment of
more peaceful relations should have proved premature, was a moderately
worded intimation, and that its publication was a well meant measure of
precaution.”
_January 17th._--Wrote the following article for the _Kölnische
Zeitung_, from the Chief’s instructions as transmitted to me by Bucher:
“Professor Friederich, writing on the 2nd of May, 1870, in the much
talked-of diary which he kept during the Vatican Council, that is to
say, a considerable time before the outbreak of the war, and while not
a soul here (in Berlin) thought of an approaching disturbance of the
peace, says: ‘I have it from one who is in a position to know that
there will be a war between Prussia and France in 1871. There are
whispers of an understanding between the Curia, the Jesuits, and the
Tuileries.’ Permit me to add a few observations that are taken from a
trustworthy source. There was no ‘whispering’ about that understanding
here, because people were perfectly certain of it. It was no secret,
but a notorious fact, that Eugénie, the bigoted Spaniard, was quite in
the hands of the Jesuits and in active correspondence with the Curia,
and that in contradistinction to the apathetic Emperor she promoted
this war (which she repeatedly described as _ma guerre_) with so much
zeal because it bore the character of a crusade; and because she and
her clerical advisers, who may be absolutely regarded as an agency of
the governing party in Rome, hoped to promote the objects which were
pursued by that party in the Vatican Council and the Syllabus that
preceded it. The father confessor played the part of intermediary
between the Empress, who was made Regent with full powers on the
departure of the Emperor for the army, and the directors of the Papal
policy. The assistance of other father confessors was also counted
upon in this connection, Vienna, for example, and even Italy being
influenced in the same way. If the victories of Weissenburg, Wörth, and
Spicheren had not followed in such rapid succession, it is probable
that the event would have borne out the calculations of the Vatican
and the Tuileries in regard to a coalition of the Catholic Powers
against Germany, which was equally hated in both quarters. There is,
therefore, no doubt that the Empress worked hand in hand with the Roman
Ultramontanes in promoting the war. On the contrary she prided herself
on it. It was her heart’s desire. In judging political situations and
events people frequently fall into the error of forgetting that the
course of affairs is often abnormal, and that one very frequent cause
of such departures from the regular order is the influence of women
upon rulers. Where women have a free hand, however, there Jesuitism and
its aims will speedily flourish.”
_January 21st._--Werther has addressed the following complaint direct
to the Emperor: He had been instructed to hand over the chain of the
Order of the Black Eagle to the King of Bavaria. As the King had
returned from Hohenschwangau on the 15th instant, he applied on the
16th to Hegnenberg to procure him an audience, but was referred by the
latter to the Royal Household. He immediately called upon Eisenhart
and explained to him the importance which the Emperor attached to the
presentation of the chain on the 18th of January, the anniversary
of two important events in the history of his House, and requested
to be informed of the decision of the King by 1 o’clock. Not having
received it however up to 3 o’clock, he called upon Eisenhart again and
ascertained that the latter had not yet been able to lay the matter
before the King. He now urgently renewed his request and pointed out
“how opposed it would be to the intentions of his Imperial and Royal
Majesty if the day passed without his instructions being carried into
effect.” Finally, at 8 o’clock in the evening, the dejected and anxious
Minister received a letter to the effect that the announcement was
a source of surprise and pleasure to the King, who would have been
very glad to receive at once the Emperor’s letter and the insignia
if he had not been fatigued by night work and detained by visits to
the Royal family. He would take an early opportunity of fixing a day
for the purpose. Werther ascribes this more to the awkwardness of
Eisenhart than to the shyness of the King. Hesse remarked: “Werther
will get a sharp reprimand over this. Just look here!” The Chief had
underlined the passage referring to the second visit to Eisenhart, and
to the “urgency” of Werther’s representations, adding a large note of
exclamation on the margin opposite the latter.
Since the great “Orders day” these button-hole decorations and higher
felicities form almost the sole subject of conversation in the office.
“Second class,” “with the ribbon,” “on the ring,” “with the oak leaves”
and similar dainties have been discussed with more or less knowledge
and gusto--Abeken, with a play of gesture and a flow of eloquence that
are all his own, manifesting the finest discrimination, while Roland
and Alvensleben very nearly approached his level.
_January 25th._--The Clerical party has tried to refute the article
of the 18th, and the Chief wishes to have a reply prepared. For this
purpose Bucher brings me a sketch of the Prince’s ideas on the matter.
The article written on this information, which was again to be sent to
the _Kölnische Zeitung_, ran as follows: “My letter on the relations
of the Tuileries and Rome before the outbreak of the war would seem to
have hit the Ultramontanes in a tender place. They reply to-day through
their Bonn organ in a tone of great irritation, and somewhat in the
temper (here I used the Chief’s own words) of a man at the dentist’s
when the forceps closes on his bad tooth. Their anger leads them so
far astray that they sometimes lose both memory and judgment. In the
article in question we read, _inter alia_: ‘Ollivier was a declared
Gallican, therefore an opponent of the Pope and the Jesuits. His
colleagues were almost all liberal Catholics.... Accordingly, one of
the first steps taken by Count Daru was to send to Rome a menacing Note
with regard to the Council, such as no other Government had ventured
to despatch. He did everything in his power to promote a decision in
accordance with the views of the minority, threatening even that, in
the event of the Papal infallibility being proclaimed, France would be
compelled to withdraw the protection which she had hitherto accorded
to the Pope.’ The first thing to be said in reply to this is that
Ollivier was _not_ a declared Gallican, and indeed nothing whatever
except a vain place-hunter who could not resist the influences brought
to bear upon him by Eugénie. Furthermore, when the war broke out Daru
was no longer one of Ollivier’s colleagues, and his Note to the Curia
had been dropped by his successor, a striking proof in support of our
contention. The Ultramontane tendencies of the Empress had in the
meantime won the upper hand, and no one will be misled by the Bonn
newspaper’s attempt to represent the withdrawal of the French troops
from the States of the Church as the execution of Daru’s threat. That
measure was a military necessity to which Eugénie was forced much
against her will. The manner in which the Empress is treated in the
ultramontane _pseudo-démenti_ is both interesting and instructive. For
the writer Eugénie is now ‘pious’ only within quotation marks, and
she is said to have taken her nieces to anti-Christian and decidedly
immoral and irreligious lectures, &c. The good lady has really not
deserved such treatment, and it would have been much more becoming
for the Ultramontanes to place on her head the martyr’s crown, which
she has richly earned in their service through her bitter hatred of
Prussia. When, on the contrary, they now insult and disavow her, they
display not only ingratitude, but stupidity, a circumstance only to
be explained by the confusion of ideas to which men are so frequently
liable when unpleasant truths are sprung upon them. For after such
treatment of their former patroness by the Jesuits, will not others in
future think twice before entering into any understanding with them?
and besides, can any one say positively that a Napoleonic restoration
is out of the question? Furthermore, it is quite irrelevant for the
Bonn Jesuit organ to appeal to certain regulations against the Order
which it serves, to the difficulty which the Jesuits often had in
obtaining permission to preach in Paris, and to the prohibition of
new educational establishments controlled by them. In the first place
these regulations were for the most part issued by Archbishop Darboy,
who energetically opposed the intrigues of the Ultramontanes in the
Council. Then again, the Tuileries were obliged to reckon with the
unpopularity of the followers of Loyola and with the Voltairian section
of the French people. On the other hand, one must bear in mind the way
in which the great majority of the French bishoprics have been filled
since 1852, to the almost complete exclusion of Gallicanism. But it is
chiefly in Alsace, where we now have a clearer insight into affairs,
that we find the consequences of these mutual relations between the
former French Government and the Ultramontanes. When the advocate of
the ultramontane cause wishes to make us believe that the war with
Germany was mainly intended by Napoleon and Eugénie to curb the Pope’s
temporal and spiritual power one involuntarily rubs his eyes, reads
the absurdity over again, and asks: But in the name of common sense,
if Napoleon had any such designs against the Holy Father, had he not,
in the summer of 1870, more than sufficient power to carry them into
effect, and did he require for that purpose a victory over Germany? We
have reason to be thankful that the writer has given us an opportunity
of saying a good word for him in conclusion. Towards the close of his
article he says that the German victory in the last war had been of
immense service to the Catholic Church. ‘Immense service!’ Let us note
that. Up to the present we have heard these gentlemen almost always
maintain the contrary. Nevertheless we thankfully accept the present
declaration, and in return beg to offer a piece of good advice. If
the victory be of advantage to you, then, gentlemen, cease to declaim
against New Germany, which is the fruit of that victory, and show more
gratitude towards its founder than you have towards poor Eugénie.
It will then no longer be said of your _Deutsche Reichszeitung_,
that--like the old saw, _Lucus a non lucendo_--its name has been
selected because it is neither German nor Imperial.”
_January 26th._--A report from Lemberg, dated the 21st instant, on the
secret agitation of the Galician Poles, says: “The National Committee
here, of which Prince Sapieha is the President, has three political
news agencies--one for Hungary, one for Posen and Bohemia, and one
for the Kingdom of Poland. Prince Czartoryski is at the head of the
Hungarian agency and Dr. Smolka of the agency for Bohemia and Posen,
while in the Kingdom of Poland it is controlled by Ignatius Lemwitz,
who is giving the young Poles a military training.”
_February 2nd._--In connection with Arnim’s communication respecting
certain correspondents of the _Kreuzzeitung_ who had made themselves
obnoxious, the Chief reported to the Emperor through Abeken that the
newspaper in question would be warned to be more careful. It was,
however, hardly to be expected that this would lead to any improvement,
as the _Kreuzzeitung_ is in general not easily influenced by the
Government, while in this instance the person indicated by Count Arnim
as the writer of the objectionable article, has been closely connected
with the paper for nearly twenty years, and has considerable influence
on its Paris intelligence, although he is known to the Chief from
previous personal intercourse as of very moderate political ability.
_February 7th._--R. in St. Petersburg writes that he recently had a
conversation with M. de Strenavukoff, the Director of the Asiatic
Department, in the course of which the latter went so far as to
assert that the only way of dealing with Rumania would be--after a
preliminary understanding between the neighbouring Powers, such as was
usual in similar cases--for one of them to receive a mandate to occupy
the country. R. continues as follows: “On my pointing out to him that
he proposed to do exactly that which he had always so strongly urged us
to avoid, namely, to break the Treaty of Paris, he replied that such
a measure could only be adopted as a last resource. France no longer
existed, and if Germany, Russia and Austria were united, England would
raise no objections.” The letter describes this as a “gushing outburst
of the Director of the Asiatic Department.” The Emperor Alexander has
expressed his approval of the course taken by the Berlin Government in
the matter of the Inspection of Schools Bill, regretting, however, that
it should have fallen out with the Conservative party over this measure.
_February 9th._--Aegidi told me yesterday that the Chief desires to see
Mittnacht and Lutz praised in the newspapers for being, like himself,
defenders of the Empire. To-day I accordingly wrote the following
article for the _Kölnische Zeitung_, which was based upon a despatch
from our representative at Stuttgart: “... there is no doubt that the
latter (the tame variety of Particularism) is largely represented at
Court, but it is equally unquestionable that the present Ministry,
Mittnacht included, is thoroughly loyal to the Empire. The _Grenzboten_
was therefore not justified in recently opening its columns to an
attack upon Mittnacht, in which, in addition to other unfounded charges
such as nepotism, &c., his national sentiments were called in question,
it being asserted that in the summer of 1870 he and his colleagues
only supported the national idea because Gortschakoff had warned
Varnbüler to do so on the occasion of their interview at Wildbach, and
because the patriotic attitude of the Bavarian Government had brought
pressure to bear upon Würtemberg. I believe I am justified in giving a
positive assurance that both statements are untrue; that Bavaria was
about to make the performance of its obligations towards North Germany
dependent upon certain guarantees for its own sovereignty, to be given
in Berlin, and that thereupon the Ministers at Stuttgart decided in
favour of unconditional co-operation with the North, this being done
before Varnbüler had spoken to the Russian Imperial Chancellor. These
few facts for the sake of truth. They deserve to be emphasised all the
more, as successful attacks upon the present Cabinet would benefit, not
the supporters of the national cause, but the Court party, on whose
behalf Chief Burgomaster Sick is intriguing.”
_February 12th._--Wrote an article for the _Kölnische Zeitung_ from
the instructions of the Chief, which reached me through Aegidi. It
contains several of the Prince’s ideas almost in his own words as
communicated to me. The article runs as follows: “The Parliamentary
struggles of the past few weeks have been of the highest significance
for our Parliamentary life. Two factors which have been in course
of development for some time past have taken positive form. These
are: a homogeneous Ministry is supported on an important question
by a Parliamentary majority, which includes even the ‘resolute
Progressives’; and a new Opposition, formed by the fusion of all the
elements which are on the most various grounds hostile to New Prussia
and New Germany, together with the group of ‘resolute Reactionaries.’
The nucleus of this Opposition, which represents reaction in the
fullest sense of the word, is the Centre Party, quite incorrectly
designated the Catholic Party. We consider it to be rather a Theocratic
Party, and as such to be treated not as a denominational, but as a
political group. With these are associated the liegemen of the Guelphs,
whose able advocate--the Member for Meppen--as an Ultramontane,
has one foot in that party, and therefore serves as a suitable
intermediary, his efforts being also directed towards restoring the
old order of things at the expense of the new. A third contingent of
this reactionary coalition consists of the Poles, or rather the Polish
nobility, with their longing to revive the Jesuit and aristocratic
rule which existed before the partition, and their inexplicable hatred
of the German character. In this instance again the ultramontane
sentiments of most of the Polish representatives promotes fusion.
“Finally this alliance of different elements bound together only by
their apprehensions, their aversions, and their reactionary sentiments
and aspirations, are now joined by the residuum of the Conservative
party, represented in the press by the present _Kreuzzeitung_, the
hostile attitude of which has long foreshadowed the change that
has now taken place. The departure of this last body of troops to
join the mobilised Ultramontanes will not signify very much, as the
Conservatives have long since surrendered to the Government and to
the Free Conservative fraction whatever they possessed in the way of
talent, and can now only reinforce the Opposition with their votes.
Through them, however, the united Opposition has acquired no little
significance, for its relations now extend into very exalted circles,
where endeavours are made to inspire suspicion and dissatisfaction
in competent quarters, and the influences in question--_feminine
influences_ are spoken of in particular--are understood to be very
active, and to have already produced dangerous friction in other
matters. The statesman who stands above all parties, and who by his
genius and energy has hitherto overcome these difficulties, will, we
hope, in the public interest be able to continue his work unhampered by
such opposition. We must not, however, be blind to the fact that the
situation is serious and strained.”
_February 18th._--Bucher brings me instructions from the Chief for
a long article on the anti-German attitude of the King of Sweden,
together with material in the shape of despatches. This is to appear in
a non-official paper. I sent it to the _Grenzboten_, which published
it in No. 10 of the current year, under the title “Stockholmer
Velleïtäten.” After an introduction in which the great European Powers,
with the exception of France, were represented as tolerably satisfied
with the establishment of the German Empire, and therefore favourable
to us, or at least not exactly hostile, the article went on to say:
“On the other hand Prussia and New Germany have, in some of the
small States neighbours at whose Courts there prevails an obstinate
ill-humour, not to say a bitter and lasting hatred, which, of course,
is not openly manifested, but is for that reason none the less cordial.
Among these neighbours we may mention, for example, the Queen of
Holland and Prince Henry, who, as the representative of the Grand Duke,
governs Luxemburg in a sense as hostile to Germany as possible. We must
also include in this number his Majesty of Sweden and Norway, Charles
XV., with whose position as regards Germany and France we now propose
to deal, giving merely a few general indications, as it would not be
desirable to speak more plainly, our intention being not to cause
irritation, but only to give a useful hint.
“Considered from a political standpoint it is not easy to discover the
cause of that exalted gentleman’s aversion to Germany. The interests
of Sweden and Norway are in no way opposed to ours. On the contrary,
what benefits us Germans, is almost invariably of advantage to our two
neighbours in the North. A powerful Germany does not threaten the free
development of the Scandinavian peoples, nor for the matter of that,
any other of her neighbours. The German Empire is the great universal
preserver of peace, the protector of international independence,
armed only for defence; and whether, remembering old, half-forgotten
quarrels, they like to hear it or not, it is, and remains connected
with them by ties of close racial kinship. Nor can public opinion in
Sweden be held responsible for royal prejudices, which would even go
to the length of making military preparations against us in view of
possible contingencies. The Schleswig-Holstein question at one time
caused a great deal of anti-Prussian feeling, but to our knowledge that
agitation was not so deep-seated as might have been inferred from a
section of the Swedish press, and anyhow it has long since subsided,
except in a few newspaper offices. It broke out once more in Stockholm
and other large towns during our war with France, but in the newspapers
rather than among the public, of whom the more thoughtful section soon
realised which side was in the right and by whose victory those not
immediately concerned would be the gainers. It may be safely asserted
that only a small minority in Sweden now regrets the triumph of Germany.
“From this it would seem to follow that sentiment can alone explain
the hostile sentiments of King Charles. His aversion to New Germany
may probably be chiefly the corollary of his sympathies for France,
which again may doubtless be traced to the recollection that the
Bernadotte dynasty sprung from a French lawyer, a recollection which
would however assume a questionable complexion if it were to lead the
King to forget that his first duty is to consider the interests of the
countries over which he now rules. But perhaps there may have been
also another recollection, namely that there was once in Sweden, years
ago, a Charles XII. But it would be a pity for such memories to cause
forgetfulness of the changes produced by time.
“We can find no other explanation, and that which we have ventured to
give is the more probable, as it is stated that his Swedish Majesty
has up to a short time ago been addicted to habits better calculated
at times to stimulate feelings, for instance, of vain glory than to
sharpen the judgment, and that under such influences he has sometimes
made statements which it would have been better to have left unmade.
Be that as it may, the unfriendly sentiments of the King towards
Germany are a fact, and if Sweden were still the dreaded power that
enforced the Peace of Altranstädt, if she were still in a position to
compel obedience to the pair of top-boots that Charles XII. once set
up in the Prime Minister’s chair, it would be possible to conceive
situations in which one would have good ground for regarding the North
with anxiety, while the main front faced towards the West. As things
have turned out, however, this is happily not the case. The top-boots
of the last century have given way to a constitutional _régime_, and
the Swedes have become peaceful agriculturists, sailors, and trades
people, who would not plunge into a ruinous conflict for the sake of
anybody’s French sympathies or longings for military glory, and who
would know how to protect themselves by constitutional methods, if any
attempt were made to translate such dangerous sympathies and longings
into action. Let us consider the present Swedish Minister for Foreign
Affairs, whose appointment to that post might be quoted in refutation
of our complaint if it had not been mainly a necessary satisfaction
given to the peaceful disposition of the Swedish people, the majority
of whom are friendly to Germany. Count Platen, who has been in office
since last autumn, was born at Stralsund, where his father was Governor
in the time of the Swedes, and has been many years at sea. He is a man
of frank and straightforward character, very popular in the country,
in which he is one of the largest landed proprietors. He entertains no
hostile feelings whatever towards Germany, but is, on the contrary,
very well disposed towards us.
“The King, on the other hand, holds different views, and has
frequently felt impelled to give expression to them. This is done
in the first place by displaying so marked a partiality for the
representatives of France accredited to the Court at Stockholm over all
other diplomatists, that it has not even escaped public notice. The
intercourse of these gentlemen--Count Montholon, the Chargé d’Affaires,
and the Attachés Benedetti and Hauterive--with the King is like that of
intimate friends. At balls and soirées they are distinguished by him in
every possible way. The monarch converses with them almost exclusively
at every opportunity, withdrawing with them from the remainder of the
company. A few weeks ago, at a ball given by Prince Oscar, one of the
Attachés appeared in the uniform of a Parisian _garde mobile_, and it
is presumed, doubtless not without reason, that this was done with the
approval, if not at the express desire, of his Majesty.
“During the last few weeks of the Franco-German war reports were
circulated in the German and Swedish press that King Charles had
written a letter to one of the French prisoners of war containing
expressions not particularly favourable to us. Denials of the existence
of this letter were received from Sweden, and among others a Stockholm
correspondent of the _National Zeitung_ wrote that the story was
apocryphal, and had given much offence to the King. Our information
from Sweden is very different, so different indeed that we do not
hesitate for a moment to quote, and to lay special stress upon this
‘apocryphal’ letter, as evidence of the anti-German sentiments of the
King, and of his ardent sympathy for France, to which he is only too
anxious to give tangible expression.
“One last proof will be conclusive. The King sometimes writes poems,
which he does not withhold from publication, and which he is accustomed
to sign with the initial letter of his name. Over the same signature
he not infrequently writes and publishes military and other articles.
Everybody in Stockholm knows this _nom de plume_. Now a few weeks
ago, shortly after the scheme of army reorganisation was rejected
by the Swedish Diet, the _Aftonblad_, a journal which is generally
known to have intimate relations with the Court, and which is perhaps
the most zealous and vehement preacher of the anti-German crusade
in the Swedish press, published three articles under the title of
‘After-Considerations.’ These consisted of arguments by ‘C.’ in defence
of the rejected Bill, together with sallies against Prussia, from
which--if, as is generally assumed, they were the product of the Royal
pen--we must naturally infer that King Charles regretted the failure
of his favourite scheme, principally because it deprived him of the
opportunity of preparing for a future attack upon Germany. It is true
that the articles tried to repudiate the aggressive ideas concealed
behind the Bill. But this certainly did not convince the party which,
in the Diet and in the press, rejected the reorganisation scheme,
principally on the ground of such aggressive tendencies.
“And now, in order to give some idea of the tenour and tone of this
remarkable piece of military penmanship, so far as it affects us
Germans, we here reproduce a few of the sallies referred to. ‘C.’ says,
_inter alia_, ‘Just as we condemn all partisan misrepresentations of
the history and position of our native land, however eloquent these may
be, whether they be intended either to excite arrogance or to produce a
sluggish sense of security, instead of a noble patriotism and an active
spirit of independence, we also denounce the cowardice which shrinks
from every danger, the lack of enterprise and endurance which will
not struggle to overcome difficulties, the selfishness which will not
submit to any sacrifice.’
“Mention is then made of Xerxes, who scourged the waves of the
Hellespont, of Napoleon’s painful reflections at St. Helena, and of the
fearful awakening of France in 1870-71. ‘C.’ then proceeds:--
“‘In like manner the Prussian policy of conquest and its sanguinary
ambition will pave the way for its fall, and bring about its own
punishment when peoples recognise that community of language does
not form a common nationality, and that the yoke may prove a heavy
one even to those who speak the same tongue. At the present moment,
however, Prussia is a source of apprehension for all those who are not
prepared to be enslaved, and who are not willing to be made subjects,
either direct or indirect, of the King of Prussia. Russia shows that
she has a mission, while England has betrayed us with a selfishness as
inhuman as it is sordid. Russia will certainly have a great future.
Russia, hated and despised at the bidding of England, may one day
become a necessary bulwark against the arrogance of Western Europe or
the covetousness of a certain great Power. England, on the contrary,
already reaps, in the mistrust and contempt of other nations, the fruit
of its hypocritical love of liberty, its calculating policy of peace,
and its too successful efforts to tear open the wounds of Poland, in
order to distract attention from its greed of conquest in India and its
oppression of Ireland.
“‘The Emperor William has recently shown not only how to establish
one’s self in a conquered country, but at the same time how to fill up
deficiencies in the Treasury with German blood.
“‘If we consider the magnitude of the forces that are now being armed
to sow and manure the battle-fields, and compare them with those of
former times, taking also into account the enormous resources of
the present day, and the five milliards which Prussia demanded as
compensation for her trouble in maintaining the balance of power in
Europe, it becomes evident that Prussia, working indefatigably and
ruthlessly to assure her military ascendancy, will only too soon be
able to throw hundreds of thousands of soldiers on our coasts with
ease, rapidity, and certainty.
“‘The world desires to be deceived. Bismarck has known how to take
advantage of this fact. Peoples and Governments have spared no trouble
gradually to augment the power of Prussia and their own danger.
Austria helped Prussia against Denmark, and was rewarded with Sadowa,
and an impotence that makes her now powerless before the minority of
her own population. France, or rather Napoleon III., at that time
reckoned on being paid for his neutrality. The payment consisted in
Sedan, the Paris Commune, and the International. England and Russia
permitted the dismemberment of France. The former performs an act of
penance in the Alabama affair, bows down before the ex-Emperor, and,
placing herself under the orders of Prussia, sulkily pockets or hides
under her petticoat (a delicate reference to the circumstance that a
lady sits upon the throne of Great Britain) her defeat in the Black
Sea question. Russia, by her readiness to fall in with the views of
Prussia, has either dealt a deadly wound to the Slavonic cause, or
incurred the necessity of an ultimate war to the knife in its defence.’
“We do not propose to gather all the flowers in this garden for the
delectation of our readers. Those already submitted will suffice. It
was thought in Sweden that the King, even if he were really not the
author of this article, at least shared the views to which it gave
expression, and therefore took no steps against the abuse of his _nom
de plume_. This opinion has never been contradicted. It is true that
about a week after the 7th of December, when the first article from
‘C.’ appeared, the Swedish newspapers denied that it had been written
by the King; and on the 20th of December the correspondent of the
_National Zeitung_ (who is, of course, semi-official) mentioned that
a man so well informed on military affairs, and doubtless also on the
military constitution of Germany, as King Charles XV. could not have
written such nonsense. But for a whole fortnight there was no official
_démenti_, and even then, so far as we are aware, it only appeared in
England. It was only on the 16th of January in the present year that
Baron Hochschild, the Swedish Minister in London, declared that the
statement of a correspondent of _The Times_, to the effect that the
article in question emanated from the King of Sweden, was entirely
unfounded.... We, of course, accept the _démenti_ as we know that
diplomatists never lie, but we are none the less glad to think that
Sweden is no longer an absolute monarchy.”
_February 20th._--In the morning again read despatches and made
extracts for future use. Queen Olga, who was in Berlin about eight days
ago, on her way to St. Petersburg, in writing to her consort, said
she was very pleased with the political interview which she had had
with the Imperial Chancellor, and with the reception given to her in
Berlin, which was as cordial as it was brilliant. A letter from Paris
of the 9th instant states that General Fleury has had an interview
with Orloff, speaking to him exactly in the sense of the well-known
memorandum (previously mentioned). Thiers must be called upon to
summon the nation to a plebiscite, as Europe was interested in seeing
the monarchical system firmly re-established in France. At the same
time General Fleury did not conceal from the Prince that Napoleon was
much pained to see Russia accredit an Ambassador to the Republican
Government. It would almost seem as if the Imperial Government regarded
President Thiers as the definitive ruler. Prince Orloff surprised the
general by replying that Russia certainly regarded every Government in
France as definitive so long as it existed. Fleury, in taking leave
of the Prince, was disappointed, if not piqued. A report of the 13th
instant from Rome states that the health of the Crown Princess is a
source of anxiety to her immediate _entourage_. She is understood to
be in the first stage of disease of the chest, against which the old
school can do nothing. Furthermore that next summer she will perhaps
visit Germany with her consort; and that a personage occupying a
prominent position in Roman society had remarked confidentially: “In
case the Crown Princess, the Pearl of the House of Savoy, should be
lost to the country, it may be confidently expected that the Orleans
family will strain every effort to place a Princess of their House
upon the Italian throne. It would therefore be desirable to at once
take that eventuality into consideration, and in order to prevent the
success of a plan which would be most prejudicial to Italy, a Princess
should be sought in Germany who, at least politically, might compensate
such a loss.”
The conflict between the _Kreuzzeitung_ party and the Chief is now
a matter of public notoriety. For some time past these gentlemen
have opposed the Prince, sharing Herr Windthorst’s views as to the
necessity for a staunch opposition, and choosing for their watchwords
the “vindication of the monarchical principle against the rule of a
Parliamentary majority,” and “the defence of the Christian character
of our State.” According to their organ the Prince, in his speech of
the 30th of January, deliberately attacked or abandoned the principle
which the Conservative party in Prussia had constantly proclaimed
and defended during twenty years as one of the fundamental articles
of their programme. The passage which led to this discovery runs as
follows: “But as things stand at the present moment we, the Ministry in
a Constitutional State, require a majority which is in agreement with
the general direction of our policy.” This is represented as a “frank
recognition of that Constitutionalism which the _Kreuzzeitung_ has
opposed with success, on the ground that it is not in harmony with the
Prussian Constitution.” In a double article drafted by Aegidi, with
liberal corrections and additions by the Chief, and which was published
in the _Spenersche Zeitung_ after it had been declined by the _National
Zeitung_, the following considerations were very justly urged in reply:
“Not Constitutional? Are we then not living in a Constitutional State?
Have we not a popular representation? Do not our laws to be valid
require its consent? Is not that consent given by a majority? Surely
then it follows inexorably that the Counsellors of the Throne must
seek a majority for their measures, so far at least that if it does
not approve of every Bill, it shall at least support the general line
of policy adopted by the Ministry. The man whom the _Kreuzzeitung_
criticises with such an air of superiority has proved in times of storm
and stress that he is willing to sacrifice a Parliamentary majority
for what he recognises to be essential. But the same statesman once
said that conflict cannot be made a regular part of the machinery of
State. Where popular representation exists and there is no desire to
see conflicts become a permanent feature of public life, it will be
necessary to secure a Parliamentary majority. If those on the Right
refuse their support, the Government, whose duty it is to keep the
machine working, may have to look further to the Left for a Government
majority whose support may be relied upon. The Prime Minister has
already called the attention of the Right to the fact that their wanton
opposition must forcibly transfer the centre of gravity to the other
side. This warning has lost nothing of its significance. The majority
can be regarded with indifference only in those countries where the
approval of the popular representatives is not required for the
validity of the laws, that is to say, in those States that are governed
on absolutist principles.”
_February 24th._--Read a variety of documents received. It is reported
from Brussels on the 22nd instant, that the Comte de Chambord desired
to go to Malines, but that the Archbishop advised him not, as public
opinion was suspicious of religious motives. The Pretender has
therefore remained at the Hôtel St. Antoine, in Antwerp, whither the
King sent his greetings through the Chief Chamberlain. He will shortly
pay the King a visit at Brussels, as he did last year. Great influx
of Legitimists, who did not, however, remain long. Chambord entirely
avoids publicity, and only goes out to hear Mass. The _Précurseur_, the
most widely circulated newspaper in Antwerp, welcomed him on the 19th
instant with a leading article which betrayed very little sympathy for
him.
A fruitseller at Versailles had addressed a letter to the Empress
Augusta, in which she asserts that the Marquise de la Torre (previously
mentioned) had during the occupation of that town by the Prussians
frequently ordered fruit from her which were intended for the Crown
Prince--“pour le Prince Fritz.” These were not paid for, however, and
she now begs the Empress to settle the account on behalf of her son.
The enclosed account amounted to 75 francs. Probably the fruit was sent
to the Coburger, but Wollmann declares that Bohlen also received some
of it, including the beautiful grapes and pears which we had once or
twice as dessert.
Bucher says he has ascertained that it is proposed to remove Abeken to
the Chamber of Peers, “together with other deserving statesmen like
Roon and Moltke.” (Surely not by the Chief.) This is an arrangement
intended to compensate him for having been disappointed of the grant
which was originally contemplated. He is therefore to be “Lord Abeken”
in future.
_Evening._--Read further documents received and despatched. On the 17th
of February the Chancellor sent the Emperor an abstract of a letter
addressed by Count Ladislaus Plater, a leader of the emigrant Poles
who is residing in Zurich, to the editor of the _Dzennik Poznanski_
(the Polish Journal), urging the most active agitation possible. This
abstract, which the Chancellor received from a Polish agent, states,
_inter alia_: “Germany, whose unification is hardly yet complete,
is undermined by two very determined parties, the Catholics and the
Socialists, neither of which will abate one jot of its demand, nor
shrink from any means to promote its cause.” The Count goes on to say
that it is the sacred duty of the Poles to support both parties in
word and deed. Should a Socialist revolution break out in Germany,
which may very shortly be expected with tolerable certainty, the Poles
must assist it with all their might. Writing on the 20th Arnim reports
various particulars with regard to parties in the National Assembly
at Versailles, and adds: “The President considers the Monarchists
to be powerless, and said to me yesterday that he had no anxiety on
that ground. He at the same time clearly manifested his intention to
establish the Republic as the definitive form of French Government.”
_February 26th._--Bucher brought me instructions from the Chief to
write an article for the _Kölnische Zeitung_, which was to be based on
a report of the 17th instant on the anti-German agitation carried on by
certain Orleanist officials of the French Embassy at Brussels. This was
immediately done....
_Addendum._--Yesterday morning Doerr brought the news that Dr.
Beuthner, the chief editor of the _Kreuzzeitung_, was so greatly
affected by the thunderbolt hurled at his party in the _Norddeutsche
Allgemeine Zeitung_, and the charge of incapacity levelled at him
personally, that it brought on an attack of apoplexy. That is the
inevitable fate of such stupid conceit as he showed last spring,
when he declined in the following words to accede to a desire of the
Chancellor which I communicated to him: “We will not do that, and we
shall see who will prove to be right in the end. The _Kreuzzeitung_
party is older than Bismarck, and it will last longer than his
Government.” The article in question, which is certainly very strongly
written, was in great part the work of the Chief himself.
Bucher informed me that the article in No. 41 of the _Norddeutsche
Allgemeine Zeitung_ on the concessions made to the Poles in Galicia
also emanated from the Minister himself.
_February 27th._--Bucher told me this evening that since yesterday the
Chief has been “exceptionally irritable,” and treated Roland Boelsing
and, again to-day, Alvensleben (who has now taken Bohlen’s place
and does all sorts of subordinate work for him) with the greatest
harshness. His irritation is no doubt due to the circumstance that
Camphausen did not wish to draw up the Taxation Bill for which the
Chief was most anxious, and that the latter had no power to enforce his
views upon his colleague.
_February 29th._--Read and noted the principal points of three
documents received on the 26th. A report from Stockholm states that
King Charles is still very weak, and that his doctors have ordered
him “six weeks’ retirement for the purpose of undergoing special
treatment as a measure of precaution against the increasing induration
of the internal organs.” The Russian General Lewascheff, who was
recently in Paris, is understood to have said to certain Galician
Poles that a scheme was under consideration at St. Petersburg for
reviving the Wielopolski system, and granting Poland a larger measure
of independence. Orloff, on being questioned upon the subject, said it
was a misunderstanding on the part of the Poles. On the 26th instant
Abeken prepared for the Chief an abstract of a report from Pera dated
the 14th of February. It states that “Russia favours the aspirations
of the Bulgarians, and General Ignatieff has actively promoted them.
The Greeks, whose influence in the Balkan Peninsula will be seriously
diminished thereby, are greatly embittered against Russia. Herr von
Radowitz himself considers it ‘an extraordinary change that Russia
should have for the first time sacrificed the Greek element to the
Slavic.’ Russia had previously relied chiefly upon the Greek element,
and the Greek Orthodox Church in Turkey had received its death blow
from the new measure, the Patriarch of Constantinople being deprived of
almost all his former influence.”
Subsequently read another St. Petersburg report of the 22nd instant,
which says: “Thiers has informed Prince Orloff that Casimir Perier
would submit to the National Assembly a proposal, the object of which
would be to confirm the Republican form of Government, and he, the
President, would support the motion, and stand or fall with Perier.
Orloff believes that the Bonapartists have a better prospect of success
than any of the other parties. Fleury has been to see him and repeated
to him almost literally the statements contained in the memorandum of
the Grand Duchess Marie on the Bonapartist cause. He had asked at
the same time whether Russia could do nothing to induce M. Thiers to
have a plebiscite. On his replying that he had instruction to maintain
the best relations with France and to avoid all interference in party
politics, the general remarked in a tone of pique that they were less
scrupulous in that respect in Berlin than at St. Petersburg.” (Hardly
in Berlin, I fancy, but rather at Arnim’s.)
_March 3rd._--Bucher brings me from upstairs instructions and material
for a Rome despatch for the _Kölnische Zeitung_. It runs as follows:
“Rumours have already been circulated on various occasions to the
effect that the Pope intends to leave Rome. According to the latest of
these the Council which was adjourned in the summer, will be reopened
at another place, some persons mentioning Malta and others Trient.
This report has now assumed a more positive form, and it is asserted
that the departure of the Holy Father is near at hand. From what we
hear there would appear to be something in this report, although the
question of the convoking the Council afresh may not yet be ripe for
decision. It is understood on good authority that the idea is mooted
and recommended by a priest named Mermillod, who has come here from
Geneva. He is a Savoyard by birth, and recently occupied the position
of Suffragan Bishop in Calvin’s city. He is one of the most active
agents in promoting the recognition of the doctrine of infallibility,
and the restoration of the temporal power of the Roman Pontiff. For
this purpose he has recently paid numerous visits to France and
Belgium, and--as others assert--to Germany also. He has returned with
the results of his observations and an account of the recruits he has
been able to raise. It appears that his report has determined the
Pope, or those who exercise a decisive influence upon him, no longer
to hesitate between the party which is for remaining in Rome and that
which urges his departure, and that it is now resolved to proceed
either to Malta or Trient for the purpose of summoning the Council to
meet there in April or May. Doubtless the main object of this gathering
will be to elicit from the assembled fathers a strong declaration in
favour of the necessity of the Temporal Power. Obviously a secondary
object of this Parliament of Bishops, convoked away from Rome, would be
to demonstrate to Europe that the Vatican does not enjoy the necessary
liberty, although the Act of Guarantee proves that the Italian
Government, in its desire for a reconciliation and its readiness to
meet the wishes of the Curia, has actually done everything that lies
in its power. The twenty Italian bishops nominated by the Pope on the
23rd of February, as well as the mitred abbots, were instructed not to
submit the Bulls containing the nominations to the Italian Government,
and were assured of compensation should they be deprived of their
temporalities. This shows that if the Pope has really, and not merely
nominally, less liberty than he requires, he at least has money enough.”
_March 5th._--Bucher brings me the following instruction from the Chief
for an article which is to be inserted in a South German newspaper,
or in the _Kölnische Zeitung_, in connection with the debate on the
vote for the Ministry for Foreign Affairs, which has just taken place
in the Würtemberg Diet. “Under the Imperial Constitution Würtemberg
has the right to maintain Legations abroad. It is questionable,
however, whether it is in the interest of the Empire or of advantage
for Würtemberg that this right should be exercised. The presence of
several German representatives in Paris, for instance, would be a
constant temptation to the French Government to try to sow discord.
It is necessary in this connection to recall the ignorance of the
French respecting foreign countries and their old idea that the German
States have conflicting interests. The presence of a French Minister
at Stuttgart, or indeed anywhere in Germany except in Berlin, is even
more to be deprecated, as he may be easily induced by expressions
of party feeling to try to enter into conspiracies with individual
Governments. If the false reports of French diplomatists had not led
their Government to reckon upon dissensions in Germany, we might
perhaps have been spared a great war. Ministers who have little to do
make work for themselves in order not to appear superfluous, in this
respect resembling police agents, who do the same. That is particularly
disquieting at Stuttgart, where St. Vallier had the hardihood, after he
had failed with the Government, to apply direct to the Sovereign. It is
true, indeed, that the King also was forced to decline his overtures.
But, after all, it is better for the Sovereign not to be subjected to
such pressure.”
_March 7th._--According to a report from Stuttgart of the 3rd instant,
the King a few days ago invited his Ministers to dinner, and said
openly at table that the Queen had written to him that Prince Bismarck
had, in conversation with her, expressed himself in favour of the
maintenance of the Würtemberg Legations. He asked, therefore, why
the Paris post should not be kept up. The King assumed, therefore,
that there was no objection on the part of Prussia to the renewal
of diplomatic relations between Würtemberg and France, and that he
also would now receive a French envoy. Suckow described this as a
misunderstanding. The Chief, however, said to-day with reference
to his interview with Queen Olga, which, he said, had lasted some
hours, that she finally asked if the Ministry for Foreign Affairs at
Stuttgart should be maintained. “I contented myself with replying
that Würtemberg, under the Imperial Constitution, had both active and
passive rights with respect to diplomatic representation, and that
we could not attempt to interfere with them. It was not a fitting
opportunity to enter into the question whether it was in the interest
of the Empire and of Würtemberg to exercise those rights, particularly
as her Majesty did not mention diplomatic intercourse with France,
which must form the main consideration in any such discussion. Paris
was not mentioned in the course of the conversation.”
A St. Petersburg report of the 29th of February informs the Chief
that “a correspondence is being kept up with Munich, and indeed with
the Royal residence itself, through Richard Wagner, the composer,
who is living in Switzerland.” This correspondence referred to the
connection between the International and the Russian Nihilists. General
Lewascheff, who was entrusted with the task of following up this
connection in Paris and elsewhere, described Wagner as being altogether
a very dangerous man, who made the worst possible use of his relations
with King Lewis. The correspondence in question went by way of Berlin.
This information was given as “very secret” by the Emperor Alexander.
It is doubtless a mare’s nest, like much more that is related of the
International, or still more probably an invention of the Russian
police, the object of these weighty discoveries being gold snuff-boxes,
decorations and such-like _douceurs_. (...)
The weekly paper, _Im Neuen Reich_, publishes a reply to an article
in the _Kreuzzeitung_ pleading in favour of the Palais Radziwill.
“No doubt it is a splendid and hospitable house worthy of a Polish
_grand seigneur_ who holds his Court in Berlin, and those who have
had access to it--amongst them evidently the contributor to the
_Kreuzzeitung_--appreciate it. But we should advise the latter to make
his inquiries about the characteristic feature of the Palais Radziwill
not in the house itself, but on Prussian soil, and he may learn that
the vast capital represented by its luxury and refinement, although
acquired by bourgeois investments, yields its dividends only for the
benefit of a certain form of Catholicism, which is Polish rather than
German.”
Bucher called my attention to this article, and added the following
commentary: “The article in the _Kreuzzeitung_ is written by no other
than our mutual friend Abeken, while the answer has come from the
Chief. Abeken undertook the defence of the Radziwills against the
charge that their palace has become the centre of Berlin Ultramontanism
owing to the fact that he is accustomed to visit them, and because
they are related to the Court and therefore sacred in his eyes.”[5]...
“Doubtless the idea of raising Abeken to a seat in Olympus, or the
Chamber of Peers, will now come to nothing, as the Chief has discovered
his intrigues with the Ultramontanes. So it will not be ‘Lord Abeken,’
after all.”
_March 8th._--To-day wrote the following article for the _Kölnische
Zeitung_, from the Chief’s instructions as communicated to me by
Bucher: “In the speech made by the Imperial Chancellor in the Upper
House the day before yesterday he spoke of petitions in favour of
the Pope which, during the session of the Reichstag, were ordered or
countermanded just as the members of the Centre Party found convenient.
Then proceeding to the seizures of papers by the police authorities in
Posen, the Prince said that among these he had seen certain letters
‘which the police considered it necessary to bring to the knowledge
of the highest authorities in order to put them on the right track
with a view to subsequent investigations in another direction.’ The
speaker further remarked that one of these letters was from a prominent
member of the Centre Party to a priest of high position, a canon in
Posen who has recently been much talked of. If I rightly remember, it
said: ‘Do not send us any more petitions to the Reichstag.’ A similar
instruction, in the French language, was despatched at the same time
to the Province of Posen by a well-known German bishop, who also
said: ‘Stop sending petitions for the present. They do no good in the
Reichstag, and only lead to unpleasant discussions.’ ‘But,’ continues
the former writer, ‘do not fail to forward these petitions later on at
regular intervals, only address them not to the Reichstag but to the
Sovereigns direct, upon whom they will in any case produce a greater
impression. Although we may have nothing to hope for from the German
Princes, it is nevertheless certain that sooner or later the Catholic
Powers will intervene on behalf of his Holiness, and such intervention
the German Princes will not venture to oppose if these petitions
impress them with the idea that opposition would cause serious
dissatisfaction among the Catholic population.’ The eventuality which
the two gentlemen, whose statements I here intentionally reproduce in
full, have in view is a French crusade against Italy, in expectation
of which Germany must be rendered powerless. It is understood on good
authority that the writers referred to by the Chancellor are Herr
Windthorst and Bishop von Ketteler; while the canon to whom Windthorst
communicated his plan for intimidating the German Princes is, as will
have been surmised, the Polish prelate Kozmian.” (...)
_March 10th._--Yesterday Bucher brought me down the outline of an
article which I am to get Rössler to write for the _Grenzboten_, whose
editor must then arrange for its reproduction by Biedermann in the
_Deutsche Allgemeine Zeitung_. Bucher’s shorthand notes ran as follows:
“One of the newspapers has expressed the opinion that Windthorst
would appear from his letter to Kozmian to expect an intervention
by France on behalf of the Pope. The member for Meppen, however, is
doubtless more far-seeing, and recognises that if France were to take
such a course the natural ally of the French and ultramontane policy
would be found in Vienna. An Ultramontane-French-Austrian alliance
would, of course, be directed chiefly against Germany, but would also
find it an exceptionally easy task to revolutionise Poland in the
direction desired by the Pope--if an inference is to be drawn from the
concessions which it is proposed to make in Galicia. At present the
relations between Germany and Austria are good, but mainly owing to
the personality of the Sovereign. Nevertheless, there is danger under
a Hohenwart Ministry of a return to the so-called ‘Father Confessor’
policy. That would also entirely paralyse free development of every
kind in Austria. This is to be first inserted in a weekly paper and
then circulated further.”
Hints of a similar effect to the remarks here made respecting the
Poles were already given by the Chief in Brass’s paper on the 17th
of February. The article caused a great sensation in Vienna, and
afterwards formed the subject of despatches between Schweinitz and our
Chancellor.
_March 13th._--This morning Bucher handed me a copy of Windthorst’s
letter to Kozmian, with the remark that the Chief wished “it to
appear in the press as coming from Parliamentary circles.” I sent the
document, with a few words of suitable introduction, to the _Kölnische
Zeitung_, from which it was copied into all the other papers.
This publication of Windthorst’s letter produced an immense sensation.
The Liberal organs condemned the letter, while the Clericals poured
out the vials of their wrath upon those to whom they ascribed “the
outrage” of its publication. One of the most amusing features of the
whole affair was the manner in which they vented their anger upon the
“learned dwarf,” as the _Germania_ was accustomed to call our little
Aegidi, who was as innocent as a new-born babe of any share in our
stratagem.
_March 22nd._--R. reports under date of the 17th instant: “The Polish
emigrants are making great efforts to bring about a reconciliation
with Russia.... Reports to this effect are received not only from
the Russian Ministers abroad, but also from the Governors-General of
Wilna, Warsaw, Kieff, and Odessa.... At the command of the Emperor the
most positive instructions have been sent to the Imperial officials to
avoid everything that would look like negotiations with the emigrants.
The Imperial Government can in no circumstances negotiate with the
latter. It must also be positively declared everywhere that the
Imperial Government will have nothing to do with pan-Slavism, but on
the contrary regards it as one of the greatest dangers for Russia. His
Majesty the Emperor appears to hold immutably to this opinion.”
_March 24th._--Among the documents received is a report from Darmstadt
giving particulars of an interview with the Grand Duke which is worth
noting. It took place at a dinner which was given in honour of the
Emperor’s birthday. In the course of conversation the Grand Duke had
expressed himself strongly on the anti-national attitude, and almost
exclusively selfish aims, of the Ultramontane Party, and upon the
untrustworthiness and Jesuitism of Bishop von Ketteler in particular.
(...)
_April 2nd._--This evening between 8 and 9 o’clock the Secretary of
State came to my desk. He first asked if I was always obliged to remain
so late in order to see if anything was wanted upstairs. I replied in
the affirmative, explaining at the same time that Bucher conveyed the
Chief’s orders to me, and supplied me with material. He then observed:
“He has stated to diplomatists that he wishes the war to be waged in
a milder form. The English representative told me so, and I should be
glad to know if any instructions to this effect have been received
here. Has anything of the kind been done?... After all he cannot mean
to go so far as the papers say. Why, that would amount to a Thirty
Years’ War.” I said that would hardly be possible, and the Chief would
scarcely think of going beyond a certain point. “I do not believe it
either,” he said; “but in that case the semi-official journals should
not give rise to such apprehensions as seem to be entertained by the
other papers; and he should not have given such directions. If you
should happen to hear that a milder tone is to be adopted, please let
me know, so that I may be informed when the diplomatists question me on
the subject.”
During this conversation I remembered a letter which I had seen on
the floor of his room the day before yesterday, which was dated from
Brussels, and would appear from the handwriting to have come from
Balan. It contained the following passage: “It would seem as if
the ecclesiastical question would more and more dominate all other
relations with us, and in this respect as well as in many others would
postpone for a long time to come the return of that idyllic peace of
former times which we were accustomed to in our youth.... The main
difficulties have scarcely begun. In my opinion they will inevitably
arise when it becomes necessary to check the fanatics of the movement
that has now been started.”
_April 3rd._--Bucher dictated to me to-day the following ideas for an
article for the _Norddeutsche Allgemeine Zeitung_, which he had taken
down in shorthand from the Chief: “Naturally very many persons in
Alsace-Lorraine wish to remain French citizens, through fear of the
conscription and for other similar reasons. That was clearly foreseen
by us, but we were obliged to keep that strip of land as military cover
against new filibustering raids such as the French have attempted
fifty to sixty times during the past two centuries. It is obvious that
we could not permit those who elected for the French nationality to
continue to reside in Alsace-Lorraine, as possibly the majority would
then adopt that course. As to the threat of expelling the Germans from
France, all those who are not absolutely necessary for the maintenance
of industry and commerce in France are already being driven away.
Life is made so unendurable to the others that they leave of their own
accord.”
_April 6th._--At midday to-day Bucher brought me instructions and
material from the Chief for a long article on the Bohemian party
of autonomy, which was to be dated from Prague and sent to the
_Grenzboten_. It was afterwards reproduced in the _Norddeutsche
Allgemeine Zeitung_ at the instance of the Chief. It ran as follows,
the portions within brackets being a literal reproduction of the
Prince’s own words: “I take the liberty to return once more to a
subject which it is desirable should be clearly understood in Germany,
namely, the character of our great landed proprietors, an important
element in the opposition to the cis-Leithan Constitution. In this
respect many organs of the German press give expression again and
again to erroneous views, although the gentlemen in question have been
repeatedly exposed in their true colours in this as well as in other
journals. At the decisive moment our great Bohemian landowners will
play the principal part. It is now asserted that the voting in both
electoral sections may be expected to be in favour of the Government
and the Constitutional party. Nevertheless, we think it best not to
shout before we are out of the wood. At all events, a few weeks ago
the landed aristocracy of Bohemia still belonged to the party which
declared in favour of a Federal and anti-Constitutional policy. It
would be a great mistake, however, to confound these magnates with the
bulk of the nationalists and to fancy that they support the agitation
of the Czechs from a genuine enthusiasm for the Crown of St. Wenceslas,
and an autonomous kingdom of Bohemia.
“Who are these gentlemen that assume such a Bohemian air? A national
nobility of Czech blood? By no means, or, at least, not in the great
majority of cases. They are, on the contrary, an element which by birth
and descent are not only foreign, but even hostile to the Czechs.
[Precisely the most active members of their party are the descendants
of the generals and statesmen who during the first decade of the Thirty
Years’ War were most energetic in suppressing and destroying the
national State, and in exterminating the native nobility of Bohemia and
confiscating their lands. They are the grandchildren and heirs of those
who, in return for the services they rendered to Father Lamormain’s
imperial penitent, and for their assistance in suppressing the Bohemian
nationality on the one hand and Protestantism on the other, were
rewarded by the Jesuitic policy of the Hapsburgs with the estates of
the national Czech nobles who had been sent to the scaffold or banished
from the country.]
“The representatives of our landed aristocracy who now vie with the
rabid Czech nationalists in their enthusiasm for Bohemian autonomy are
almost without exception Germans. [In thus assuming the part of Czechs
they make themselves as ridiculous as the gallant Junker von Krauthofer
from the banks of the Vistula when he dons the embroidered Pekesche of
the Poles with their white or red ‘Confederatka’ cap, and christens
himself Pan Krutowski. Not one of them uses the Bohemian language
in speaking to his equals; indeed few of them are able to read or
understand it at all, while hardly a couple out of the whole lot could
stand the test of pronouncing the famous vowelless shibboleth ‘Strcz
prst skrz krk.’ (These words signify: Put your thumb down your throat.)
They speak as their mothers, grandmothers and great-grandmothers spoke,
they think and feel as their grandfathers and great-grandfathers
thought and felt, that is to say, neither German nor Bohemian, but
rather in as un-national and anti-national a spirit as their most
intimate friends and allies, the Clericals and Ultramontanes.]
“This history of Bohemia shortly before and after the battle of the
White Mountain is well known, and so are the statesmen and military
commanders who lent their aid to the Emperor and his Jesuits in
the destruction of Bohemian independence, and in the sanguinary
‘Reformation’ that followed, as well as the intrigues of the
Centralistic-Ultramontane Court party in Vienna, and in the vengeance
which they wreaked and the rewards which they received. People
remember the wholesale executions of those who were the guardians and
administrators of Bohemian autonomy, the dragonnades under the guidance
of the Jesuits which were intended to drive the Czechs, aristocracy,
bourgeoisie, and peasantry within the pale of the One True Church, and,
finally, the enormous confiscations by which the Imperial Treasury
acquired 642 estates during the year in which the battle occurred. The
Emperor, it is true, had occasional intervals of a milder temper, but
was again and again persuaded to take violent measures by the bigoted
hatred of his Jesuit confessor and of the Papal Legate, and to at least
an equal degree by the covetousness of officials of high position, who
were actually promised a large share of the confiscated property. Even
Czechs, who had been guilty of no offence, were robbed of their estates
on all sorts of pretexts. Almost all the landed aristocracy lost half
their property, and many, including the wealthiest, their entire
estates through the Commissions that were appointed by the Emperor in
1622 to raise the amount that had been expended in consequence of the
insurrection.
“It would be well one day to give statistical details of the share
which fell to the assistants in this great work of oppression and
revenge, and of the portion that still remains in the hands of the
families of those who were then rewarded, and with these details--for
the sake of comparison--a statement of the political views of the
present holders of those confiscated estates. It would be a very
singular picture to see people who have grown rich and powerful through
the destruction of Bohemian autonomy now promoting its restoration.
“That would in truth be a most extraordinary reaction. But one should
be very cautious in crediting the sincerity of our large landowners
who make common cause with the Czechs in opposing the Constitution,
and in the aspirations and efforts that are ostensibly directed
towards that end. Their reactionary aspirations do not extend so far
back. They would be satisfied with a return to the conditions of the
period immediately preceding 1849, to the Austria which flourished
under Schwarzenberg and Bach. They and the Ultramontanes have allied
themselves with the Czech Federalists in order to prepare for this
reaction and to undermine and weaken the present political system of
the Empire, reducing it to a state of permanent instability. Like
their fathers, who once worked from Vienna against Prague, so do they
now from Prague oppose the political and religious influence of the
Austrian capital.
“Our ultramontane Princes of the Church, who now join with the
remainder of the reactionary mob in attacking the Constitution, were
formerly by no means in favour of Federalism or autonomy. The same
bishops who are to-day fanatical supporters of the Czech demands,
declared at the time when the Concordat was under discussion that the
variety of languages was one of the evil consequences of the building
of the tower of Babel which should be abolished, and emphasised the
necessity of a centralised State. Even now they are not irreconcilable
opponents of centralisation, but what they desire is to see Rome made
the centre for all affairs of importance. For them a centralised
Austria, under its present constitution, is an abomination. But a
centralised Austria held together by Ultramontanism and thoroughly
permeated with it, with a Vienna Star Chamber policy, like that of
Metternich, coercing, in co-operation with Rome and the old nobility,
all the contending nationalities and utilising them for their own ends
and those of the Pope, far from being repugnant to them, would be the
realisation of their ideal. And the members of our landed aristocracy
who have fallen into line with these ecclesiastical allies of the
Czechs have exactly the same ideas on the subject.
“I repeat, the Czech sentiment of these nobles is a mere pretence. It
is as false as the zeal which they manifest for Bohemian autonomy.
Two and a half centuries ago, their forefathers, as the servants of
ecclesiastical and political reaction, and as tools of the Jesuits,
opposed Bohemian autonomy with their whole might, and were rewarded
by being put into possession of the estates of the Bohemian nobility.
[The Schwarzenbergs could tell a tale on that subject. They have taken
over the views of their ancestors with the estates which they have
inherited. They will only support the Slav agitation for a time, and
with the secret intention of dropping it at a suitable opportunity. In
their hands the Czech peasant serves merely as the instrument for his
own better subjection. He was chosen for that purpose solely because
the Germans were not sufficiently gullible, and were too independent
of character, to serve these gentlemen’s purposes, viz., the fusion of
Ultramontanism and Absolutism which was established in Austria from
1661, and which the Jesuits and their lay and Clerical allies are now
promoting with all their might in Germany also.]”
_April 8th._--According to a telegram from Rosen, our representative
at Belgrade reports the Secretary of the Russian Consulate had boasted
that it was Russia who had put the Servian Government up to refusing to
pay the Zwornik tribute. The Chief made the following marginal note:
“Herr R. must be told to drop the habit of telegraphing every boastful
utterance in which Consular officials may indulge.”
In consequence of the difficulties respecting Zwornik and Sakar,
despatches have been written to S. and R., informing them that R.
has been instructed to act with the greatest prudence and reserve
in this matter, which clearly betrays a divergency of views between
Austria and Russia, in order not to prejudice our relations with St.
Petersburg or Vienna. Consul-General Rosen has however long since
received instructions to unhesitatingly subordinate our interests in
Servian affairs to the considerations imposed upon us by our intimate
and friendly relations with Russia and Austria, and to avoid everything
that could lead to misunderstandings or complaints on either side.
_April 10th._--According to a report addressed by the Austro-Hungarian
Ambassador, Count Apponyi, to Andrassy, which was shown by the latter
to S., Thiers, speaking to Apponyi, said: “_Les sentiments hostiles
de Bismarck contre le parti catholique lui inspirent de la sympathie
pour la gouvernement de Victor Emanuel_.” In other respects, Thiers
still maintains his optimistic view of the situation in France. He said
the country had never been so tranquil, and the South was no more to
be feared than Paris. He further observed that the good understanding
between Prussia and Russia was based more upon family relations than
upon the common interests and sympathies of the peoples.
_April 14th._--Andrassy has again raised, through the Austro-Hungarian
Ambassador in Berlin, the question of taking action against the
International, remarking incidentally that although at the interview
in Gastein nothing positive had been settled with regard to the
measures to be taken, yet there was every reason to believe that both
sides were in agreement, and that the German Government wished to
take the initiative in the matter. The communication of the Spanish
Government now afforded an opportunity of returning to the subject.
It was known through Schweinitz that the German Government was not
prepared to let the matter drop, but, on the contrary, intended to take
it into serious consideration, and that it was disposed in particular
to complete the existing extradition treaties by adding provisions
respecting the International. It is then suggested that a conference
of Austro-Hungarian and German authorities on the subject should take
place in Berlin, the results of which might be submitted to both
Governments. The document goes on to say:--
“The following measures might be recommended to the technical
authorities on both sides as likely to be effective: The prohibition of
labour congresses in which were represented associations belonging to
different countries; the prohibition of all foreign control over labour
societies at home; and, finally, the definition under treaty of those
precautionary measures that require a common understanding between the
European States and those which every State should be left to promote
under its own laws. Those points once settled by arrangement between
the two Governments, they might then proceed to consider whether in
addition to repressive measures it would not be possible to discuss
others of a remedial nature, to meet the legitimate demands of the
working classes and thus counteract the Socialist propaganda.”
I may add here that on the 27th of April the Chancellor instructed
Bucher to write to Itzenplitz, requesting him to have the materials
collected in November last embodied in a memorandum, and to nominate
for this purpose on behalf of his Ministry a representative acquainted
with the subject. A similar request was addressed to the Ministers of
the Interior and of Justice.
_Evening._--Bucher brings me an article from the _Pester Lloyd_ of the
11th instant and says: “The blue pencil mark, and the query ‘Surely
to be laid before the Chancellor?’ are by Aegidi. He thinks it will
be something new for the Chief. I am, however, pretty certain that
the article has been written at his suggestion. I myself have on
one occasion launched something of the kind against Augusta. Just
see that the article, or the best passages of it, are reproduced
in some low outside print (_irgend ein entferntes Schandblatt_). I
do not wish to give the black fellow my views on the origin of the
article, because, as you know, I do not trust him. Keudell has also
connections in Augusta’s circles.” The “best passages” from the
article, which began by describing the Emperor’s speech from the throne
as dry and temperate, but free from phrasemongering, and typical
of the “practical character of Prussian policy,” are the following:
“Although the statements contained in the speech from the throne
afford little ground for comment, yet the omissions point to another
aspect of the question. For some days past a singular rumour has been
circulating in the newspapers to the effect that the arm which has
seemed on the point of crushing the intrigues of the zealots is felt
in Berlin to be already unnerved, and that an armistice is impending
with the reactionary party which Prince Bismarck has just branded
as the arch-enemy of the German Empire. The sudden and unexpected
arrival of the Chancellor from Varzin is regarded as an indication
that something is pending in the capital which renders his presence
there indispensable. Others assert that the threatened expulsion from
Germany of the order of Jesus has excited such serious apprehensions in
Rome that the Holy Father himself directed the Episcopacy to observe a
prudent and moderate attitude in order to avert the execution of that
measure; thus paving the way for a _modus vivendi_, negotiations for
which had been already entered upon with every prospect of success.
As it is well known how unwillingly the Emperor William entered upon
that campaign, and what difficulties Bismarck had with the Conservative
Junkers and Pietists, the ominous silence on this point of the speech
from the throne may be taken as a confirmation of the foregoing rumours.
“Moreover, another dark rumour is gaining more form and consistence
from day to day, and cannot be ignored much longer. We regret to say
authentic reports agree in representing the Empress Augusta as the
centre of that coalition which desires to stay the hand that Bismarck
has raised to strike. We grant that the rumour sounds ludicrously
improbable, yet in presence of the letters that represent the facts as
fully authenticated, we have no alternative but to set aside all such
denials as futile, and--taking the matter as it stands, for good or for
evil--endeavour to explain it and to consider its consequences. We must
confess that we have only two very commonplace explanations to offer,
which may nevertheless suffice. These are the spiritual requirements
of increasing piety, so common in energetic women who are advancing
in years (the Empress will soon have completed her sixty-first year)
and the desire to play a political part, which likewise grows upon
them with age. It is scarcely necessary to recall special instances
in history to show how easily and frequently these tendencies have
combined, and how ladies of the highest station have thereby become the
most convenient and effective instruments of pietistic schemes. The
Empress, who has been at all times of an aspiring and ambitious mind,
but who has never exercised much political influence over her consort,
was obliged to seek a lever elsewhere. That is the simple solution
of the problem, but it must not be dismissed merely because of its
simplicity. Other ladies in a similar position follow the dictates of
their hearts when, influenced by their innate piety, they devote their
whole energy to promoting the interests of the Church.
“In the case of the Weimar Princess, the daughter of Charles Augustus,
whose friends were Schiller and Goethe, and the pupil of Alexander
von Humboldt, the connection between these two factors is reversed.
The splendour, to which her pride has always led her to aspire, has
now fallen abundantly to her lot. When it is remembered that the
magnificent coronation festivities, ten years ago at Königsberg and
Berlin, were principally her work, (it is well known that she begged
the Empress Eugénie to lend her her hairdresser for the occasion),
she must be fully satisfied in that respect, since the imperial
crown has been added to the royal diadem. But, in addition to this
outward pomp, Augusta now wishes to enjoy the sense of real power.
Indications of this tendency were evident so long ago as 1866, when
Vogel von Falkenstein received orders from Berlin in a feminine hand
to proceed with leniency in South Germany, and was suddenly removed
from the command of the army on the Main, because his anger at this
interference found expression in the words, ‘When petticoats are to the
front, the devil take a Prussian general!’ In order not to sink into
insignificance beside Bismarck, the Empress required a party, and she
was obliged to take it wherever it was to be found. In this way, the
illustrious lady, who once prided herself on being the patron of the
freethinking cream of the scientific and literary world in Berlin, has
come to find herself presiding over a conventicle.
“The turn things have taken remains none the less extraordinary
because we have tried to explain it. The Empress Augusta is the leader
of the pietistic Junker clique, which, under Frederick William IV.,
did everything in its power to humiliate her, at a time when she, as
Princess of Prussia, lived on the Rhine in a kind of honourable exile,
because she was not prepared to humour the romantic visions of her
royal brother-in-law. It is still related in Coblenz that a favourite
amusement of the wife of that arch-Junker Kleist-Retzow, who is now
leading the opposition against Bismarck in the Upper House, and who
was then Governor of the Rhine Province, was to hang out her wet
linen in the garden in such a way as to cut off the Princess’s view.
Berliners still remember the article in the _Kreuzzeitung_ which
actually denounced the ‘democrats’ for an ovation that once took
place in the fifties, outside the Palace of the Prince of Prussia,
because he and his consort had regained their popularity by opposing
the pietistic clique. And yet to-day the Empress is working hand in
hand with Kleist-Retzow and Senfft-Pilsach, with Lippe and Gerlach!
The unnatural character of this alliance is the best guarantee for its
short duration. The Empress, who is a clever woman, will grow tired of
the adventure as soon as she discovers that, instead of influencing
others, she is herself being used as a tool. Bismarck, however, must
now prove the truth of what he once said to Bamberger in Paris: ‘I am
much more of a courtier than of a statesman.’”
_April 15th._--Read two reports of the 11th instant from St.
Petersburg. One states that a copy of the _Kozmian Documents_ has
been handed to Prince Gortschakoff, and that the Russian Chancellor
has declared his readiness to join with us in protesting against the
appointment of Ledochowski as Primate of Poland. The report goes on to
say: “Prince Gortschakoff formerly complained that we intended to throw
Russia alone into the breach, and yet it would now seem as if it was he
who wished to throw himself into it, or rather had already done so, as
M. K. has made representations in Rome, although only in a confidential
form.” The other document reports: “Prince Gortschakoff told me to-day
that a few weeks ago General ---- showed him a private letter from
M. Thiers which contained a reference to the German occupation. The
Chancellor had replied that if the President of the French Republic
wished to communicate to him a financial scheme giving adequate
security for the payment of the war indemnity, the Russian Government
would willingly commend such a plan to favourable consideration in
Berlin. Beyond that he could promise nothing. The French Ambassador
returned to the subject a few days ago and again asked if the Imperial
Government would not use its influence in Berlin to hasten the
withdrawal of the German troops. The Prince replied that he would
not weary General ---- with repetitions, but would relate to him an
anecdote out of his own experience. On one occasion at the conclusion
of a game, the loser went on bewailing his bad luck, thus unnecessarily
delaying the other players. At length one of the latter exclaimed
impatiently, ‘_Payez d’abord et lamentez après!_’ The Ambassador took
the hint and did not press the matter further.”
_April 17th._--To-day towards noon Aegidi came to my desk and said he
wished to ask me a question. Hallberger, of Stuttgart, intended to
found a great Review, jointly with another gentleman whose name he
could not mention as yet. Now it had occurred to him, Aegidi, that
Professor Roessler might be willing to accept the editorship, for
which he would be highly suitable. The Chief knew and approved of the
scheme. I replied that Roessler did not appear to me to be fitted for
it, as although he was certainly able, he was nebulous, unpractical,
and rather indolent, so that he would constantly require to be roused
and kept up to the mark. Aegidi then said that there was plenty of
capital behind the scheme, and that Roessler would have an excellent
position. “But,” he continued, “the main point is this. The Review
would publish a fortnightly survey of the situation from here, similar
to that in the _Revue des Deux Mondes_. Would you be prepared to write
it? Of course you must demand very high remuneration. All your terms
will be agreed to.” I said I would consider the matter, particularly
if the Prince appeared to desire it. “Yes,” he said, “and you shall
have whatever you ask. But there is another point which may cause
you some hesitation--the gentleman with whom Hallberger proposes to
carry on the work is Meding.” I was thoroughly astounded, and felt the
blood rush to my head. “Meding!” I exclaimed; “on no consideration
whatever! That would be to roll myself in the mud of my own free will.
I beg of you most earnestly not to propose anything of the kind to
Roessler either, as he would regard it as an insult to suppose that
he would have anything to do with such a double-dyed traitor.” Aegidi
was highly surprised, and--with bated breath--supposed I would not be
prepared to see Meding, who intended to call upon me at 2 o’clock.
“Heaven forfend!” I replied; “I do not wish to hear his name or to have
anything to do with him.” “Well,” he added, “I myself should really not
have taken up the matter but for Keudell. You can see from this what an
easy-going, unsuspicious man he is.” (As if one did not know better!)
Later in the day I returned to this outrageous proposal, and told
Aegidi once more that I did not understand how such an individual could
imagine that a respectable literary man would have any connection with
a periodical edited by him. Roessler would be beside himself if such a
thing were suggested to him, and I really had good reason to be angry
at such a proposal being made to me. “You are right,” replied Aegidi,
“and I beg your pardon for having done so. I really did not know at
first that he was the same Oscar Meding.[6] (Stinking fish!) I cannot
understand how Keudell could have recommended him to me.” (...)
_April 20th._--In a report from Pesth, dated the 17th instant, I find
that Andrassy fancies, from various symptoms, that dissatisfaction is
felt at St. Petersburg at Austria’s disposition to enter into more
intimate relations with us. This does not apply, however, to the
Emperor Alexander himself. It would appear that the symptoms referred
to are to be found in communications from Lieutenant-Colonel Baron
Bechtoldsheim, the Austrian Military Attaché at St. Petersburg, and
from Lieutenant-General von Tornau, the Russian Military Agent in
Vienna. The latter, a meritorious old soldier, belongs to that class
of Russian politicians who look upon the Prussian conquest of the
Baltic Provinces as inevitable. During the war of 1870, General Tornau
was so _francophil_ that it was impossible to comply with the wish of
the Emperor Alexander, that full information should be given to his
military agent concerning Austrian armaments.
The same writer reports, under the same address and date: “I again
called Andrassy’s attention to the principle that has repeatedly
been laid down before as one of the preliminary conditions of our
mutual _rapprochement_--namely, that it must not in the slightest
degree impair the relations between Germany and Russia. In addition
to the reasons already mentioned, I gave the following. In political
affairs national and revolutionary passions have now associated
themselves more closely than ever before with sectarian feeling. This
circumstance increases the value of our orthodox friend. Andrassy
took this opportunity to give me the grounds on which he bases his
conviction that any action on behalf of Rome was an impossibility
in Austria-Hungary.... Not only there (in Hungary) but also in
Cisleithania, a Papal policy could not be carried into effect. ‘Even
the Thuns, and the members of their party,’ continued the Count, in
allusion to the notorious Clerical deputation, ‘entertain no such hope,
and no thought of it exists in those quarters with whom the decision
must lie.’ Therefore, if in the next war between Germany and France,
the latter seeks to secure allies on a Catholic basis, she will have
nothing to hope for here in Austria-Hungary. It is more probable, added
Andrassy, that she would turn to the Slavs, who form the majority of
the Austro-Hungarian population, and are connected with kindred races
on the southern and eastern frontiers of the Empire.”
_April 21st._--Brass to-day publishes an article (the greater part of
which was dictated by the Chief to Bucher) on the language used by the
Pope in bestowing his benediction upon a large deputation of Catholics
last Saturday. I quote the following passages: “Until we are assured
of the contrary on more definite information, we are disposed to think
that those four hundred persons did not all come to Rome from their
different countries merely to deliver the address, but rather that
those who have charge of the Vatican policy considered it desirable
to give the Pope an opportunity of expressing his views, and that the
real pilgrims were reinforced with contingents from the tourists and
foreign residents who are always to be found in Rome and the other
Italian cities. We shall hardly do the Papal advisers an injustice
in crediting them with this little stratagem, when the Pope’s own
speech proves that they did not hesitate to impose upon him with the
grossest inaccuracies, and when they induced so truth-loving a man to
say that a spirit of hostility to the Church had provoked the struggle
in Germany. The Pope does not understand the German language, and the
Germans who encompass him are no friends of Germany. It is, therefore,
no wonder that he is unable to control the statements made to him by
his counsellors. Are we not, indeed, accustomed to find the grossest
errors respecting Germany prevalent in leading circles in France,
a neighbouring country which is in active, personal and literary
intercourse with us? Every one in Germany who is capable of forming an
independent opinion knows, and every one, with the exception of the
party of the _Germania_, will acknowledge, that it was the Catholic
reaction which began the quarrel with a Government whose dispositions
towards the Catholic Church were most friendly. Every Government,
including those of Catholic countries like Portugal, Spain, Belgium,
Italy and France, must defend itself against a reactionary movement
which now, through the mouth of the Pope, summons to its assistance
the elements of opposition in Ireland, Poland, and Holland, in the
same way as it must defend itself against the revolutionary democracy.
This is confirmed by the Pope himself, so far as France is concerned;
as the ‘party’ which fears the Pope so much must, we presume, be held
to include the Government that has curbed the zeal of the ultramontane
deputies. For the Papal politicians even France is not sufficiently
Catholic; France, where for centuries the keenest Papal propaganda has
been carried on, where Roman discipline has been maintained by the St.
Bartholomew massacres, the dragonnades, and the revocation of the Edict
of Nantes, and whose first care, after stealing Strassburg from us, was
to hand over the Protestant Cathedral to the Catholic bishops. The Pope
admonishes the party which in France fears him to cultivate a humble
spirit. If he knew the real condition of affairs there, as in all other
Christian countries, he would rather have addressed that admonition
to the arrogant priests who, unlike the Protestant clergy, instead
of being the servants of the community desire to become its masters;
and to those members of the laity who, for the purposes of their own
ambition, abuse the prestige which he rightly enjoys, who terrify him
with the lie that the Catholic Church in Germany will undergo similar
material losses to those which it has suffered in Italy, who take
allies wherever they are to be found, and who--as in certain election
addresses--instigate the spoliation of the rich in the name of a
religion of love.”
Bucher, who called my attention to this article, told me the Chief
desired the whole official press to speak in this tone of the Pope--a
good old gentleman, who does not understand German, and who has
fallen into bad hands. He at the same time gave the following notes,
requesting me to “smuggle them into the press somewhere:” “In the
course of the debate in the Reichstag on the Statistical Bureau,
the Federal Commissioner, Privy Councillor Michaelis, asserted that
under the new order of things the Foreign Office had become entirely
superfluous for Prussia. That is an extraordinary statement, which
calls for rectification. The debate on the Budget in the Prussian
Diet showed that there are still in existence eight Royal Prussian
Legations, and that for the transaction of the business connected with
them, the Foreign Office is still designated the Prussian Ministry
for Foreign Affairs, and appears as such in the Prussian Budget, the
title of its officials to be regarded as Prussian officials having been
expressly vindicated. It is an open secret that the opposition to the
Prussian Statistical Bureau is due to other causes. This institute has
done its work, and submitted its results without considering whether
the latter harmonise with this or that theory--in other words, it
has acted in a scientific spirit. Now, for a considerable time past
it has been observed with disfavour in certain quarters that the
results obtained by the Statistical Bureau do not always tally with
the infallible and all saving doctrines of Free Trade. The opinion is
indeed gaining ground in ever-widening circles that the preachers of
economic infallibility would do well to test and amend their teachings
by the light of such facts as are now being collected in Berlin,
instead of emulating their ecclesiastical colleagues the Jesuits by
calmly putting every heretic out of the way.”
_April 22nd._--Aegidi told me this morning that the Chief wished to
see the following subject discussed in the press. Prince Leopold of
Bavaria, in consequence of his betrothal to the Austrian Archduchess
Gisela, was to enter the Austrian army. During the war with France he
had distinguished himself by his gallantry and other high qualities.
Therefore, in spite of the pleasure caused in Germany by his betrothal,
it would be a matter for regret if he were to be lost to the German,
and particularly to the Bavarian army. Up to the present, there had not
been any such intimate personal connection between the Bavarian army
and the dynasty as existed for instance in Prussia and Saxony, and it
must therefore be hoped that the rumour would not be confirmed, or that
the decision might still be altered.
Aegidi added that he had just sent a paragraph to this effect to Zabel
(then chief editor of the _National Zeitung_), but that he had declined
to publish it....
_May 4th._--Aegidi assures me that an article in the _Norddeutsche
Allgemeine Zeitung_, written by himself, reproduces the ideas of the
Prince, in several places “almost literally.” After alluding to the
nomination of Cardinal Hohenlohe as German Ambassador to the Curia,
and with the erroneous interpretation placed upon it by certain
newspapers, the article goes on to say: “It is not the business of
a diplomatic agent to have his own plans of campaign, to deliver
battle or gain victories, nor to exercise influence through threats,
stratagems, or persuasion. He is only the intermediary between
the Governments and Courts that hold intercourse through him, the
mouthpiece of his Government, whose instructions he must carry out
skilfully and conscientiously. In the present instance the aim of
the German representative at the Vatican cannot for a moment be to
persuade or win over the head of the Catholic Church, and still less
to bring the great struggle between the civil and ecclesiastical
powers to an issue by diplomatic talent and resolution. The first task
of the representative of Germany at the Vatican would doubtless be
to prevent the Pope from being misled with regard to German affairs.
Were such a representative--thoroughly acquainted with the questions
at issue, and well informed both as to persons and things--to succeed
in this respect it would be a great gain. It must not be forgotten
that such subjects as are generally included in foreign politics do
not come in any way within the province of his diplomatic mission. The
envoy to the Papal See has nothing whatever to do with territorial
questions or other worldly interests, but only with affairs of Church
and State. Nor can these be settled in Rome, or be dependent upon any
decisions arrived at there. They must, on the contrary, be regulated
by legislation, with the co-operation of Parliament; and it is in
that way that they will be regulated. It is none the less desirable
to prevent numerous conceivable misunderstandings which may arise in
connection with such important matters, and in particular to forestall
wilful misrepresentations, thus averting unnecessary friction. These
considerations will doubtless have exercised a decisive influence in
the choice of an intermediary exceptionally suited for the post. The
Pope, however, did not approve. As reported yesterday, in reply to the
official communication announcing that Cardinal Prince Hohenlohe had
been selected for the post of Ambassador of the German Empire, and
inquiring whether the appointment would be agreeable to the Pope, the
Cardinal Secretary of State declared that his Holiness could not allow
a Cardinal to undertake such an office.”
_May 5th._--The following paragraph appears to-day in the _Magdeburger
Zeitung_, the _Weser Zeitung_, and the _Hamburger Correspondenten_:
“St. Petersburg, April 29th. It will be remembered that M. Kapnist, the
Russian agent to the Curia, was some time ago invested by the Pope with
the Order of Pius. It is now reported from Rome that the cross of the
Order is set in brilliants of exceptionally high value--the estimate
varies between fifty and a hundred thousand francs. Such a distinction
excites all the more surprise as M. Kapnist’s mission is by no means
concluded.” This was probably written by Aegidi, who asked me yesterday
to have the news circulated in papers to which I have access, but in
such a way that the source of the paragraph should not be recognised. I
wonder what object the Chief, from whom he received this instruction,
can have in view in circulating this report. In a letter written by D.
on the 27th of April, which reached here on the 30th, it is stated that
the story circulated by the _Italie_, as to Kapnist’s Order being set
with brilliants was unfounded, and that altogether he had received no
distinction greater than was due to his rank. And yet four days later
the above instructions are given!...
_May 9th._--A communication was yesterday despatched to S., which
contains the following passage: “You will have seen from the ciphered
despatch of Consul-General Rosen, dated the 21st of April, and
forwarded _viâ_ Vienna, that M. de Kallay in Belgrade denies being the
author of the report of our alleged intervention on behalf of Servia,
in the Zwornik question. Different versions of his communications seem
to have reached Vienna and Constantinople, as would appear from the
statements made by Count Andrassy to your Excellency, and by Count
Ludolf to Herr von Radowitz. Similarly, the false reports that have
reached the newspapers can be traced to the same source. As they
are obstinately maintained, it has been necessary to publish the
following _démenti_ in the _Staatsanzeiger_. An instruction has been
issued from the Foreign Office, to contradict a report from Belgrade,
dated the 28th ultimo, and published in the _Augsburger Allgemeine
Zeitung_ of the 2nd instant, which is in every respect unfounded. The
report in question maintains, in opposition to the _Norddeutsche
Allgemeine Zeitung_, that the Berlin Cabinet intends to intervene in
the Zwornik question on behalf of Servia. The correspondent observes:
‘I am informed, on an authority which it is impossible to doubt, that
Prince Bismarck, in the last Note sent by him to Herr von Radowitz,
expressly directed him to support the Servian demands.’ This statement
is wilfully false in every particular. No Note, no instruction, no
communication of this or a similar kind has been sent. When this
audacious invention was first circulated, an official inquiry which was
instituted into the affair showed that its author, whom we shall not
name for the present, was closely connected with certain non-German
official circles. Doubtless the correspondent knows the source of the
rumour, and will be able to judge for himself what he should think of
its trustworthiness.”
_May 10th._--I noted down the following from a despatch sent to
Rosen yesterday: “Count Andrassy tells me that M. de Kallay (the
Austro-Hungarian agent to the Servian Government) has reported from
Belgrade that the Regents give it to be understood that the German
Consul-General has said that Servia would ultimately get Zwornik, but
must avoid any step that would cause uneasiness.”
Read two reports from Paris, both dated the 6th instant. The following
is an extract from the first: “As I have already stated on a former
occasion, we ought not to decline off-hand the proffered understanding
with the Bonapartists, especially as, on the one hand, they have no
intention of intriguing against the present Government, and, on the
other, they are the only party which openly seeks our support and
includes reconciliation with Germany in its programme, while all the
other groups and sections avoid every intercourse with us, and inscribe
_la revanche_ on their banners. I consider the candidature of the Duc
d’Aumale to be as great a danger as that of Gambetta, and the so-called
respectable Republic which would be represented by Casimir Perier and
Grévy would form only a transitional stage to Gambetta. Therefore the
most desirable development of the political situation appears to me one
which would, on the one hand, leave us time to come to an understanding
with the Government as to the speedy payment of, and security for, the
three milliards, and, on the other hand, hasten as much as possible
the inevitable change of system, so that the presence of our troops in
the country might afford us an opportunity of exercising a decisive
influence upon the crisis.” The following passage from the other report
is of importance: “M. Thiers then explained to me the general outline
of his scheme for the payment of the war indemnity. He wishes to raise
a loan of three milliards. Of that amount not more than one hundred
millions per month can be called up without placing too great a strain
upon the Money Market. Those sums would be paid direct into the German
Treasury by the banks entrusted with the operation. The payments could
begin in the summer of the present year. The greater part of the first
milliard, which is due on the 1st of March, would therefore be paid
over before that date. This payment in advance should therefore be
met on our side by a corresponding evacuation of French territory.
I forbear to enter into the objections which I raised to M. Thiers’
proposals, as they are too obvious to be overlooked.”
_May 16th._--This afternoon Bucher, under instructions from the Chief,
handed me the following sketch for an article which was to be dated
from Vienna: “I do not know whether the little flirtations of the
authorities here with the Poles have been noticed abroad. The summons
to the recalcitrant Galician members calling upon them to appear in
the Reichstag within fourteen days under pain of losing their seats,
was sent so late that the interval covered the marriage festivities,
and these gentlemen were able to take part in them as members of
Parliament. On the 21st of April, the day on which they were declared
to have lost their seats, the Emperor nominated Dr. Ziemialkowski,
the Burgomaster of Lemberg, whose revolutionary past is well known,
as Minister without a portfolio, and in the Speech from the Throne
referred to this appointment as evidence of his constant consideration
for Galicia. Shortly before this the Archbishop of Lemberg and the
Bishops of Tarnau and Przemysl thought good to send an address to
the ‘Primate,’ Count Ledochowski. It will be remembered that at the
time when Poland was still a kingdom the Primate sometimes acted
as Interrex. The ceremony of inauguration of the Cracow Academy,
which was founded by the Hohenwart Ministry, took place on the 7th
of May, and was attended by the Archduke Karl Ludwig, the Patron
of the Institution. The festivities and speeches on this occasion
were of such a demonstrative character that the local journals,
notwithstanding the full reports which they published, omitted a number
of exceptionally piquant details, particularly in a speech of the new
Minister Ziemialkowski. We may perhaps form some idea of that speech
from the following passage in an election address which he delivered
in 1870: ‘Very soon,’ he said, ‘the civilisation of Europe must
measure swords with Asiatic barbarism. From this struggle Poland will
arise once more like the Phœnix from its ashes. It is true, indeed,
that in the present formation of Europe Poland, with a population
of sixteen millions, situated between the German Empire with forty
millions and Russia with sixty millions, could not maintain herself
alone. She therefore must unite with Hungary and Austria and form a
federation which would justify us in claiming that it had its origin in
a political necessity.’ In Polish affairs one is thoroughly accustomed
to these castles in the air, but it would really seem as if Prussia and
Germany ought to keep a sharp look-out.”
_May 19th._--A report from St. Petersburg, dated the 14th instant,
says: “The news that Count Schuvaloff has been to Berlin and was
received by your Serene Highness has not failed to cause some surprise
here. It was reported immediately that Schuvaloff had been sent to
Berlin with a special mission and, as I learn from a well-informed
source, even Prince Gortschakoff’s own mind was not quite at rest with
regard to this rumour. The explanation is that the varying influence of
the Chief of the Third Department is unpleasant to the Chancellor, all
the more so as Prince Gortschakoff is aware that Schuvaloff dislikes
him, and the two Ministers are not always in agreement on questions of
principle.”
_May 21st._--We hear from St. Petersburg: “Prince Gortschakoff hopes
soon to receive communications respecting the International.... The
_tête-à-tête_ with Austria is certainly the best means of proceeding in
the matter. At this time of day a repressive treatment of the disease
is not in itself enough. The origin of the evil must be discovered, and
with it the antidote. Russia has resolved to suppress with the utmost
energy all disorders in which this dangerous association is involved.
The further communications to be made by me on the result of the
conference proposed by Count Andrassy are awaited here with interest.”
Bucher has left here to-day to join the Prince at Varzin.
_May 26th._--The following very academic, but none the less noteworthy,
dissertation written by Aegidi, as he says on instructions from Varzin,
may be read in to-day’s _Norddeutsche Allgemeine Zeitung_: “The
attitude of the Conservative element in a country is of the greatest
consequence for its sound development. If there be no party which can
adopt into its programme the demands and requirements of a new period,
the altered conditions and principles of the present time, then the two
conceptions, conservative and reactionary, must be fatally confounded
together. The friends of the new order of things, whose aims have been
to a certain extent achieved, and who would therefore be glad to make
common cause with Conservatives in securing and consolidating the
existing order, cannot go hand in hand with reaction. They therefore
occupy an unstable position between the reactionary element and those
who want to go still further; but they remain at all times in closer
sympathy with the latter than with the former. Thus the State at every
new stage is deprived of the requisite steadying influences, and drifts
into a current which can only favour a determined reaction.
“Who will deny that the forces which promote change gave a salutary
and necessary impulse to public life? It is, however, an old political
axiom that the State also requires, and to as great an extent, those
forces that tend towards permanence and moderation. As a rule,
however, their chief service is considered to be to oppose change;
and such opposition is, indeed, frequently beneficial; but their
most useful work should be an entirely different character. The true
strength of the Conservative element in a State is to recognise at the
proper moment the essential features of the situation, to exercise
its judgment with an open mind and absolute freedom from visionary
aspirations, to acknowledge the rights and the true inwardness of the
living present, to keep immediately practical objects in view, and,
as a party devoted to the maintenance of what exists, to secure for
every stage of development a period of consolidation. Not in opposition
to the new era, but rather in union with its moral and positive
forces, can Conservatism find its true mission. By counteracting vain
tendencies to return towards the past, as well as to anticipate the
future, the Conservatives should consider themselves as the party of
the immediate present, and endeavour to secure for it the fulness of
its rights.”
Bucher, writing under yesterday’s date, requests me to secure the
insertion in one of the papers of a paragraph stating that he is
engaged with the Prince at Varzin, as he has been on similar occasions
during the past three years. He added: “This has been ignored on the
present occasion by the tame press, doubtless not unintentionally.”
(This, no doubt, means at the instance of Aegidi, who would like to
replace Bucher at Varzin.) Bucher reports that the Chief is in “very
good humour, rides a great deal, and enjoys his plantations.”
_June 16th._--A despatch addressed to the Imperial Chancellor from St.
Petersburg on the 10th instant says: “I have only been able to have
a very short conversation with Count P. Schuvaloff since his return
from Karlsbad. He thanked me once more for having been the means of
obtaining for him the very interesting interview which he had with
your Serene Highness. According to what he said on this subject, he
received the impression that your Serene Highness quite dissociated
the labour question from the treatment of the International. The
former should be thoroughly studied, and regulated as far as possible
by legislative action. At the same time, he did not think your Serene
Highness considered it desirable to take energetic measures against the
latter just now. Your whole attention was absorbed in the struggle with
the Catholic Church, and it appeared to him that your Serene Highness
did not wish unnecessarily to turn against the Government so useful a
weapon as the Socialist movement might ultimately prove to be against
clerical encroachments. Count Schuvaloff found no confirmation whatever
in the conversation which he had with your Serene Highness for the
supposition circulated here by Prince Gortschakoff that your Serene
Highness was opposed to a friendly understanding between Rome and
Russia.”
According to another report of the same date, “Gortschakoff had
accepted Antonelli’s assurances (see above), and had not signed
the protest proposed by Prussia against the title of Primate”
(Ledochowski’s), Tolstoi, the Minister of Education, had “remonstrated”
with him for not doing so, and “most strongly urged him to act in
concert with Prussia.”
_July 10th._--Bucher sends me from Varzin the following sketch of an
article: “A South German newspaper recently called attention to the
expediency, in view of the Pope’s state of health, of an understanding
between the Governments to promote the election of a successor of
moderate views. We hear that a suggestion to this effect has been
made by the German Imperial Government, but that it has up to the
present been received with favour by only two of the great Powers. The
reserve manifested by the others may in several cases be explained by
the circumstance that they consider their relations with the Catholic
Church to be so settled and assured by law that they may regard the
action of the Curia with indifference, while others, perhaps, believe
Germany to be in greater difficulties than themselves. This view is
only so far correct that the _ecclesia militans_, which is in a latent
state of war against every country with a regular system of government,
is engaged at the present moment in attacking Germany with exceptional
fury. But Germany, even if left isolated, would be able to repel these
attacks, and would be in no embarrassment if it became necessary to put
an end to the intimate relations which have hitherto existed between
Church and State, and to substitute for them the relations which obtain
in England and the United States. Pessimists might even say that it
would be all the better if the present Pope, who chastises with rods,
were followed by one who would scourge us with scorpions. The German
Government, however, desires to be at peace with the Catholics, and
desires the Catholics to be at peace among themselves.”
This sketch, “which is the result of this morning’s conversation at the
breakfast-table,” is to be used for an article in the _Weser_ or the
_Magdeburger Zeitung_. For the rest there will not be much journalistic
work just now, as the Prince is displaying a rather marked indifference
to newspaper business. Aegidi has been at Varzin for a few days, and
expressed a strong desire to relieve Bucher there. The Princess,
however, does not like him, and he therefore left on the 8th instant
for his father-in-law’s, without having improved his opportunities for
spying and eavesdropping on behalf of Keudell.
_July 11th._--This afternoon received two communications from Bucher.
(1) A suggestion for an article referring to that of Bamberger, “The
Genius of the Imperial Chancellor and the Genius of the Imperial Diet”
(Lindau’s _Gegenwart_, No. 24). It must be pointed out that “probably
the reason why the Jews, the former Jewish members of the Reichstag,
Lasker, Bamberger, Friedenthal, the representatives of Hamburg, and
perhaps a few more, have spoken and voted against the Jesuit laws, was
because they felt a dim presentiment that, in an outburst of general
indignation against themselves and their race, a demand may be made
for exceptional measures against them and their tactics,” (2) “The
Prince is now held responsible for the weakness of the Jesuit Bill,
but very unjustly. He only demanded the introduction of such a Bill,
but had nothing to do with the drafting of it. The first draft, which
was made in the Imperial Chancellerie, was modified and weakened in
the Ministry of State, and we believe we are correct in saying that
the Chancellor was by no means pleased with it, and made no secret of
his displeasure during Herr Wagner’s visit to Varzin after the Cabinet
Council. The Chancellor, however, declined to prepare a draft himself,
on the ground that at Varzin he had neither the necessary materials
nor the opportunity of personal communication with his colleagues, and
also because he relied upon the Reichstag to put backbone into it. The
result proved that he was right in his calculations.” Sent No. 1 to the
_Weser Zeitung_, and No. 2 to the _Kölnische Zeitung_. The former was
not printed, which is not to be wondered at, considering the influence
of the Jews in the journalistic world....
_July 13th._--Sent to the _Kölnische Zeitung_ the following letter,
based upon a report from Paris: “Hopes are entertained in the Orleanist
camp that, after the indirect abdication contained in the manifesto
of the Comte de Chambord, they will be able to proclaim the Comte de
Paris as King. This hope is not, however, shared by the more thoughtful
members of the party, although MacMahon is understood to show a leaning
towards the Duc d’Aumale, and many persons are even of opinion that
when Thiers hands over the reins of power his successor will not be
an Orleans, but some one very different--namely, Léon Gambetta. If
all signs are not deceptive, the cause of the sons of Louis Philippe
is just as certainly lost as that of the Comte de Chambord. They
can make no further progress by legal means in presence of the very
considerable accession of strength which the Republican minority in
the National Assembly obtained at the elections, and they have hardly
courage enough for an attempt to use force, which might, perhaps,
have succeeded two months ago. The centre of gravity now lies in the
Republican party, with whose assistance Thiers has hitherto held his
ground, and which the recent elections have further strengthened, as
against the monarchical parties. But Thiers’ position is very seriously
menaced by the reappearance on the scene of Gambetta, who will probably
in a short time induce the Left to desert him. Gambetta’s first object
would then be to form a purely Republican Cabinet, and that may be
expected to develop into a Grévy _régime_, which would one day suddenly
give place to a Gambetta dictatorship. Such a turn of affairs would
not be favourable for German interests. Thiers and Favre (of whom
the latter would be the first to fall a victim to the Parliamentary
Left) are unquestionably the statesmen who now and in the future would
suit us best. As to Gambetta, we know that he observed recently to
an acquaintance that the Republic would enable France to prosecute a
successful war of revenge against the Germans, and that he intended
to promote this end by every means in his power; and that even to-day
France was in a position to wage such a war if it were conducted
in a more revolutionary spirit. Of course he will not immediately
proclaim such views and intentions in the National Assembly. On the
other hand, it is expected that his support of the income tax will win
for him the gratitude of the poorer classes, the artisans, the small
bourgeoisie, and the peasants, amongst all of whom he has even now a
large following. By such means he and his friends will find their way
into the Paris Municipal Council, which is to be elected on the 23rd
instant. He has also no little influence with the army. In the first
place, the leading officers, like Faidherbe, are on his side; while
all those who were appointed by him during the war regard him as their
natural champion against the reductions in rank which the Government
contemplates; and, finally, he must have numerous friends among the
soldiers themselves, to judge from the voting of the troops stationed
in Paris at the last elections, when he received 1,700 of their votes,
while Cissey, the Minister of War, who had formerly been in command of
an army corps, got no more than 1,200 to 1,300.”
Bucher sends me the following paragraph from Varzin for circulation
in the press: “It is stated in a quarter, which, from its proximity,
might be expected to know better, that the domains granted to Prince
Bismarck in the Duchy of Lauenburg now return an annual income of
40,000 thalers, which may be easily increased to three times that
amount when the leases fall in. The truth is that the domains in
question now yield an annual return of 34,016 thalers, inclusive of
3,500 thalers for the rent of some shooting, and over 2,000 thalers
for the rent of certain manorial privileges which will lapse later on;
and that there is absolutely no land from which an important increase
of returns is to be expected, as the whole estate consists of forest,
which, after the deductions to be made on the cessation of the rights
above mentioned, will yield only an annual income of about 28,000
thalers.”
_July 18th._--R. had a conversation with Schuvaloff on the 30th ultimo,
respecting the social question, and is to continue the discussion
of the subject. The Chief has made marginal notes on several of the
Count’s observations, and amongst other things he calls attention to
the fact that savings banks founded by employers have existed for a
long time past in Germany, those established by Krupp and other large
manufacturers being particularly worthy of note. The Government would
be glad to do everything in its power to promote such institutions,
which indeed have already occupied the attention of the Legislature.
It is true that these savings banks are not a preventive against
strikes. They exercise, however, a very beneficial influence on the
more sensible section of the labouring classes. Courts of arbitration
were also useful. Finally, the Government has long had the intention
of supplementing the criminal law, particularly with respect to
associations under foreign control, and to the intimidation of workers
who do not wish to join a strike. These questions must however be
treated in a systematic way, which has been impossible up to the
present, owing to the protracted illness of the Minister of Justice.
The Prince himself does not wish to enter upon this task in the amateur
fashion common in Russia.... A thorough preliminary study on the
part of the various Ministries concerned will also be necessary in
connection with the proposed conference between ourselves and Austria,
if they are to lead to any practical result. The Ministries in question
include that of Justice, as well as those of the Interior, of Commerce
and Industry, and of Public Works. The latter has already discussed
the social-political question with certain authorities on the basis
that the State can only undertake to deal with the labour difficulty
so far as it may be rightly considered to come within its province.
Questions that lie within the competency of the Legislature are first
to be considered in the Ministries of the Interior and of Justice.
The position of the preliminary inquiries renders it impossible to
fix a date for the meeting of the German and Austrian Commissioners,
although there is every desire to hasten it. For the rest, the Prussian
Legislature has already adopted various measures for the better
maintenance and regulation of the institutions and funds for the
relief of the working classes. Tribunals of commerce and arbitration
for settling differences between employers and employed are also under
consideration, and indeed have been provided in certain instances by
means, in particular, of the Prussian Trade Regulations and the other
laws extending the same, such as the Mines Act and the Roads and Canals
Construction Act.
_July 19th._--Received the following letter from Bucher:--
“Verehrtester Herr Doctor,--No chance for you up to the present. (I had
asked for more work.) He reads the newspapers with the impartiality
of a _rentier_, amuses himself and sometimes gets a little angry, but
does not show the slightest inclination to interfere. (A circumstance
which does not worry me.) When the Karlsbad cure is finished and I
am relieved by Wartensleben on the 1st of August, the prospect will
improve. The letters are becoming intolerable, and he is thinking of
issuing a sort of proclamation against them. Perhaps you could spare
him that trouble if you could secure the insertion in some remote but
widely circulated paper of a communication to the following effect
which should be dated from Stolp:--
“‘Notwithstanding the notice in the _N. A. Z._ that, &c., there
is a rapid increase in the number of private letters addressed
to Prince B. with requests for assistance, loans, appointments,
purchases of estates, redemption of pawned goods, recommendations
of all descriptions and proposals of the most various kinds for the
improvement of the world, together with offers of manuscripts for which
it has been impossible to find a publisher, &c. Attempts are made to
force the Imperial Chancellor to open and read these letters himself
by registering them, or marking the envelopes “Private,” “Important,”
“Please to read personally,” or by claiming special introductions.
Others address themselves to the Councillor of Embassy Bucher, and
expect him to disturb the repose which is so necessary for the cure by
communicating the contents of epistles, which usually begin with the
stereotyped formula: “Although I know that you have little time and the
Prince still less, I trust it will nevertheless be possible to make an
exception in the present instance.” The Prince has therefore given
instructions recently that no letters addressed to him privately are to
be taken in, unless they can be recognised as coming from relations or
friends.’
“The communication should be given as if coming from an inhabitant of
Stolp who had been here on a visit, but without exactly saying this.
Yours very truly,” (In English.) This was immediately prepared for the
_Kölnische Zeitung_, in which it appeared a few days later.
_July 29th._--A report of the 27th instant contains the following
passage: “Count Tauffkirchen, who recently arrived at Munich on leave
from Rome, gave W. some particulars of what he had ascertained shortly
before his departure respecting the alleged Bull ‘Præsenti cadavere.’
As already known, a Bull of Pius VI. of the year 1797 prescribes a
term of ten days which must elapse before the election of a new Pope
can be proceeded with. On the other hand, the _Bullarium Romanum_,
volume xiii., page 92, contains a Bull of Pius VII., dated the 6th
of February, 1807, which modifies this provision and prescribes
formalities to be observed in the election of a Pope in case of
political disturbances. It provides that the interval of ten days
need _not_ be kept if more than half the Cardinals (that is, at the
present time, 125) decide otherwise. It is not necessary to wait for
the foreign Cardinals, although they must be invited. The Cardinal Dean
(Patrizzi), the _Capi d’Ordini_ (de Angelis and Antonelli), as well as
the _Camerlengo_, have to decide where the election is to be held. It
is probable that the next election will take place in accordance with
these directions.”
_August 10th._--Sent the _Kölnische Zeitung_ the following letter,
dated from Rome, which I wrote from information contained in a
despatch: “The _Nazione_ publishes a series of articles entitled
‘L’Esclusiva al Conclave,’ which proves that the civil powers--and not
only Austria, France, Spain and Portugal as hitherto, but also the
King of Italy and the German Emperor, have an unquestionable right
to enter an effective protest against the election of candidates for
the Papal dignity who do not appear to them to be suitable. In the
course of this argument, the journal in question alluded to the Emperor
William as follows: The creed professed by the bearer of the supreme
authority in a State can exercise no influence upon the relations of
that State, or upon his own relations with the Church. The Emperor is
a Protestant, but as the ruler of several millions of Catholics, and
as their lawful representative, he would be perfectly within his right
if he desired to exercise his influence on the election of a new Pope.
It would be unnatural to deny him this right while not contesting it
to the King of Spain, whose rule does not extend over a larger number
of Catholic subjects; or to the King of Portugal, who has much fewer
Catholic subjects than the German Emperor. The latter’s position does
not involve any sacramental or dogmatic question, but simply and solely
a civil and legal relation, namely, the representation of his Catholic
subjects. Besides, after the Reformation, the electors who took part in
the election of the Catholic German Emperor included three Protestant
princes. On the consecration of the Emperor by the Bishops of Mainz,
Cologne, and Trèves, the Protestant electoral princes joined in the
symbolic rites. Indeed, the bishops received from their hands the crown
which they placed upon the Emperor’s head, and those princes attended
the Catholic Mass on the occasion. They thus took part with Catholic
bishops in Catholic rites. Every one must recognise that the German
Emperor, in exercising by means of his veto an indirect influence upon
the election of the Pope by the Conclave, performs an act which has
far less of a spiritual character than the direct co-operation of the
Protestant electors in the coronation of the old Catholic Emperors.
Towards the end of the article, the writer says that Pius IX. has
already repeatedly violated ancient and venerable principles of the
Church. If he questions the right to reject unpopular candidates,
which is based upon the fundamental laws of the Church, he runs the
risk of his successor not being recognised, and of thus giving rise
to a ruinous schism. So far the Italian organ. It is quite another
matter whether the German Emperor and his counsellors propose to take
advantage of the _Esclusiva_ in question.”
_August 15th._--On the 12th instant Eckart, of Hamburg, again sent
the Foreign Office a report of the contents of some of the Russian
periodicals. This includes a reference to an article by an “American,”
or, more correctly, an Englishman, named Dixon, who indulges in a
number of silly statements as to the intentions of Germany respecting
the Baltic Provinces of Russia. These are to be refuted, and I am
doing so in a communication to the _Kölnische Zeitung_, which runs as
follows: “In the July number of the Russian monthly _Besseda_, we find
an article by the much talked-of and prolific writer Hepworth Dixon,
in which the Russians are urgently warned against the German agitation
for the Baltic Provinces, which must necessarily lead to the next
European war. According to Dixon it resembles the former agitation
for the separation of Schleswig-Holstein from Denmark, which after
modest beginnings ultimately swept German statesmen forward in spite of
themselves. It is true that up to the present the more sensible section
of the German people will not hear of it. The leading statesmen in
particular, including Prince Bismarck, are thoroughly and in principle
opposed to it. Experience teaches, however, that fanatics are always
more energetic and active than those who weigh the consequences of
their acts; and it may therefore be regarded as certain that the
agitation in Germany, which is maintained by skilful agents from the
Baltic, will continue to spread and lead finally to a war with Russia.
The _Golos_ finds it incumbent to commend to the consideration of the
Russian public these silly lucubrations of a writer who obviously
knows still less of Germany, its requirements and aspirations, than he
does of Switzerland, upon which he recently published some few hundred
pages of moonshine. That is really quite unnecessary. The only grain
of truth in Mr. Dixon’s wisdom is that no leading German statesmen
and no sensible people in Germany give a moment’s thought to Curland
and Livonia in the same sense as they once did to Schleswig-Holstein.
The agitation, which was not initiated with much skill, and was from
the very beginning hollow, has not increased, but on the contrary
has long since died out, with the exception of some faint echoes in
opposition newspapers, whose faith in the cause they plead is itself
slender. Every one with the least insight into the facts knows that
‘German’ Russia, with its one German to every ten inhabitants, cannot
for an instant be assimilated to Schleswig-Holstein, nor Russia herself
to Denmark; and furthermore, that we have not the least right to
interfere in the administration of those provinces, nor the slightest
interest in their conquest, which would only extend our straggling
Eastern frontier, and render it less capable of defence. We have
entirely omitted from our consideration the circumstance that we have
in Russia a friendly neighbour, whose good will, which has been of
great advantage to us in a recent very critical period, we desire to
cultivate further. It might, however, have occurred to Mr. Dixon, if
he were not a lightning thinker of superficial judgment and meagre
knowledge.”
_August 18th._--A few days ago Balan, who now performs the functions of
Secretary of State, wrote to Prince Reuss, who is at present staying at
Nordernay, respecting the approaching visit to Berlin of the Emperors
Alexander and Francis Joseph. “As Prince Bismarck had let him know
that he considered it desirable to ascertain the views of the German
Ambassadors to both Courts respecting the manner in which the question
of precedence was regarded by the Courts of St. Petersburg and Vienna,”
he begged Prince Reuss to inform him. Reuss replied as follows under
yesterday’s date: “As your Excellency is aware, the Emperor Alexander
had at first fixed upon the 6th of September as the date of his
arrival. This plan was altered, and the Emperor told me that if it
were agreeable to his Majesty he would arrive in Berlin on the evening
of the 5th. Count Schuvaloff explained to me that the motive of this
alteration was the desire of the Emperor to arrive somewhat earlier
than the Emperor Francis Joseph. That the question of precedence was
involved was evident from the statement of the Count that whilst he was
at Stuttgart the Emperor Alexander had also arrived somewhat earlier,
in order to secure precedence of the Emperor Napoleon. I also gather
that the Emperor Alexander attributes a certain importance to his
earlier appearance, as indicating that he is the older friend. I do
not believe however that he would be inclined to insist upon having
precedence during the whole period of his visit.”
A letter of the 16th instant from Berne says: “My assumption that
the appointment of Herr von Niethhammer as (Bavarian) Envoy to
Switzerland may be regarded as a kind of demonstration against the
Imperial Government seems to be confirmed. That gentleman hopes for a
Gasser Ministry, and in competent quarters here he praises the King
of Bavaria, who is not disposed to sink to the level of the small
Princes who come to Berlin. Moreover, he expresses views of such an
absurdly Particularist and Ultramontane character that he frequently
excites somewhat contemptuous surprise, and gets snubbed for his pains.
As to Prince Gortschakoff, who has been elsewhere described as the
‘garrulous’ Chancellor, he gives it to be understood everywhere that
he considers it desirable for Russia to draw nearer to the Vatican in
the same measure as others draw away from it, and that he seems to have
already succeeded in this policy.”
Bucher, writing from Varzin, sends me the following paragraph for
Brass: “In case the Prince’s health permits him to travel, he will
proceed to Berlin at the beginning of September, going from there to
Marienburg, and returning thence to Varzin.”
_August 27th._--This evening read the answer of the Emperor Alexander
to the invitation to meet the German and Austrian Emperors in Berlin.
It is written in very cordial terms, and runs as follows:--
“Mon cher Oncle,--Votre lettre si amicale du 16/28 juillet,
pour laquelle je Vous ai dejà remercié par télégraphe, m’a fait un
plaisir véritable. J’avais effectivement l’intention d’employer la fin
du mois d’août à des courses d’inspection dans le midi de la Russie,
mais ayant appris par le Prince Reuss, que ma présence à Berlin,
simultanée avec celle de l’Empereur d’Autriche, était desirée par Vous,
je me suis empressé de m’arranger de façon à pouvoir me rendre à Votre
aimable invitation.
“Je pense comme Vous, mon cher Oncle, que notre entrevue à trois pourra
avoir une importance fort grave pour l’interêt du bien-être de Nos
états et de la paix du monde. Que Dieu nous vienne en aide!
“Quant à la joie immense de Vous revoir je crois n’avoir besoin de vous
en parler, car l’affection que je Vous porte n’est pas chose nouvelle
pour Vous.
“Je me fais aussi une véritable fête de revoir Votre brave et belle
garde à laquelle je suis fier d’appartenir grâce à Votre constante
amitié, dont Vous m’avez donné une si belle preuve sous les murs mêmes
de Paris.
“Je Vous demande la permission d’amener avec moi mes fils Alexandre et
Wladimir, car je tiens, comme Vous le savez, à ce que les sentiments
qui nous unissent et que nous avons hérités de Nos Parents puissent se
conserver et se perpétuer aussi dans la nouvelle génération.
“Le Prince Reuss ayant communiqué Votre gracieuse invitation à mon
frère Nicolas, il en a été très heureux et me précédera à Berlin de
quelques jours, si Vous le permettez.
“La presence de Vos officiers distingués à nos occupations, en camp de
Krasnoe-Selo, fût une grande satisfaction pour moi, et j’espère qu’ils
en auront emporté un aussi bon souvenir que celui qu’ils ont laissé
parmi nous.
“Oh! que je me réjouis de la perspective de Vous répéter de vive voix
l’assurance de l’amitié sincère avec laquelle je suis, mon cher Oncle,
Votre tout devoué neveu et ami,
“Alexandre.”
_September 8th._--To-day the Chief gave a great diplomatic dinner
in honour of the members of the suites accompanying the Russian and
Austrian Emperors. Of our people, Von Thile, Von Keudell, Von Bülow,
Philippsborn, and Bucher were present. The latter, with whom I had a
long _tête-à-tête_ in the evening, said: “I have seldom seen such a
collection of weird faces as those Russians. The Hamburger is a regular
Stock Exchange Jew. Jomini looks like a professor--you know there are
professors who understand how to make themselves agreeable to ladies.
There were also some strange specimens among the Austrians. I said so
afterwards to the son, Herbert (so I understood him, but Bucher always
speaks in a whisper and not very clearly), and he replied: ‘Yes, you
are right, although many people would not trust themselves to say it
aloud--but it is true all the same.’”
This evening we remained till 11 o’clock at the Ministry, where I had
to write another article for the _Kölnische Zeitung_ on the election
of the Pope, which was directed, amongst other things, against the
assertion of the _Catholique_ that this election was of world-wide
significance. Afterwards Bucher and I had a bottle of red wine at
Friedrich’s, when he gave me a great deal of interesting news. Keudell,
he said, had long been on the look-out for a substantial embassy, and
the Chief has now given him Constantinople. He, Bucher, fancied that
this was done because Keudell was of little further use to the Prince,
as he was taking leave at every moment--town leave while the Reichstag
was sitting. Constantinople was selected because a great luminary was
not required there. Keudell would not do much as an Ambassador, as
he had no ideas of his own. Here he frequently borrowed one from the
Chief, and made use of it for his own purposes; but on the Bosphorus,
far away from the Wilhelmstrasse, he would have to stand on his own
legs, and, in any emergency, he would hardly be equal to it. He could
hold his tongue, and that was of some value; but his political acumen
was confined to his own personal affairs, in regard to which he always
knew how to improve his opportunities. I then mentioned that on one
occasion when I was speaking of the East Prussians, Keudell’s fellow
countrymen, and said that all those with whom I had had any dealings
were thoroughly selfish, the Chancellor tersely added: “Jewish horse
dealers” (Pferde Juden). Referring to Aegidi, Bucher repeated what he
had formerly said, namely, that he was brought to us by Keudell in
order to act as his correspondent, spy, and intermediary after his
departure, keeping him posted in current affairs and in the ideas of
the Chief, and getting his praises sung in the newspapers as often as
possible....
Bucher then mentioned that during the last week at Varzin the Chief
had almost given up riding, but had, on the other hand, driven about
the country a great deal, and that, too, in a basket carriage without
springs, a very unpleasant conveyance when it bumped over the roots of
fir trees which project across the paths. He had never seen the Prince
look so cheerful as on the day of his silver wedding. In the morning,
as they were about to go to church, they could not find a dress-coat
for his Highness, but, just as he was preparing good-humouredly to
submit to his fate, they discovered a very ancient garment of the
kind required in some forgotten wardrobe, which he then donned for the
festive occasion. Finally, in the evening, he brewed for himself and
the company a potent beverage, composed of two bottles of port, one of
old arrack, and one of champagne, which he quaffed gaily long after
Bucher had had more than enough, and gone off to bed. After the second
glass the Countess fell so fast asleep in her rocking-chair that she
could be heard--breathing aloud....
_September 15th._--A Ministerial crisis has been in progress in Munich
for weeks past, and it is said that Gasser has a fair prospect of
becoming Premier. His wife, a Von Radowitz and a friend of the King
with whom his Majesty is in constant correspondence, is credited in a
report of the 1st instant with “no inconsiderable share in the Cabinet
crisis which the Sovereign has provoked.” According to a report from
B. of about the same date, Von Daxenberger, the Councillor of State,
is disposed to support Gasser’s candidature. At least it is said
there that “he is in closer agreement both in political and religious
questions with Bray than with the present Minister”; that in speaking
to B. he had “endeavoured to represent Gasser as a man of moderate
views, whilst he was inclined to depreciate Lutz.”
To-day I forwarded to the _Kölnische Zeitung_ a letter dated from
Munich for which Bucher conveyed to me the Chief’s instructions. It
stated that the Ministerial crisis was not yet at an end, and asserted
positively that the Secretary of State, von Lobkowitz, the prospective
Minister of Finance, was especially active in promoting a Gasser
Cabinet. On the other hand, the report that the Councillor of State,
Von Daxenberger, is also working in the same direction seems less
worthy of credence. “No argument on the subject,” was the Chief’s
instruction.
_October 10th._--Arnim recently (date not noted) sent the Chancellor
a rather lengthy statement of his opinion that Thiers should not be
supported any longer, as he was only strengthening France for the
benefit of Gambetta. He also hinted that we might give our support
to others, in which case there would be plenty to make overtures to
us. The Ambassador said he had severed his connection with B., who
had shown himself quite incapable, but he was now employing another
agent of the same description, who seemed in general to justify the
confidence placed in his cleverness and powers of hearing. Prince
Czartoryski had recommended to his political friends in the province
of Posen, as Parliamentary candidate, the parish priest of Zduny,
a man of strong clerical and nationalist sentiments, and a friend
of Kozmian. Further, a French political agent, named Orlowski, was
stationed at Dantzig, where he passed himself off as a commercial
traveller. Samuel, the Chief of the French Secret Police, was now
staying at Lunéville. Ladislaus Witkowski, a Jesuit, who spent several
years in Rome, and who was made a Knight of the Legion of Honour on
Czartoryski’s recommendation, had been sent by the Prince to the Grand
Duchy of Posen, in order to promote an agitation among the peasantry.
Witkowski was thirty-eight years of age, tall and stout, grows a
beard, and wears plain clothes. He would probably put up at Kozmian’s.
In Paris, he resided with the Jesuit, Jelowicki, who has recently
paid several visits to Posen, and appeared to act as a channel for
communication between Rome and the Grand Duchy. Witkowski might also
have instructions from Samuel.
_November 8th._--This evening received from Bucher, who has returned
to Varzin with the Chief, the outline of a communication to be
dated from Stolp, and sent to the _Kölnische Zeitung_, and which
should run somewhat as follows: “Permit me to constitute myself ‘An
Occasional Correspondent’ from Pomerania, as I have accidentally come
into possession of more detailed information than the professional
correspondents seem to possess. There are no indications at Varzin
of an approaching departure. I cannot say whether a very active
correspondence is maintained with Berlin, but when the Prince, in
speaking at his own fireside of a reform of the Upper Chamber, declares
it to be of necessity for our public life, it is hardly likely that
his colleagues will be unacquainted with his views in this respect.
Furthermore, if one bears in mind certain conversations which are
understood to have taken place, at the Parliamentary _soirées_, during
the debate on the Inspection of Schools Bill, some idea can be formed
of the direction of the intended changes. It may therefore be assumed
that, as the Upper Chamber is only a poor imitation of the English
House of Lords, for which neither our history nor the position of our
landed aristocracy affords any justification, its future character
will have to be rather that of a Senate or Council of State combining
greater intelligence and usefulness.”
_November 22nd._--Last week a local paper--I think it was Glasbrenner’s
_Montagszeitung_--and the _Deutsche Presse_ of Frankfurt, published a
paragraph, which was in all probability inspired by Aegidi, stating on
good authority that Herr von Keudell would shortly be recalled from
Constantinople in order to take over the post of Secretary of State
at the Foreign Office, as Herr von Balan must sooner or later return
to Brussels. I sent this to Bucher, who would seem to have laid it
before the Prince, as Aegidi said to me to-day that the Chief had asked
for information respecting its origin. He added: “I will write to the
_Montagszeitung_, but I have little hope of ascertaining anything.” At
that moment I had in my pocket the following rough draft of a paragraph
which I had received from Bucher: “The long absence of the Prince
from Berlin, and the unfavourable reports as to his health that have
been circulated by enemies of his, and also under the cloak of regret
by certain friends who hanker after his inheritance, have encouraged
the hopes of those who desire a change, which it is well known would
not be unwelcome to a certain _exalted lady_.” Bucher added: “If you
cannot get this into a (non-official) paper you may perhaps mention it,
unintentionally as it were, to some one who will circulate it in the
Press.” I secured its insertion, expanded to a somewhat greater length,
in the _Hannoverscher Courier_, from which it was copied by other
newspapers, such as the _Schwaebischer Mercur_ (of the 16th inst.)...
_December 16th._--During the past few weeks wrote a number of minor
newspaper paragraphs upon the Chief’s instructions, as transmitted
to me by Bucher from Varzin, and latterly from here. To-day again I
wrote a somewhat longer article for the _Kölnische Zeitung_, for which
Bucher brought me down directions. It ran as follows: “Last week a
number of obscure and confused reports were circulated in a portion of
the press respecting the intentions of the Imperial Chancellor on his
return from Varzin. According to one of these rumours, Prince Bismarck
proposes to resign the office of President of the Ministry of State,
and, of course, also that of Minister for Foreign Affairs. Another
declares that he is thinking of withdrawing from all co-operation in
Prussian internal affairs. It should be pointed out in reply that the
foregoing ‘of course’ is in direct contradiction to the facts. We have
it on the best authority that the Prince has no idea of resigning the
office of Minister for Foreign Affairs, and, consequently, does not
intend to retire from the Prussian Ministry of State. In view of the
close connection existing between Prussia and Germany, such a course
would be inconceivable, unless he were at the same time to give up the
Chancellorship of the Empire. On the other hand, the rumour in question
is correct to the extent that the Prince desires to be relieved of the
Presidency of the Prussian Council of Ministers. Therefore, in future,
if the Emperor approves, the Prince will hold the positions, first
of German Imperial Chancellor, together with that of Chief Prussian
Representative in the Federal Council, and will remain Minister for
Foreign Affairs, and as such retain his seat in the Prussian Ministry.
The Prince’s reasons for resigning the Presidency of the Prussian
Council of Ministers and restricting his share in the administration
of Prussia are, in the first place, the absolute impossibility of
continuing to devote the necessary energy to the duties of the various
offices which he has hitherto held without danger to his health, which,
by the way, is now happily restored. Under the ‘collegial’ system
which prevails in the Prussian Ministry, the Presidency requires the
undivided attention of a statesman in robust health. The same applies
equally to the office of Foreign Minister for the Empire, as well as
to the other duties devolving upon the Prince as Imperial Chancellor.
As it is, it will be a severe effort for him to perform the duties
of those offices which he proposes to retain, and he could scarcely
continue to do so in a satisfactory manner if he were not so ably
assisted and represented, as he has hitherto been, by the leading
officials of the Empire. Another reason, which may have decided
the Prince to ask to be relieved of the Presidency of the Prussian
Council of Ministers may be the desire to bear, in future, a smaller
share of responsibility than he has hitherto done, for the policy and
decisions of the departmental Ministers, who, in consequence of the
collegial system[7] above mentioned, are very largely independent of
the President. The Mühler Ministry may be remembered as illustrating
the drawbacks of this system. It allowed an official department to
be utilised for the furtherance of ultramontane interests, and its
real character was only detected by the Minister President after
it had placed all sorts of difficulties in the way of his policy.
The relations between Prussia and Germany will not be rendered less
intimate by the alteration which the Prince has in view. As Foreign
Minister, he has hitherto been the intermediary between Prussia and the
rest of Germany. In that capacity, he has held direct communication
with the King as German Emperor and has instructed the Prussian
representatives in the Federal Council. All these duties and powers
must unquestionably, and will, therefore, continue to be, performed
and exercised by him after his resignation of the Presidency of the
Prussian Council of Ministers.”
_December 18th._--According to a letter from a trustworthy source in
Munich, King Lewis recently sent Prince Adalbert a note, of which the
following is the substance: The Prince had taken the initiative in the
matter of the Gasser Ministry, therefore the discredit attaching to the
failure of that attempt must fall upon him. Consequently, his Majesty
must in future imperatively forbid all interference by the Prince in
State affairs.
1873.
_January 1st._--I note the following from a communication from
Stuttgart, based upon a conversation with Mittnacht respecting the
cause of the dismissal of Baron von Egloffstein (till recently
President of King Charles’s Cabinet), and the situation created
thereby. The King is determined to fulfil his duties towards the
Empire, but Egloffstein had constantly endeavoured to influence
him in a Particularist direction. Since 1870 Queen Olga has been
apprehensive for the existence of Würtemberg, and is confirmed in these
apprehensions by the ladies of her _entourage_, and in particular by
the Baroness von Massenbach as well as by Von Egloffstein, who, at
the instance of the Queen, has also been endeavouring to influence
the King. The Ministry was therefore obliged to demand the removal of
Egloffstein from his post, and to this the King at once consented....
_January 21st._--An instructive and entertaining dissertation on the
“history of a semi-official newspaper article” might be written from
the following entries in my diary. I content myself with providing the
material for it, and adding a few words calculated to give a true idea
of the origin and value of this much debated work. Rumour had already
been busy for a considerable time when the _Kölnische Zeitung_ on the
10th instant published the following “disclosures”:--
“When the Upper Chamber resumed the consideration of the District
Regulations last autumn, the necessity of the reform was so fully
recognised in the highest quarters that not only Count Eulenburg, the
Minister of the Interior, but the Sovereign also had committed himself
to that measure. As far back as February, 1872, the Ministry, in view
of the attitude of the Upper House, passed a resolution declaring its
approval in principle of a reform of the Chamber--a reform which was,
indeed, to be based solely on the idea of a Council of State, and not
on that of a real Chamber of Peers in the English sense.[8] Naturally
such a radical change found many opponents in exalted circles, and even
the Liberal party received the proposed reform with relative coolness,
being much more interested in an energetic handling of the District
Regulations question. At this juncture they regarded the District
Regulations as the ‘bird in the hand,’ and showed little appreciation
for the reform of the Upper Chamber, which they looked upon rather as
the ‘two in the bush.’
“The leading statesman thought differently. He was of opinion that
if one secured a twenty mark piece (the reform of the Upper House)
it would be an easy matter to get change for it and secure also the
thaler (the District Regulations). When, therefore, in the autumn the
Upper House again showed itself recalcitrant, its attitude was by no
means unwelcome at Varzin, though there was no particular enthusiasm
for a creation of peers. In fact something more was desired. Hence the
hints given to individual members of the Upper House that the Prince,
who was then away on leave, was not at all keen about the District
Regulations. In short it looked as if the then President of the
Prussian Council of Ministers had no objection to an amendment of the
Bill in the direction proposed by the Upper House, and did not want any
secret made of his views to certain of his colleagues who were members
of that Chamber. If this is an accurate statement of facts it is easy
to conjecture what plans were being laid. The Prince would have had
an opportunity of intervening, and ultimately the Upper House would
have been confined to that consultative position which he regards as
indispensable, if it is to be retained as a living factor in the State.
It will be remembered that this scheme was frustrated by a creation
of peers. The latter measure was opposed in a memorandum from Varzin,
which declared in favour of an immediate reform of the House of Peers.
But this proposal was supported only by one member of the Ministry,
namely Count Roon. Count Eulenburg carried the day with the majority of
the Cabinet, the hints given to certain members of the Upper House with
regard to amendments of the District Regulations Bill having in the
meantime reached the ears of the Sovereign.
“Prince Bismarck and Count Roon were therefore left together in the
minority, although the former, as Minister President, still bore in
the eyes of the public the responsibility for a policy which he had
expressly opposed within the Cabinet. This was very little to the taste
of the Imperial Chancellor, for whom it was a fresh illustration of the
drawbacks of the collegial system obtaining in the Prussian Council of
Ministers.
“Here, therefore, he hoped to find an opportunity for intervention and
reform, while taking up once more the question of reorganising the
Upper House, which always occupied the first place in his thoughts.
When he left Varzin he was already preceded by a swarm of rumours,
all of which turned upon his relations with the Prussian Ministry and
an extension of the Imperial Ministries. It almost appeared as if
henceforth Prussia’s task was to be confined to her domestic affairs.
Like the navy, the Foreign Office, the Ministry of Communications,
the army seemed fated to fall within the jurisdiction of the Imperial
Chancellor, so that the head of the War Office would, as a Minister of
State, occupy about the same position towards the Imperial Chancellor
as General Stosch in his capacity of chief of the Admiralty, and Herr
Delbrück as President of the Federal Chancellerie. The Emperor’s
decrees on military matters would never again be countersigned by
the Prussian Minister of War, but by the Imperial Chancellor, &c.
Concurrently with these changes the Constitution would become more
homogeneous, and the formation of a real Cabinet would ensue, with
a chief who would be able to pursue an independent, and, indeed, a
personal policy, and, through the members of the Cabinet, extend it
even beyond the limits of that body.
“This plan, however, seems to have never yet been developed officially
to its full extent. When it became known in exalted quarters (where the
remembrance was still fresh of the hints conveyed to the Upper House
respecting the District Regulations) that, in existing circumstances,
the Minister President was as such no longer disposed to allow himself
to be outvoted and saddled with a policy which was not his own, the
question of filling the gap was bound to arise. Count Eulenburg, who
had just carried off the victory, and who once before, within the last
year, had been selected for a similar position, was naturally one of
the first to be considered in the Royal deliberations. At the same
time it was beyond doubt that, under the Presidency of Count Eulenburg,
who had just secured a victory over Prince Bismarck in the Cabinet on
the question of the creation of peers, further co-operation on the part
of the Minister for Foreign Affairs in matters of specifically Prussian
interest could not be expected. Count Roon’s position was different.
He had also tendered his resignation on the ground that he had been
outvoted, and the Sovereign was strongly indisposed to part from him.
His appointment as President of the Council of Ministers in succession
to the Prince would by no means constitute a disavowal by the King of
the Chancellor’s views with regard to the reform of the Upper House, as
Count Roon had gone hand in hand with Prince Bismarck in this respect.
Both men, who had had intimate personal relations with each other for
years, speedily came to an understanding. Count Roon, notwithstanding
his Conservative leanings, had long since frankly adopted the policy of
the Imperial Chancellor. He had already proved his determination in the
struggle with the clergy over the Old Catholic army chaplaincies and
the encroachments of the military Bishop, Nanczonowski, and he now made
no difficulty about adopting in every particular the programme of the
retiring Prussian Prime Minister with regard to the fight against Rome.
Both statesmen were in the most perfect agreement in the question of
the Upper House. The Civil Marriage Bill had to be set aside for a time
without going into its merits, as the Ministers had not yet decided
what compensation should be given to the Evangelical clergy in return
for the perquisites and fees which they would lose. On the other hand,
the Imperial Chancellor was in a position to promise his support for an
ultimate increase in the demands made upon the Reichstag for the Army
Budget of the Empire, in the event of a second chief of the military
administration, whom it was proposed to appoint, being more closely
connected as Minister of State with the Imperial Chancellor. In short
an intimate alliance and a cordial understanding were arrived at by
which part of Bismarck’s original programme was immediately realised,
the rest being postponed, without prejudice, to a future time.”
This article was followed on the 14th of January by the following
explanation, which appeared in the _Norddeutsche Allgemeine Zeitung_:--
“The _Kölnische Zeitung_ of the 10th instant contains an article on
the secret history of the Prussian crisis, which it prefaces with the
assurance that it has been derived from trustworthy sources. We are
unable to say how far this assurance is justified in every particular,
but we must contradict the statement that the Imperial Chancellor ever
encouraged the opposition against the District Regulations Bill in the
Upper House, or that any attempt whatever was made from Varzin to open
up communications with the existing Opposition.
“After the Upper House had amended certain paragraphs in contradiction
to the spirit of the Bill, and to the report of the Lower House, the
Prince gave it to be understood that the constitutional procedure
should be followed, namely, that the amendments of the Upper House
should be dealt with once more in the Lower House, and opposed the idea
of closing the session of the Diet after this first hostile vote of the
Upper House, and forcing the position by a creation of peers.
“It is true that, on the unexpected resolution of the Upper House
rescinding its own amendments, the Prince urged strongly that the
reform of the Upper Chamber should be taken in hand at once, before
proceeding further with the District Regulations Bill, and he still
considers this reform to be one of pressing necessity, though it should
not take the form of a consultative Council of State, but rather that
of a two chamber system, under which the Upper House, however, must
strike root and carry weight in the country.”
On the 20th of January the same organ went still farther in its
comments on the disclosures of the _Kölnische Zeitung_:--
“We have already specified some inaccuracies in this article without
entering into a complete contradiction of it. We are now in a position
to assert that, in our humble opinion, this article contains about
a dozen statements of very doubtful accuracy.... As, however, the
Minister President has expressed in the Diet a wish that the discussion
of this subject in the press should be brought to a close, and as we
do not intend to run counter to a desire uttered in such a quarter,
nor care to enter into a polemic with the Rhenish organ, which usually
obtains its information from better sources, we forego all further
correction of the contents of the article, to which--as we are in a
position to state--official circles are entirely foreign.”
And now, what was the real truth of the matter? Let the reader form his
own opinion from the following diary entries, remembering, in addition,
that Aegidi was intimately connected with the journal last mentioned
through Eckart: “_January 12th._--This evening Bucher told me in reply
to my question that the disclosures of the _Kölnische Zeitung_ were
correct, and that he had himself prepared the memorandum referred to
therein.” “_January 15th._--Wollmann informed me this evening that
Aegidi had sent the article in the _Kölnische Zeitung_ of the 10th
instant to the Prince at Friedrichsruh, adding that he was aware who
the author was, and giving an assurance that he had had no part in
it.” “_January 21st._--Bucher told me this morning that the article in
the _Kölnische Zeitung_ was written by Kruse, the chief editor of the
paper, who is now in Berlin, from information given to him by Aegidi,
and contains only a few unimportant errors. He, Bucher, had, under
instructions from the Chief, written the mild _démenti_ published by
the _Norddeutsche Allgemeine Zeitung_ on the 14th instant. The sharper
_démenti_ that followed, calling the attention of the _Kölnische
Zeitung_ to the fact that no people had a right to demand a _chronique
scandaleuse_ from their journals, was dictated by the Chief and written
by Aegidi, who was thus obliged to ply the rod on his own back.”
On reading these various communications, one can hardly help agreeing
in some measure with the _National Zeitung_, which wrote as follows
on the 20th of January: “We would strongly urge upon the Government
the desirability of accepting the advice which we tendered to them
recently, namely, that, instead of blaming the press, Ministers should
keep their own motley throng of Privy Councillors and semi-official
satellites in order. It is notorious that some of our Ministers are at
loggerheads, and desire each other’s overthrow, and no denials will
persuade people of the contrary. They may fight out their battles
within the Ministry and in the proper place, but they should not bring
their quarrels under the notice of the general public by mysterious
insinuations, conveyed through persons who are dependent upon them,
and whom they disavow at every opportunity. Altogether we would
urgently request the Government to exercise a closer supervision over
their semi-official mouthpieces, and not permit them to convert the
performance of their official duties into a public nuisance which is
steadily growing worse.”...
_February 15th._--Among the documents which I read to-day I found one
of last month that was of exceptional interest, as Bucher had added a
number of marginal notes, obviously for the purposes of the Chief’s
reply. It was a despatch from Arnim excusing himself to the Chancellor,
who had charged him with giving utterance in his communications to
opinions at variance with the fundamental principles of German policy.
The Ambassador asserted that no divergency of views existed between
them. The Prince had laid it down that the first task of Germany in
connection with France was to prevent the latter being in a position
to form alliances, and “he (Arnim) had also kept that end constantly
in view.” It was only with respect to the means towards that end that
he had expressed an opinion differing from the views of the Chief (who
regards the maintenance of the Republic and of Thiers as the best
course). The quotations from previous despatches show that there is
as little truth in this statement as there was in the assertion that
on his return to Paris in October last he had “found the President’s
position strengthened to a greater degree than was desirable.” In reply
to this assertion Bucher quotes the following sentences: “It is even
now questionable whether Thiers, who imagines that he has come to terms
with the agitator (Gambetta) is still a match for him” (Report of the
3rd of October), and “the continuance of the present _régime_ only
benefits the Radical extremists, in whose programme the _revanche_ goes
hand in hand with their campaign against the monarchies and the entire
social system of Europe.” (Report of the 13th of November.) Finally,
in his present defence, Arnim tries to show that he had formerly
“observed, not without uneasiness, that Thiers was making arrangements
intended to secure his own power for a number of years.” Thereupon the
Chief had remarked: “He can hardly have observed that,” and Bucher
quoted the following passage from a despatch of the Ambassador’s, dated
the 30th of November: “The power which he is accumulating will pass
into other hands (Gambetta’s).” Finally, the Count now asserts that
he had only recommended “that M. Thiers’s prestige should no longer
be promoted through the inspired German press.” In his report of the
29th of November the Ambassador persists in his opinion that “the
President’s Government must be regarded as a source of serious anxiety
for monarchical Europe.” In the despatch of the 30th of November Count
Arnim recommends that we should bring about a crisis which should
result in bringing either Gambetta to power or a Government which would
seek support from Germany. We should then be justified in overthrowing
Gambetta, and indeed obliged to do so (according to Arnim’s view of the
case, on account of his propaganda). He would advise us to withdraw our
support from Thiers. In conclusion, according to Bucher’s notes, Arnim
says, in a report of the 6th of December: “It may be taken for granted
that the President will find it very difficult to govern if he does not
make up his mind to lean on the Conservative majority.”
_February 20th._--It appears from a report of Arnim’s of the 17th of
last month that he has engaged a certain Lindau[9] to furnish him
with detailed reports from the French press. In a despatch of the
8th instant, the Ambassador states that Lindau has asked not to be
deprived of the assistance of Beckmann (who was probably objected to
as a suspicious character, or otherwise unsuitable). Arnim strongly
supported this request, “in the interests of the service.” Lindau must
have some one at his disposal who would undertake the more compromising
portion of the whole arrangement.... Besides, neither Herr Lindau, nor
any other official at the Embassy, was in a position to deal with all
the material and to furnish full and satisfactory reports on the press,
and at the same time to write articles himself for German, Italian, and
Russian newspapers. According to Arnim, Lindau also proposed to start a
publication for Russia, probably a news agency.
_March 3rd._--All these suggestions were rejected by the Chief in a
despatch of yesterday’s date. He will have no formal Press Bureau, no
Russian news agency, and no influence exercised upon the German papers
by the Paris Embassy.
I closed my diary at the last-mentioned date to let it rest for some
years. The period which I had set myself, on the cessation of my
_direct_ intercourse with the Prince, for my further continuance at
the Foreign Office was at an end; and this intercourse had not been
renewed. I therefore, on the 28th of February, wrote to the Chief, as
follows:--
“Most Noble Prince, Most Mighty Chancellor, Most Gracious Chief and
Master.
“A few days ago I completed my third year of service at the Foreign
Office. In connection therewith I venture dutifully to beg that your
Serene Highness will allow me to retire from that service at the end
of March, and to return, at first, to Leipzig; and at the same time to
take into consideration the concluding sentence in the order of the
15th of March, 1870. The sentence in question says: ‘I would add that,
in case your present occupation should sooner or later cease, you will
be granted an annuity of 1,200 thalers, on condition that you still
devote your literary activity to the support of our policy, as you have
done during recent years.’
“The employment for which I was engaged here, according to your Serene
Highness’s verbal instructions on my presentation to your Serene
Highness on the 24th of February, 1870, ceased on the 1st of July,
1871, and with it, gradually, everything in the way of duty that was
associated therewith. Notwithstanding this, I have honestly endeavoured
to make myself useful; but I must confess to myself that these
endeavours would be more fruitful in a different position to that which
I now hold.
“In view of the circumstances, I ought perhaps to have sent in the
foregoing dutiful petition immediately after the change which deprived
me of the honour of direct intercourse with your Serene Highness.
Had I taken such a step at that time, however, it might have been
misunderstood; and I moreover had still to inform myself fully as to
the purport of the instruction to ‘support our policy,’ in order to
avoid possible mistakes; and, furthermore, I was anxious to be able
to bequeath to future generations a picture of your Serene Highness’s
life, painted not only with affection but also with knowledge. The
latter has been for years past, and will remain, my sole ambition. It
will at the same time afford me compensation for the loss of personal
intercourse with your Serene Highness to renew it more actively in the
spirit.
“Although during the three years which I have spent here I have
certainly not acquired nearly sufficient positive information, I hope
I have made considerable progress in freeing myself from political
prejudices, as well as in _matter-of-factness_. One can, moreover,
never leave off learning, although in other studies a triennium is
considered sufficient.
“I may, therefore, confidently hope that your Serene Highness will
kindly grant my dutiful petition; and perhaps I may not be disappointed
if I add the fainter hope that when I begin the larger biography which
I have in view, your Serene Highness will give me assistance similar to
that which others would appear to have had before me.
“However that may be, I shall leave here with the same deep sense of
veneration for the regenerator of our nation with which I came, and
will act accordingly. With this feeling will always be associated
a grateful recollection of the days, so happy for me, when I was
permitted to have personal intercourse with your Serene Highness,
and particularly of the seven months of the great war, when that
intercourse was most direct, and when I sometimes believed myself
justified in thinking that I enjoyed your Serene Highness’s good will.
“Your Serene Highness’s
“Dutiful and devoted
“Dr. Moritz Busch.”
I read over this paper first of all to Bucher, who approved of it as
being “perfectly dignified,” and who, on his own suggestion, laid
it before the Chief in an open envelope. The Prince read it through
carefully, and then said, “I suppose he cannot get on with Aegidi.”
Bucher replied that he was not acquainted with our relations, and only
knew that I was not satisfied with my present position. The Chief then
finally ordered: “Do not let it go through the office, but hand it
direct to Bülow, who should see me about it.”
No reply was received for nearly three weeks. Finally, on the 20th of
March, Aegidi informed me that he was instructed by the Prince to say
that he wished to speak to me, and that he had fixed 2 P.M.
on the 21st for that purpose. When I went upstairs to the Chief’s
residence at the hour named, I had to wait for about ten minutes in
the Chinese Salon while Bülow was with him. (The following was written
down immediately after this audience, and gives a literal reproduction
of all that was said by the Imperial Chancellor.) Mantey, the Chancery
attendant, then announced me. As I entered, the Prince, who looked
very well and greeted me with a friendly smile, was seated at his
writing-table dressed in his blue silk dressing gown. He shook hands,
and invited me to take a seat opposite him, the same place which
I occupied at my first interview in February, 1870. The following
conversation then began:--
He: “So you wish to leave? You have written me a letter. (He opened
out the letter which lay before him, and I saw that he had marked
one passage in blue pencil.) Excuse me for not answering it sooner.
You referred to an arrangement which I could not recall to mind. I
therefore had the letter sent to Keudell, and his answer on the subject
only arrived yesterday. From that it appears that you are within your
rights, and I have instructed Bülow to arrange the matter accordingly.
You will receive what has been promised to you, but according to the
understanding, the services to be rendered by you in return will be
slight and purely voluntary.”
I replied that I would nevertheless be as diligent as possible. I was
chiefly taken up with politics, and in supporting _his_ policy I should
only be obeying a moral imperative. I could not possibly act otherwise,
had written in support of his views long before I was paid for it, and
so forth. I not only wished to be, but should be soon, in a position to
serve him, as in a few months I should take over the chief editorship
of the _Hannoverscher Courier_, a newspaper with a circulation of about
10,000. I would only ask for good information.
He: “You will doubtless not wish to receive it through Aegidi, yet it
must be so. There must be only one source from which information goes
forth.”
I: “Well, there is another man here who, if I may take the liberty to
express an opinion, is the best of all those who work under you, in
character, ability, and knowledge.”
He: “And who might that be?”
I: “Bucher. If your Serene Highness would only sometimes let me know
through him what you desire and intend. One is accustomed to some
extent to your Serene Highness’s way of thinking, and can guess a great
deal; nevertheless, new and unexpected ideas may frequently arise of
which some indication should be given me.”
He: “Yes, Bucher. A real pearl! Well, put yourself in communication
with him. A very able man, if I can only keep him; but he seems to me
to be in anything but good health.”
I said that was certainly true, but when he was exhausted he was always
able to recuperate by sleep, so that in spite of his hard work he could
keep up to the mark. The Prince then continued:--
“But now to come to the second point. You have said in your letter
that you wish to write my biography. I have nothing to say against
that, and it may even prove very useful. It is not a matter of
indifference to me who writes it. A great deal has already been
written, but it includes a lot of rubbish. I will assist you in it,
although it will not be easy. I am ready to answer all the questions
you put to me and to give you every possible information. But first
read what has already been written on the subject, and then send me a
sheet or two of questions. Or, better still, write the history of the
headquarters in France. You were there. That may prove very useful to
me, and also to history. I will give you every possible information.
You can also question my sons, and my cousin Charles, whom you know.
By the way, an attempt has been already made to levy blackmail upon
me. A Leipzig bookseller wrote me that you had kept a diary in which
you had written down everything that I had said about the King. Five
copies of it were deposited in five different places, and would be
published unless I sent him a hundred thousand thalers. I considered
you to be a man of honour incapable of that kind of thing, so I wrote:
‘Not five groschen!’ nor would I set a single policeman in motion on
that account. It would certainly not be a matter of indifference to me
if it were printed and published, and if all that I had said in my own
way about the King and other exalted personages when I was excited and
indignant--rightly indignant--were to become known. But the King knows
that I had already said much worse things of him. Besides, now that
I have resigned the Presidency of the Council of Ministers I am on a
much better footing with him. He thinks now that I can no longer stand
in his way and prevent him carrying out his wishes when he has some
unpractical idea in his head, or when prejudice makes him reluctant
to sanction some necessary measure. But my influence over the other
Ministers has only increased with the change. I have never had so much
influence upon them as now, and since then I have been able to carry
through much more. My health, however, is not good. I was almost six
months away last year, and it was not of the least benefit. I am no
longer what I was--only a Ziska drum,[10] you know, nothing but the
skin.”
He paused for a moment, and then returning to the attempt at blackmail,
said: “The bookseller wrote once more on the subject, and this time
he said he would be satisfied with fifty thousand thalers. I kept to
my former decision, however. ‘Not five groschen, and not a single
policeman.’” With the exception of my own family and a few old friends,
I had spoken to no one about the diary I kept during the war, and
least of all to a bookseller, at Leipzig or elsewhere. I was quite
certain of that; it was utterly impossible; and I was, therefore,
absolutely dumbfounded at these remarks. This, then, was obviously
the reason--which I had so long sought vainly to discover--why he had
broken off all direct intercourse with me. I had been calumniated, and
he mistrusted me. I was more than once on the point of saying that
this bookseller was a myth, and, what was more, a gross and palpable
invention by some malignant fellow, who found me in his way because he
could not use me for the advancement of his own selfish ambition. I
checked myself, however, and only said I was thankful to him for his
confidence. It was not unjustified. The diary certainly existed, but
I had never intended to publish it. It was only for myself, and it by
no means consisted merely of what he had said respecting the King and
other Princes. “And besides,” I concluded, “it was no secret for the
Foreign Office. At Versailles Abeken had called attention to it at
table, and you observed that it would one day be quoted, ‘_Conferas
Buschii_,’ &c.”
“Yes,” he observed, “that is quite right. I remember now. By the way,
you will hardly have cared much for Abeken either.”
I replied: “Well, not very much.”
“Nor did I,” he added. “He was only happy in the atmosphere of the
Court and at the Radziwills; and when he had his nephews with him, ‘my
nephews, the Counts York,’ he was quite beside himself with delight. He
was useful, however, in his own red-tape fashion. He had such a sackful
of phrases that, when I wanted some, he had only to shake it out, and
there I had a whole pile.”
He then referred for the third time to the fabulous bookseller, who
still seemed to cause him some anxiety; and I again assured him that
I had no idea of publishing my notes. “After my death,” I said, “some
fifty years hence, perhaps.” “It need not be so long,” he replied. “You
may even now write on the subject; and, indeed, I should be pleased
if you did. And just ask me when there is anything you do not know
or are in doubt about. It should be my epitaph. I should not like to
have it done by Hesekiel, though. But you will proceed with tact and
discrimination, and in this respect I must trust entirely to you. But
you must not let Decker publish it, but some other publisher, or people
will notice that I have had a hand in it.”
I again observed that the matter was not so simple, as all the material
had to be properly collected, sifted, and arranged if it were to be
done as it ought to be, and that in the immediate future I should not
have the necessary leisure for this purpose. Besides, when I wrote the
book I would beg leave to submit the proofs to him sheet by sheet for
revision and correction. He agreed, imposing one condition--that I
should observe silence respecting his collaboration, “for, of course,
that would be to collaborate.” I called his attention to the fact that
letters with questions and envelopes with proofs would be opened in the
Central Bureau downstairs. “Register them, then; writing ‘Personal’ on
the cover, and in that way they will reach me unopened,” he replied.
With these words he stood up and gave me his hand, said he had been
glad to see me again, hoped I would visit him later when I came to
Berlin, and repeated that I was right in what I said respecting my
promised pension, which I should receive. He then shook hands with
me once more, and I took leave, delighted with his amiability, and
determined to do everything possible to please him. In the evening I
gave Bucher an account of my interview, and on the following Monday I
dined with him at a restaurant in Unter den Linden, when we made all
the necessary arrangements for the supply of information to me. He had
as little faith as myself in the mythical bookseller, but thought it
quite possible that some one had tried to palm off that fiction on the
Chief, and imagined that in that case it was probably Keudell who had
instigated the intrigue.
A day or two later Balan came to my desk, and said: “I congratulate
you, Herr Doctor. A pension of 1,200 thalers, and thanks for your
services in addition. That is a great deal.” Thanking him for his
congratulation, I replied that the amount was payable under an
old contract, and that if I had not earned it up to the present I
should try to do so in the future. A few hours later I received the
order, signed by the Imperial Chancellor; and on my going again to
the Ministry next morning to take leave of my colleagues, I found
the following letter on my writing-table: “The Imperial Chancellor
and Princess Bismarck request the honour of Dr. Busch’s company on
Saturday, the 29th of March, at 9 P.M.” Of course I accepted
the invitation. It was one of the Chief’s Parliamentary evenings,
which I had never yet attended. Next day, at noon, I left Berlin, half
sad, half glad. Sad, because I was leaving him in whom all my thoughts
were centred, and glad because I had recovered my liberty, and should
henceforth no longer pace those floors where intrigue crawls at the
feet of the honest and unsuspecting, causing them, by knavish and
underhand trickery, to stumble and to fall.
CHAPTER IV
HERR VON KEUDELL IN THE PRESS AND IN REALITY
The chief reason why I have not modelled the bust or, now that he is
an Ambassador, the statue of Herr von Keudell, which I announced in
a preceding chapter, is that I have no taste for such work. It may,
however, suffice if I arrange the necessary material for this purpose
in proper order. Deficiencies can mostly be supplied from the entries
in my diary already, or still to be, quoted. With the exception of a
few comments I refrain from expressing any opinion, and allow others to
speak--first the press which entertained friendly relations with him,
and then such persons as appear to me to be impartial and well informed.
In October, 1872, the German _Reichscorrespondenz_, the organ of the
Aegidi group, published the following sapient commentary on Herr
von Keudell’s mission to Stamboul: “It is well known that Herr von
Keudell is one of Bismarck’s most intimate and confidential friends.
He always has the _entrée_ to that statesman’s inner circle, which he
enlivens with his exceptional musical talent. When such a man (such
a talented musician!) is appointed Envoy to Turkey it may be fairly
concluded that at this moment we have most important interests there,
which can best be safeguarded by one who has been allowed to obtain
an insight into Prince Bismarck’s masterly plans. In a word the
present political situation offers a good opportunity for preparing
an energetic solution of the Eastern question. The wounds received by
Russia in the Crimean war have long since healed; France has suffered
such military, political and financial disaster that she cannot realise
her aspirations to the possession of Egypt; and the conflicting
interests of Austria and Russia in the East have been reconciled by
the meeting of the three Emperors. If therefore Germany, Russia and
Austria are now prepared to solve the Eastern question there can hardly
be a single statesman in Europe capable of preventing them. If war
be ever justifiable, surely it is when it opens up a new field for
civilisation. The Turks, in their manners, customs and religious views,
have remained hostile to modern civilisation, and it would therefore be
an important gain for the progress of civilising influences towards the
East if they were to be expelled from Europe and driven back into Asia.
It would therefore almost seem as if an Eastern war were impending,
and as soon as the Sick Man’s heirs had entered upon their inheritance
the time might be at hand for the countries which now bristle with
military preparations to disarm and enjoy an era of peace. The recent
hostilities between Montenegro and the Turks were the flaming beacons,
heralding an Oriental war. Russia, bearing in mind the (apocryphal)
will of Peter the Great, was already endeavouring to induce the Powers
with which she stood in a friendly relation to join in a collective
note against the Sublime Porte. Thanks to her inborn tenacity in
political affairs, she will not rest until she has attained her ends
in the East, where presumably she will be found ready to divide the
anticipated spoils with her allies. Our present envoy (this is the
real gist of this shockingly written and almost idiotic lucubration)
is one of Prince Bismarck’s most trusted assistants, and he must be
regarded as specially suited for the task of securing our interests in
the impeding division of the inheritance.”
At that time a similar opinion of the importance of the gentleman
in question was expressed in most of the German newspapers, which I
happened to see, those that had no opinions of their own adopting the
high estimate contained in the other papers. Foreign journals also, and
in particular those of Vienna and Paris, and indeed even the President
of the French Republic, regarded Keudell’s mission as an event.
Gambetta’s organ, the _République Française_, wrote: “We announced
a few days ago that it was probable Herr von Keudell, Councillor
of Embassy, would be nominated to the post of German Envoy at
Constantinople, and we called attention at the same time to the great
political significance of this appointment. A Berlin correspondent
of the Vienna _Fremden-Blatt_ confirms the importance of this news.
The selection of Herr von Keudell for the post in question, and its
acceptance by such a personage, is in fact regarded in Berlin as a
political event. Doubts were entertained whether Herr von Keudell would
accept this post, which had been frequently offered to him, but which
he had always declined. The fact of his now accepting it at the urgent
desire of the Imperial Chancellor, proves that he must in this instance
have yielded solely to considerations of duty of the highest moment.
The importance which is generally ascribed to this incident is due to
the circumstance that Herr von Keudell is the statesman who has perhaps
most frankly supported the policy of a good understanding between
Germany and Austria-Hungary in all great questions, and furthermore
that he considers every danger to which Turkey is exposed at the hands
of Russia as being not only a danger for the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy,
but also for Germany, her commerce and her future. He is therefore
of opinion that Austria has to keep watch on the Danube, and Germany
on the Rhine and Moselle. The _Fremden-Blatt_ correspondent adds:
‘The choice by Prince Bismarck of this particular diplomatist for
Constantinople is a clear indication that he intends to pursue the same
policy in the East as Austria-Hungary, and that in view of a conflict
he considers an understanding with the Austrian Empire to be necessary
for Germany and in harmony with her interests.’”
Arnim, in a despatch dated from Paris on the 9th of January, 1873,
writes: “M. Thiers, with whom I was talking a few days ago of the
importance of the Constantinople post in the days of M. de Varennes,
compared to the present time, observed, ‘_Maintenant c’est vous qui
rendez ce poste important._’” The Ambassador had no doubt that this
observation was made under the impression that German policy in the
East had entered upon a more active phase, and added, “It is impossible
to decide whether this impression has been gathered from certain
mysterious utterances in the press (respecting Keudell’s importance
and his mission) or from the reports of the French Ambassadors in St.
Petersburg, Vienna, and elsewhere.”
It was little more than a month after Keudell’s departure for
Constantinople before the press, doubtless inspired by Aegidi, struck
up a new tune in Keudell’s honour, which was intended also to promote
certain aspirations of a more practical character.
On the 22nd of November, 1872, I sent the following note to Bucher
at Varzin: “The _Deutsche Presse_ of Frankfurt-on-the-Main publishes
in its issue of the 20th instant the following paragraph: ‘Berlin,
November 18. It is understood here that it has now been decided to
recall Herr von Keudell shortly from Constantinople, in order that he
should take up the position of Under Secretary of State in the Foreign
Office, as Herr von Balan is believed to have been again selected for
the Brussels Legation.’ To my certain knowledge, Engelmann, the editor
of this paper, used to receive a subvention from us when he was in
Stuttgart, and was up to a few months ago in communication with Aegidi,
and visited him in Berlin.”
I replied as follows, in the _Hannoverscher Courier_, upon information
received from Bucher: “Fresh rumours of an alleged aggravation of
the Imperial Chancellor’s condition are constantly circulated in the
press. I am assured on good authority that the Prince’s health is by
no mean worse, but on the contrary much better than it was some months
ago, although in order to complete his recovery he must still rest
for some time to come, and avoid the overwork which may await him in
Berlin. In the meantime, as I learn from another quarter, the long
absence of the Chancellor from the Ministry in the Wilhelmstrasse, and
the unfavourable reports respecting his health, which are spread not
only by his enemies, but also by certain friends who, whilst affecting
regret are longing for his inheritance, encourages the hopes of those
who desire to see a change, which, as is doubtless well known, would
not be unwelcome to a certain exalted lady. I have reason to believe
that this statement also comes from a trustworthy source.” At the
same time the _Norddeutsche Allgemeine Zeitung_ denied the report
of Balan’s impending return to Brussels, and of Keudell’s intended
appointment in terms which were to make it appear that the question
was still under consideration. The _Deutsche Zeitung_ of Vienna on
the 25th of November called attention to this circumstance, observing
that the language used amounted to a partial confirmation of the
rumour. This was probably written by Aegidi, or suggested by him to
one of his journalistic hacks. A more positive statement was now
issued from Varzin. On the 21st of December I received from Bucher,
through the Central Bureau, the following explanation, which was not
to be published in the _Kölnische Zeitung_; and which appeared in
the _Hannoverscher Courier_, whence it was copied by other papers:
“Herr von Keudell has experienced in his own person the truth of the
proverb respecting over-zealous friends. In the Casino (in Berlin) it
is well known that he regards the next stage in his career to be the
Secretaryship of State in the Foreign Office, and that he has retained
his residence here. It will hardly have been in accordance with his
wishes, however, that a weekly newspaper should have circulated a
report, afterwards widely reproduced in usually well-informed papers,
that he is to be the successor of Herr von Thile, and that Vienna
papers should declare the _démenti_ of the _Norddeutsche Allgemeine
Zeitung_ to be a partial confirmation of this report. In view of the
trustworthy source from which that _démenti_ is understood to have
come (for your information, from the Chief), the terms in which it was
drafted may be held rather to indicate a desire to contradict in the
friendliest form possible, a rumour, which bore the appearance of an
advertisement. Outsiders are the less called upon to busy themselves
with the interests of the statesman in question, as the position he
occupied at the Foreign Office for many years must have provided him
with sufficient connections in the home and foreign press to secure the
publication of anything which he himself considers useful.”
This was sufficiently plain for those who knew how to read between the
lines. Nevertheless fresh indications appeared from time to time in the
papers, even late in the year 1873, that Herr von Keudell had renounced
none of his aspirations and endeavours in this direction.
So far the materials for an estimate of the statesman in question are
furnished by his friends. Let us now hear some of the opinions held
in other quarters, and in connection therewith a few facts respecting
his diplomatic achievements. There are diary entries reserved for this
purpose, which, however, only reach up to March, 1873. Some other
particulars will be found in the subsequent chapters.
On the 25th of October, 1872, after 6 o’clock in the evening, in
Hepke’s room, Bucher told me that Keudell (through his _protégés_ in
the press, whose number was legion, particularly in South German and
Austrian newspapers) gave it to be understood that he was a man of
great diplomatic talent, and was designated to succeed the Imperial
Chancellor. I gave vent to surprise at such boundless self-esteem.
“No,” replied Bucher, “it is after all not quite impossible--in the
future. He has cast his lines in the Court of the Crown Prince, and
no one knows what she (the Crown Princess) may not be able to do some
day. When Thile resigned, he (Keudell) greatly regretted having taken
the post at Constantinople. He might have become Secretary of State.
Moreover, it was not family considerations that induced Thile to go.
Keudell induced him to sign something he had written which offended
the Chief, so that Thile was sharply reprimanded. Keudell was the
real instigator of the incident which, it seems, tripped up the future
Secretary of State. It would be well to call the Chief’s attention to
such manœuvres through the press. Nothing of the kind appears in the
newspapers which he usually reads, nor in the extracts laid before
him. Aegidi takes care of that. You know that he has been brought here
in order to direct the press in Keudell’s interest, and to prevent
anything that might damage him becoming known upstairs. But there is
one paper which the Chief reads carefully, and which Aegidi has not yet
gathered into his net. That is the _Figaro_ (he referred to the Berlin
journal). If one were to send to that paper one or other of those
articles, such as that of the _République Française_, for instance!
It would be well to bring such things to the Chief’s notice, as I am
afraid he does not yet quite understand our esteemed friend. He does,
no doubt, so far as his ability is concerned, but not, I think, his
ambition and capacity for intrigue; and he believes in his devotion.
He has obviously given him the Constantinople post, which is not very
important now, because he was no longer of any use to him here. Some
years ago, when he applied for an Embassy and his request was refused,
he got himself elected to Parliament, and since then he has had one
leave of absence after another. His mother-in-law has also said, ‘What
good is it for them to make permanent arrangements now? He will soon
be an Ambassador.’ He has no political ideas, and, I fancy, not the
necessary knowledge or adroitness to carry out the more brilliant ideas
of others. He has now secured Radowitz to supply him with the ideas for
his Oriental reports. But, in spite of that, I am afraid they will not
amount to much.”
On Thursday, the 21st of November, I wrote as follows in my diary:
This morning Wollmann came to me and read a passage from a letter
which he had received from Count von der Goltz, Attaché to the Embassy
at Constantinople, to whom he had formerly given lessons. The Count
informed him that his chief, Keudell, had instructed him to prepare
a memorandum on Turkish finances, and in particular on the tobacco
monopoly, within two months. He, Goltz, however, had not the slightest
information on the subject. Could Wollmann not send him something of
the kind? That doubtless means that our Ambassador at Stamboul wishes
to send a report to the Chief in Berlin, probably as his own work. He
then orders it from a young inexperienced attaché, who again requests
a subordinate official in the office of the Imperial Chancellor to
help him out of his difficulty, and to give information on the matters
in question; which will then--as the production of the Ambassador--be
returned to its place of origin, Wilhelmstrasse, Berlin, ten weeks
after the newspapers here had already published all that was wanted on
the subject.
On the 21st of December, I wrote as follows: This evening about 8
o’clock Bucher communicated to me ... the welcome news that the
Chief has at length had his eyes opened to the manner in which
Keudell managed the press. When Bülow, who has now taken over the
administration of the secret service fund in succession to Keudell,
reported to the Minister on the condition in which he found it, the
latter’s “hair almost stood on end with fright.” “No detailed accounts
whatever,” he continued. “Everything jotted down in the loosest way.
People with whom the Chief had expressly desired to break off all
relations continued to receive their money, five or six hundred
thalers a year, indeed often more than that, or they got a lump sum,
up to three thousand thalers, in settlement. The deficit which arose
in this way amounts to about eighteen thousand thalers.[11] Several of
these fellows are not known to any one. Aegidi was questioned, but he
declares he does not know them either. They must have been Keudell’s
own secret and semi-official mouthpieces, whose sole and only business
was to promote his private interests by dirty press intrigues.”
On the morning of the 15th of January, Bucher showed me the _Spenersche
Zeitung_, with Lasker’s speech on the trade done by Wagner and certain
noblemen in railway concessions. In the conversation that followed
Bucher observed that Keudell, like other members of our nobility, such
as Prince Biron and Prince Putbus, speculated in railways, and that the
direct line between ---- (I could not catch the name) and Stargard was
generally called the Keudell railway.
On the 7th of March Bucher again mentioned “our former esteemed friend
and colleague.” Keudell, he said, wanted by hook or by crook to get
away from Constantinople and take Balan’s place. That, however,
now seemed to have been averted, as the Chief had said he was not
a suitable man for the post, and he would also be unwelcome to the
higher officials in the office. He would, however, probably be removed
to Rome. Furthermore, Keudell had boasted to a landed proprietor
in Neumark, where his wife has an estate, that he would one day be
Minister or even Imperial Chancellor. (I am inclined to doubt this, as
he is not the kind of man to talk about his plans and hopes.) Recently
in a circle which included none of the Foreign Office officials, but
a number of other officials, amongst others a Councillor of Finance,
Aegidi was bragging about his patron’s prospects of obtaining the
Secretaryship of State, and prophesied the creation of an Imperial
Ministry in which Keudell would have a post. The Financial Councillor
shook his head, however, and as Aegidi went on in the same boastful
tone, told him plainly that Keudell was not fit for the position of
Secretary of State, as he had no political judgment; that he was still
less suitable for the Imperial Chancellorship, in which position he
would within a month “drive the cart into the ditch”; and that he was
about equally unsuitable for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, as there
he would intrigue with all his might against the Prince. “Aegidi,
it seems, was astounded at hearing these views,” said Bucher, in
concluding his report.
I should observe that Bucher had no reason personally to dislike
Keudell. He had suffered nothing at his hands, and had nothing to
apprehend from him. He simply loathed his selfishness and love of
intrigue, and the impotent conceit with which he flattered himself that
he might one day become Imperial Chancellor, whereas he had none of the
necessary qualifications for the post.
CHAPTER V
ARNIM’S HAND--VISIT TO THE PRINCE IN BERLIN--I RECEIVE MY INSTRUCTIONS
FOR A PRESS CAMPAIGN AGAINST THE EMPRESS AUGUSTA--THE “FRICTION
ARTICLES” IN THE “GRENZBOTEN”--VISITS AT VARZIN, SCHOENHAUSEN AND
FRIEDRICHSRUH
During the years 1873 to 1875 I edited the _Hannoverscher Courier_.
I then returned to Leipzig, where I was chiefly engaged on the
_Grenzboten_, which was published there. At first my connection with
the Foreign Office was not very close, and I only occasionally applied
to it for information, which always reached me through Bucher, as
arranged. At the end of May or the beginning of June, 1873, the latter
wrote me that MacMahon was causing a great deal of work, so that he had
been engaged until late at night on the three holidays. A few weeks
later it seemed to me that there were signs of an approaching crisis,
and I accordingly begged him to let me know how I could best serve
the Chief in my paper. On the 27th of June I received the following
answer:--
“Honoured Friend,--I have succeeded, during the last half hour
before the departure for Varzin, in smuggling your letter of the 25th
into the Chief’s hands. Here is his answer:--
“‘The most timely topic is the friction to which I am subjected, and
which has undermined my health. We have the traditions of absolutism
existing side by side with the constitutional machine, and, since 1866,
in duplicate. The absolute King has the will, or at least imagines
that he has, to decide everything for himself. He was formerly, and
still is, however, practically restricted by the lack of indispensable
knowledge, and the consequent independence of the departments which
sometimes takes the shape of passive resistance (to the Chancellor).
The State and Imperial Diets also want to determine what is to be done.
And then there are Court influences. The members of the Reichstag are
utterly exhausted, and yet they call upon the Ministers, who are no
less exhausted than themselves, to immediately set about preparing
Bills for the next Session. In the last resort, all the friction
arising from this complicated machinery falls upon the main wheel, the
Prime Minister, the Chancellor.’
“So far the Chief. I venture to add a few ideas which I imagine will
be in accordance with his views. In order to avoid irritating the
King, it would be wise to speak of the ‘absolute _monarchy_,’ and to
add a few words in recognition of his former services, suggesting
that the old gentleman, who from the traditions of his whole life and
from his military training is thoroughly devoted to his duty and very
strict in the transaction of business, will not give his approval
until he has thoroughly mastered the subject under consideration.
As to Parliament you might say that it contains no stable majority
upon which a Government could rely or which could furnish a Ministry.
The reasons are: the immaturity of our Parliamentary life; the after
effects of a merely theoretical knowledge of politics; conflicting
elements produced by the course of events--the Guelphs, Particularism,
Ultramontanism; the influence of the University Students’ Associations;
consequently a crumbling into fractions--a Holy Roman Empire split up
into three hundred territories. Perhaps a reference to England. There
are some points in my pamphlet on Parliamentarism which deal with
Ireland. Conclusion, perhaps: That we have to make up in a few years
the leeway lost by our forefathers during centuries.
“If you like, I will look through the manuscript. Please in that case
to send it to the Wilhelmstrasse.
“With friendly greetings,
“Bucher.”
“P.S.--I have thought of another conclusion, and would suggest the
following: What is to be done? The public calls for Imperial Ministers.
They will doubtless come in time, but it is very questionable whether,
_cæteris paribus_, the friction will be less when the Chairman and the
Directors of the Imperial Chancellerie are more independent of each
other. Two or three people are under the impression that everything
would go on better if they were to succeed the Prince. It is true that
nobody believes it except themselves. Therefore, long live the Chief!
The Pretenders are Keudell and Arnim. The first bides his time; the
second is engaged in active intrigues.”
In 1874, when the differences broke out between the Prince and Arnim, I
immediately applied to Bucher, and asked for directions as to the way
in which I could make myself most useful. I received an answer without
delay, and during the month of May various communications reached me.
On the 3rd of May, for instance, I received the following sketch of an
article for the _Courier_:--
“The opposition of Count Arnim, whom many newspapers puff by heading
their articles, ‘Arnim and Bismarck,’ recalls the condition of things
which prevailed under Frederick William III. and Frederick William
IV., and which was believed to have entirely passed away to the great
benefit of the country. Although it is a popular error to think
that the title of Minister Plenipotentiary, which is borne by our
Ambassadors, puts them on an equality with the Minister of State,
yet, as a matter of fact, Prussian diplomatists have in the past not
infrequently behaved as if they were the colleagues of their Chief,
and carried on discussions with him such as take place between two
Councillors of a Government or members of the bench of Judges. Prussian
diplomacy was noted for its lack of discipline. Cases are known in
which an envoy returned to Berlin without asking leave, in order to
advocate his own views at Court, and to secure support for them in
the newspapers. It was not his love of power which led the Imperial
Chancellor to set aside a number of Excellencies of that old school,
but rather the recognition that such a method of doing business might
have suited a time when Prussia was a fifth wheel to the coach of
European politics, but was entirely incompatible with the execution
of the programme which Herr von Bismarck brought with him in 1862,
and has already carried out in a way that will immortalise him long
after the names of the malcontent Excellencies may have ceased to
figure even in an encyclopædia. It is said that Herr von Blankenburg,
a military writer, descended from a Pomeranian family with which Count
Arnim is related on the mother’s side, makes insinuations in the
_Schlesische Zeitung_ against Bismarck’s character as a colleague. Our
representatives abroad are not the colleagues of the Minister, but
rather his agents. In their reports they have sufficient opportunity
for expressing their views, but when a decision has been arrived at
they have to carry out their instructions in a willing spirit. In a
Cabinet (Collegium) any differences can be easily settled without
damage to the interests of the country by putting the question to the
vote. But when a difference arises between a Minister in authority and
a subordinate who does not follow the instructions of his departmental
chief it is difficult to find any other solution in a well-ordered
State than the retirement of one or other of them from the service.
This may possibly now be the case, and in the interests of the service
it may be regretted that it did not occur before.”
Shortly afterwards followed a translation of the final passage of an
article in the _Hour_, which it may be taken for granted was either
written by Bucher or at least inspired by him. It ran:--
“The fact that the Imperial Chancellor has so long tolerated such a
censorious and contumacious attitude on the part of a subordinate
shows with what serious internal difficulties this statesman has
had to contend during his whole career, difficulties which in their
full extent will never become known to the public. These were the
consequences of a transition from an absolute to a constitutional
system of government. Even after the Constitution had been proclaimed
under Frederick William IV. many diplomatists continued to follow
the traditions of the former absolute régime, opposing the Minister
for Foreign Affairs, and endeavouring to obtain the approval of the
King for their own policy. Such a condition of affairs, which brought
Prussian diplomacy into disrepute, so far as its discipline and
success were concerned, could not possibly be tolerated by a Minister
who entered office with such far-reaching plans as those of Prince
Bismarck. Behaviour of this description is also little calculated to
succeed with a man of such a straightforward and resolute character
as the Emperor William. The efforts made by Count Goltz, and others
whom we will not here specify, as they are still living, to play the
part of Ministers, met with no success. There is every reason to hope
that Count Arnim’s endeavours will be equally unsuccessful, even if
they be favoured by certain influences at Court, as thus only can
the Minister’s policy overcome the machinations of ambitious and
self-seeking intriguers. It is in the interest not only of Germany, but
of all Europe, that this consummation should be achieved, and we have
good reason to hope that it will be.”
On the 29th of May I received from Bucher the following short letter of
the previous day’s date:--
“Honoured Friend,--A little piece of news that will give you
pleasure. I said to the Chief to-day, ‘Busch has reported himself,
and wishes to join in the fray. I have gladly taken advantage of this
offer, and here are two extracts from his newspaper.’ Answer: ‘Ah, our
little Saxon! Leave the extracts here.’
“When I find any more material I will send it to you, of course, _salva
redactione_.
“I am not going to Varzin this time, and with such abominable weather
as we are having now, I am not at all sorry. Besides, it will do no
harm if some of the young bloods who have an ambition to go there, try
it for once.
“Yours ever.”
A few months later I received the following from Bucher: “Harry (Count
Arnim) has taken away with him from Paris a number of Foreign Office
despatches, and asserts that they are private letters. In the spring
the Berlin semi-official journals hinted that he had _become_ a rich
man.”
On the 28th of August Bucher wrote me from Varzin: “The Chief has
received diplomas of honorary membership from two Italian lodges, and
instructed me to ascertain from some trustworthy person acquainted with
the subject what sort of connection he would enter into by a tacit
acceptance (he will not send an answer), and what future obligations he
might be considered to have assumed. I mentioned you, and received his
permission to ask you. Please, therefore, to inform us. The Chief is
better than he has been for ten years.”
I gave the desired information, and on the 16th of September received
the following answer:--
“The Chief desires me to thank you for your prompt reply, which has
induced him to pigeon-hole the hocus-pocus” (from Livorno and some
little place the name of which I have forgotten). “The news about my
eyes was something more than mere newspaper gossip. It was part of
the press campaign which Delponte (Delbrück), the statesman with the
youthful knee-breeches, organised and set in motion in the spring. In
1873 I underwent treatment for the purpose of relieving the pressure
of blood to the eyes. There is nothing the matter with me now, thank
goodness! but last year’s cure is worked up again, as they would
like to get rid of me. I do not hold with the Manchester principles
that have made England so wonderfully prosperous. I do not sniff the
Court atmosphere, have no aspirations, and will not join the Camorra
of Ministers and Privy Councillors who are constantly engaged in
conspiracy against the Chief, but am on the contrary content to serve
him. But it is exactly because I have no aspirations that I can say,
‘_Je m’en fiche_.’ Auf Wiedersehen in Berlin in October.
“With best greetings, &c.”
The visit here referred to was postponed till the 3rd of November, when
I called upon Bucher at his lodgings, No. 39 Lutzowstrasse. I made
the following notes at the time of what I considered the interesting
parts of our conversation. (...) Bucher further remarked ... that the
Imperial Chancellor now appears to have also seen through Delbrück.
He now takes into his own hands much that was formerly left to him.
In the same way the Chief has for some time past taken Keudell’s
measure. In his departmental connection with press affairs, Keudell
had left a deficit not of 18,000 thalers as he had formerly told me,
but of 80,000,[12] through the payment of remuneration and pensions to
writers of all sorts, in some cases without the knowledge, and in one
instance (Bucher mentioned an Englishman named ----, as the person in
question), against the express instructions of the Prince. This deficit
is now being made good by the suspension of similar subsidies for a
period of two years. He was not much of a success in Rome either. He
had together with Lonyay, the Austro-Hungarian envoy in Rome, started
the project of a visit to be paid by the Emperor William to the Italian
Court, by announcing that Francis Joseph intended to visit Victor
Emmanuel. Bucher added: “Both gentlemen hoped in this way to obtain the
rank of Ambassador. But when inquiries were made into the matter in
Vienna it was ascertained that Francis Joseph did not dream of such a
thing, and so the plan was dropped in Berlin.” I also now obtained a
further explanation of Thile’s retirement. This was due to an intrigue
of Keudell’s. According to Bucher the facts were as follows. On the
occasion of the meeting of the three Emperors in 1872, Gortschakoff and
Andrassy gave Keudell to understand that they would like to receive the
Order of the Black Eagle. The Chief however was opposed to this, partly
on the ground that he did not wish to diminish the value of this high
Order by conferring it too frequently, and partly because he wanted
to save it up as a reward for future services on the part of those
statesmen. Notwithstanding this Keudell used his influence in favour
of its immediate bestowal; and when the Emperor had issued the patent
or decree to that effect he induced Thile to countersign it. When
Keudell afterwards reported this to the Chief, the latter fell into a
fearful rage and indulged in violent language against the unsuspecting
Secretary of State. Keudell then let Thile know what had been said,
with the remark that it was quite impossible for him to repeat some
of the worst expressions. Thile thereupon immediately tendered his
resignation to the Emperor. Bucher added: “When it was now suggested
that Thile should be summoned as an expert in the Arnim trial, I
pointed out that he bore the Prince a grudge.” The Chief replied:
“He has no reason to be angry with me, although he may well be with
Keudell. In spite of this and other instances, however, Keudell will
still be maintained by the ladies.”
On my removal from Hanover to Leipzig in October, 1875, the
correspondence between Bucher and myself gradually increased in
frequency. In reply to a request of mine for particulars respecting
the Prince’s family, which I required for an article that the editors
of the _Illustrirte Zeitung_ wished me to supply, Bucher wrote as
follows from Varzin on the 31st of October:--
“It is very possible that your pen can do welcome service. Further
particulars when you are in Berlin. Even now it would be very useful
and agreeable to Gamaliel (this was the name under which, as a measure
of precaution, we referred in our correspondence to the Chief, at whose
feet we had studied politics), if you were to show up the manœuvre
of representing Camphausen as the leader and the chief sinner, and
Delbrück as following or being influenced by him, while the contrary
is, and must be, the case, in view of the character of the two men. D.
is cunning, C. blunt. Delbrück allows his bosom friend to be sacrificed
as a scapegoat, in order to propitiate the raging waters.” And in a
letter of the 7th of November also dated from Varzin, Bucher suggested
the following: “A newspaper chorus is trying to make Herr Camphausen
responsible for the financial policy of the German Empire. We fancy,
however, that Herr Delbrück is both Minister of Finance and Minister
of Commerce for the German Empire, and that in these departments he
has been given a free hand by the Imperial Chancellor. He too has
invariably had all the laurels so long as there were any to be plucked.
Herr Camphausen has enough to bear in his responsibility for the
financial policy of Prussia.”
Shortly after I had fulfilled these instructions, the publication of
Arnim’s pamphlet, “Pro Nihilo,” afforded an opportunity for unmasking
its author in the _Grenzboten_.
My relations with the Prince assumed a still more satisfactory form
in 1877. Keil of the _Gartenlaube_ wished to publish a large portrait
of the Chancellor, and I was to supply the text. I therefore applied
direct to the Prince in a letter, in the course of which I said: “It
is not to be a biography, but only one side of your Serene Highness’s
life and character, treated in a bright sketchy style. I have asked
for time to consider the proposal, and was at first indisposed to
undertake the work. But then the following considerations occurred to
me. The _Gartenlaube_ has at present 300,000 subscribers, and therefore
at least a million and a half of readers; and if your Serene Highness
should have any idea which you might think it desirable to launch into
the world, or anything in the past which you might wish to recall to
memory, this periodical would serve as a capital hoarding for purposes
of advertisement, particularly as it is not a daily paper, but remains
for permanent reference. And then there was another point which seemed
to me worthy of consideration, namely, that if I declined the proposal,
Herr Keil would probably instruct some one else to prepare the article
who might be less devoted to your Serene Highness. Finally, to meet
the wishes of the publisher of the _Gartenlaube_ in this respect would
confirm the good sentiments which he now entertains, and enable me to
gain influence with him for future contingencies.
“If these considerations meet with your Serene Highness’s approval, I
may, perhaps, hope that you will have a hint conveyed to me as to the
treatment of the subject, and at the same time assist me with some
materials for my work.
“I did not wish to apply to your Serene Highness before, as I took it
for granted that it would be only in Varzin, if anywhere, that you
would have leisure to give any serious attention to such matters. If
your Serene Highness has no purpose in view which might be promoted
by such an undertaking, I shall let it drop, as my only desire in the
matter is to meet your wishes, and advance your interests.”
I then went on to say that Keil would probably be prepared to accept a
series of sketches of the houses and estates occupied by the Prince in
the course of the year, and one might combine various political matters
with the descriptive part.
Nothing came of the article to accompany the portrait. On the other
hand, the series last mentioned was carried out, although in a
different form to that which was at first intended. In the meantime,
however, I had something more important to occupy me.
On the 4th of April Bucher wrote: “Your request was received in a very
friendly way by the Chief, who will give the necessary instructions
and see you when you are here. _He is going._ It is not a question of
leave of absence, but a peremptory demand to be allowed to retire.
The reason: Augusta, who influences her ageing consort, and conspires
with Victoria (the Crown Princess), works up the priests through
the Radziwills and others, travels _incognito_ from Baden-Baden to
Switzerland in order to have tête-à-têtes with Mermillod and other
rabid Ultramontanes--an incident which is discussed in every tap-room
in Switzerland, and which we know from other sources to be a fact. The
successor who seems to have the best prospect, because Augusta desires
his appointment, is Schleinitz, the Minister of the Household. You can
make use of this, but with that prudence which is imposed by the Press
Laws.”
Of course I wrote to Bucher by return of post, that in these
circumstances I held myself at the Prince’s disposal to do everything
and anything which lay in my power, and that I would proceed to Berlin
within the next few days. At the same time I wrote the first of the
so-called “Friction Articles” of the _Grenzboten_. Advance copies were
sent to the principal Berlin papers, and were reproduced by them. They
caused a general sensation, and excited much discussion and comment,
favourable and otherwise, even in the foreign press. This first article
ran:--
“The Resignation of the Imperial Chancellor.
“Berlin, _April 7th_.
“The following sets forth the present position of affairs in the
Wilhelmstrasse. It is not possible to say whether it will be the same
when your next issue leaves the press a week hence, as it lies solely
with the highest authority in the land to modify it.
“The only point that is quite certain is that it is not a question of
a longer or shorter leave of absence of our Imperial Chancellor, but
rather of his actual retirement from the chief control both of Imperial
and Prussian affairs, of a resignation of all his offices which has
long been under consideration by the Prince, and has finally been
tendered in unmistakable terms. All other accounts of the affair are
mere myths and baseless conjectures. The Imperial Chancellor leaves,
not, as people say, for a longer holiday than usual, not for a year,
but for ever. The only hope, therefore, is that the cause of this
decision may yet be removed.
“That cause is not the Prince’s condition of health, which might
certainly be better than it is, but cannot at least be regarded as
worse than it has generally been during recent years. Furthermore,
it was not in consequence of the Stosch affair that he tendered his
resignation, though it can hardly have been a matter of particular
satisfaction to him. Finally--and this ought to be understood as a
matter of course--Prince Bismarck does not surrender the helm in order
to retire from politics and to devote himself to the occupations and
pleasures of a country life, although he thoroughly appreciates them,
and has during recent years sought to enjoy them as frequently as State
affairs permitted. A man of his character and his past knows that he
cannot follow his own inclinations, but belongs to his country and his
people as long as he has the strength and the untrammelled opportunity
to serve them.
“These last words give a clue to the true and only cause which induced
the Chancellor to ask for his release from office. It consists in the
‘friction’--emphasised by him on several occasions, both in public
and in private--which has arisen out of the efforts of certain Court
circles to use their influence in supporting the Ultramontanes and
others, to the grave embarrassment of the Chancellor’s policy and
action. This friction, exhausting as it is, could and would have been
borne, were it not that it threatens from year to year to become
a greater hindrance, and that it has already on several occasions
prevented the Chancellor from using, as he considers essential,
the authority vested in him for the welfare of the country, and
in particular for the necessary measures of defence against the
pretensions and intrigues of Rome. If the Prince retires, it is the
Ultramontanes who will triumph most. Their success will be for us a
national misfortune. I shall certainly be in agreement with all true
and enlightened patriots in describing as I have the resignation of
the statesman who has called New Germany into existence, and who alone
appears fitted to complete the edifice he has founded. It will also
be due in the main to the influence of a certain exalted lady and of
certain circles with which she has so willingly allied herself for
years past.
“The Press Law stays my pen. Perhaps you would at some future time
accept an article on Petticoat Politics, a subject which, I am sorry to
say, is no laughing matter, but deals, on the contrary, with influences
more or less successfully active in every Court. Before 1870 people
spoke of certain Rhenish influences; during the war there were rumours
of communications with a French Monsignor; and meetings with a Prince
of the Roman Church, who is one of the leaders of the Ultramontanes in
West Switzerland, are discussed by people who must have received their
information on the subject from sources other than Swiss tap-rooms.
Finally, every one knows the influence exercised, even in the highest
circles in the capital, by a distinguished Polish family in Berlin,
whose palace is the rallying point for all the aspirations of the
Church Militant.
“But enough for the present. Perhaps even too much. God grant that
there may be an improvement! Prince Bismarck goes, if, during this
week, things do not take a turn for the better,--a change that does not
lie in his hands, and which is hardly to be expected. Prince Bismarck
retires to Varzin because he cannot prevent, and does not wish to
witness, the preparations that are being slowly made for a pilgrimage
to Canossa. What has public opinion, what have the parliamentary
representatives of the nation, to say on this subject?”
On Wednesday, the 11th April, I left Leipzig for Berlin by the first
train in the morning. I put up at Toepfer’s Hotel in the Karl Strasse,
and proceeded to Bucher’s at 9.30 A.M. At the corner of Dorotheen
Strasse, while on my way thither, some one tapped me on the shoulder.
Turning round I saw it was Wollmann, who was greatly surprised at
meeting me there.... I ascertained from him that the crisis on the
first floor of No. 76 Wilhelmstrasse was at an end, and that the Chief
would remain and only take a long holiday.
We then took a glance in passing at the now-completed Column of
Victory, whereupon I took leave of Wollmann, saying that I had to
visit a friend, and went on to Bucher’s. He was as usual friendly
and communicative. His view of the situation differed from that of
Wollmann, however. According to him the crisis was only postponed. The
Prince had for the present yielded to the desire of the Emperor that he
should continue to hold the offices of Chancellor and Minister, and had
only requested leave of absence for an indefinite period. He had been
quite serious in wishing to resign all his offices, and it was doubtful
whether he would return. Count Stolberg had been selected by him as his
successor, as he is a distinguished and independent man, who enjoys a
certain authority at Court. Bülow, the Mecklenburger, and Hoffmann have
been selected as the representatives of the Chief during his absence.
Bucher further related that the condition of affairs at the Baden
Court was also “rotten.” The Grand Duke, well-meaning, but of somewhat
limited intelligence, had, during his Italian journey, “fallen under
the influence of some of the shrewdest of the Cardinals, and had
allowed himself almost to be persuaded into perpetrating a huge blunder
by visiting Pio Nono.” The Grand Duchess held with the priests in
Alsace, and with orthodox place-hunters like Geffcken and Max Müller,
and was disposed to conclude peace with the Ultramontanes. This was one
of the causes of Jolly’s retirement. Bucher went on to say: “The Grand
Duchess has also written a letter to papa (the Emperor William), in
which she begged that the alleged oppression of the Catholics in Alsace
should be stopped. This suggestion was, however, declined.”
He confirmed what he had said in this letter respecting the Empress,
and added: “In the spring of 1871 our troops should have returned
much sooner, but Augusta wished to be present at their entry and
yet to complete her course of baths before she came back. So there
was a postponement of four or five weeks, which cost the Treasury
nine millions in hard cash. The losses suffered by agriculture in
consequence of this delay are incalculable. The promotion of Gruner
as Wirklicher Geheimrath (‘Real’ Privy Councillor), which was given
by the old Emperor in a note written in his own hand, without
counter-signature, was also her work. Gruner is quite incapable, but
is a member of the _Bonbonnière Fronde_.[13] It is just the same with
Schleinitz, who is also quite devoid of talent and smartness, and of
whom she was thinking as successor to the Chief.”
According to Bucher, the Prince’s health was again anything but
satisfactory. When Bucher told the Chief that if he retired he himself
would not remain, the Prince replied that that was a matter he should
first consider well, but if he nevertheless decided to resign he should
come to him at Varzin. With regard to my visit to the Chief, he feared
nothing would come of it at present, as to-day was his wife’s birthday,
and he would perhaps leave to-morrow evening. At the same time he
wanted to report my arrival, even if he were not summoned to the Chief.
I returned to my hotel at 3 o’clock. Leverstroem and his black horse
were standing at the door. He handed me a card from Bucher, with
the words: “The Prince expects you at 4 o’clock.” I hastily donned
evening dress and white gloves, and, jumping into a cab, drove to 76
Wilhelmstrasse. Then upstairs and through the old familiar rooms. I had
to wait about five minutes in the billiard-room, where the billiard
table was quite covered with huge bouquets of flowers. Then into his
chamber. He came forward a few paces to meet me with a most friendly
smile, shook hands, and said he was glad to see his “old war comrade”
once more. I had then to take a seat opposite him, while he sat with
his back to the first window. Our conversation lasted till 5.30, that
is to say, nearly an hour and a half.
He first thanked me for the _Grenzboten_ article, and then said: “It
would be well, however, if such communications were repeated, and the
origin of the crisis discussed at length.”
I replied: “That is my chief reason for coming here--to get materials
and information for such articles. The more I get the better. The
_Grenzboten_ is absolutely and unconditionally at the disposal of your
Serene Highness.”
He then gave me various particulars concerning the Court clique and
its aristocratic followers in the _Kreuzzeitung_, and among the high
officials who had been shelved as well as others who were still in
office, and their manifold machinations, intrigues and cabals against
him, at the same time giving me an account of his own measures. He drew
a detailed picture of the Empress, who opposed him not only in his
struggle with the Clericals, but also in purely political questions.
“She has always desired to play a part,” he said, “first with the
Liberals and the friends of enlightenment, now with the Ultramontanes
and the orthodox Court preachers. She has become pious now that she is
growing old, and has in consequence taken up with the Clerical circles
on the Rhine. If she is not already a Catholic, she will be so very
soon. We know that she has negotiated with Mermillod in person, and
formerly--during the war--with Dupanloup by letter. She has written
to Catholic associations that she disapproves of the ecclesiastical
laws, and these letters have been published. And then the defence of
the Ursulines. Like Eugen, _i.e._, in 1870, she has, as I subsequently
ascertained, issued direct instructions to officials. The Emperor is
old, and allows himself to be influenced by her more and more. He has
never had that strength of character with which many people credit him.
I remember in the period of conflict when things were at the worst
that he returned once from a summer resort, where his wife had been
frightening him about the Opposition. I went to meet him at Jueterbogk,
joining him there in his carriage. He was very depressed, was thinking
of the scaffold, and wanted to abdicate. I told him I did not believe
things were so bad. Prussians were not Frenchmen, and instead of
thinking of Louis XVI. he should remember Charles I., who died for his
honour and his rights. If he were to be beheaded, he would also die
for his honour and his rights. So far as I was concerned I too would
willingly suffer death in case it were necessary. There I had caught
him by the sword-knot and appealed to him as to a King and an officer.
He became more cheerful, and by the time we reached Berlin he was again
quite reasonable. In the evening he joined a large company, and was in
excellent spirits. This time when I asked to resign he did not wish
me to do so But in acting in this way he only pities himself--what
should he do then?--and has no pity for me. I have yielded--for the
present--but before I come back I will put my conditions.”
I said: “And they must agree to them. They cannot get on without you.
That would only lead to follies and blunders and misfortunes, and they
would have to crawl to you on their knees to beg you to return.”
He then came back to the subject of the Empress, and said: “She also
interferes in foreign politics, having taken it into her head that
it is her vocation to plead everywhere in favour of peace--to be an
Angel of Peace. She therefore writes letters to foreign Sovereigns,
to the Queen of England for instance, which she afterwards mentions
to her consort, who, however, says nothing about them to me. Part of
this correspondence is carried on through one of the minor officials
of the household. Schleinitz, the Minister of the Household, after
having proved his utter incapacity in foreign affairs, has obtained his
present post through her Majesty’s favour. But there, also, his success
leaves much to be desired. As he knows nothing of the administration
of property he only manages to secure very insignificant revenues from
the Royal estates. But as he has always been a member of the Court
opposition, of the _Bonbonnière_, he is in high favour with Augusta. In
1866 his salon was the gathering place of the Austrians, and in 1870
the French were constantly at his house, and made it their rendezvous.
Whenever an intrigue against me was on foot he was certain to be in
it. Gruner is another member of the clique, a man who is not only
incapable but passionate. She obtained his promotion on the Emperor’s
birthday by a mere written note without the counter-signature of a
Minister as a reward for his hostility to me. Then we have Stillfried,
Count Goltz and Nesselrode, who all belong to the _Bonbonnière_, and
intrigue with Augusta against me and my policy, and seek to turn our
Most Gracious against me. Goltz, a general of cavalry, is a brother
of the former Prussian Minister in Paris, whose legacy of hatred he
has entered upon without any _beneficium inventarii_. Nesselrode, the
Master of the Household, is a well-known Ultramontane, whose relations
with Gehlsen’s _Reichsglocke_ came to light on the prosecution of the
latter, and who had a seat and a vote at the editorial conferences
held at Olbrich’s.[14] Immediately after that miserable scandal he
received one of the highest Orders, thus confirming the fact that that
disreputable sheet was favoured by the palace. Stillfried, the great
authority on heraldic and ceremonial matters, also a Catholic, was at
first moderate, but later--probably in consequence of the Empress’s
lectures--went over to the fanatics. And finally, you should not
forget the two Radziwills, the former secretary to Ledochowski, and
the chaplain. Both belong to the Centre party, and both are welcome
guests at the _Bonbonnière_. The newspaper in which they now deposit
their poison--I mean the Evangelical section of the clique--is the
_Kreuzzeitung_. Nathusius, the editor, who for a long time past has
tried to turn his readers against the Government and the Emperor,
has at length been condemned for libel against Ministers.[15] He has
been pardoned by his Majesty on the intervention of the offended
parties--certainly in consequence of the Empress’s intercession. You
can say that in view of these facts it may be taken for granted that I
actually made the statement attributed to me, namely, that my greatest
difficulties have arisen from having to undertake a diplomatic mission
to our own Court. And you may add that Prince Charles is not well
disposed towards me, and exercises an unfavourable influence upon his
brother. When you speak of the Evangelical section of the _Bonbonnière_
you may use the expression: ‘The dregs of the _Kreuzzeitung_ faction
and of the irreconcilable Opposition in the Upper House.’” We went on
to discuss his opponents, and in particular the Privy Councillors and
diplomatists who had been retired. In the course of conversation he
dealt fully with Arnim, his opinion of him being very similar to that
expressed by Bucher.
At this moment his wife entered the room, and handed him some medicine
in a cup which she held in her hand. He introduced me as a “fellow
campaigner at Versailles.”
When she had gone he continued his explanation: “Then in addition to
the Court there are other causes, of friction that hamper and worry
me. The Ministers will not modify their views in harmony with my
plans--in matters affecting customs and taxation, and in the railway
question--particularly Camphausen and Delbrück. They will not take
up my ideas, but twist and turn and procrastinate. I must, forsooth,
draw up Bills for them and the Reichstag to criticise. Let them do it;
in the first place it is their business, and they have the necessary
technical knowledge, so they should show what they are capable of.
There is in this respect a great deal to be altered, which has been
postponed up to now, as other matters took precedence.”
Finally he mentioned the Reichstag as a source of friction. The
National Liberals, he said, meant well, and in this connection he
mentioned Wehrenpfenig, but they could never forego criticism.
I said everything he had told me would be carefully stored in my
retentive memory, and gradually made public in an explicit, vigorous
and prudent way. I then put forward my plan for a sketch of his houses
and estates for the _Gartenlaube_, begging permission to inspect
Varzin, Schoenhausen and Friedrichsruh, and requesting introductions
to the Prince’s officials at those places. He consented to everything,
and said, “You must come to Varzin when I am there myself. I will there
give you letters for Schoenhausen, and Friedrichsruh, and also for
Kniephof, to my cousin who now owns the place, as you should see it
too.”
I remarked that he looked in better health than I had expected.
“Yes,” he replied, “others think so, too. People misjudge me in three
respects: they consider me healthier, wealthier, and more powerful
than I really am,--particularly more powerful; but you know how much
truth, or rather how little truth, there is in that.” He seemed to
have exhausted all the necessary topics, so I rose to take leave,
when he accompanied me through the two salons to the room occupied by
the attendants, who must have been surprised at seeing this. At least
that was the effect made upon good old Theiss, who was on duty there,
and who whispered as he helped me on with my overcoat: “Good Heavens,
Doctor, an hour and a half with his Serene Highness, who then sees you
as far as the door of the antechamber!”
Next morning I paid a visit to the Central Bureau, where my
acquaintances were exceptionally friendly--of course I again enjoyed
the Prince’s favour. Holstein begged me to come to him, and had a long
conversation with me. He said I had been quite different to Aegidi;
every one had read about me; and yet I had never pushed myself forward.
Little influence was exercised over the press now. In the long run,
however, that would not do, and it had already occurred to him whether
I might not return. But Bucher was of opinion that I should not be
willing to do so. I replied that, as a matter of fact, I did not wish
to; but if the Prince desired it I would regard that as a command.
Finally, he was good enough to give me a “partout” card of admission
to the Reichstag. I went there, heard Hänel and Bennigsen speak on the
crisis, and then strolled off to Ritter Schulze’s, where I took lunch.
On returning to my hotel the porter handed me a note from the Prince,
inviting me to dine with him at 6 P.M. Went there in a frock
coat, as requested in the note but wearing a smart white tie and white
gloves, while etiquette prescribed a black tie and coloured gloves with
a frock coat. I was soon to be reminded of this breach of propriety.
The table was laid in the first of the two back rooms. When I entered
only the Princess, Countess Marie, Count Bill, and a lady with a
Polish name were present. The Russian General Erkert came afterwards.
The Princess, noticing my white necktie, exclaimed, “Herr Doctor, how
smart you have made yourself!” I do not remember what I said in reply,
as I suddenly became conscious of my sin and felt somewhat out of
countenance. Luckily the Prince soon appeared, and we went to table,
the general taking in the lady of the house, while I had the honour to
give my arm to the daughter. A beautiful silver vase set with old and
new silver coins stood in the centre of the round table. I sat between
the Princess and the Countess, the Russian being on the other side of
the Princess, while the Prince sat opposite me. Then came the dainty
little Polish lady and Count Bill, next his sister. We drank Bordeaux,
Burgundy, Rhine wine, champagne, beer, and finally chartreuse, which
the Prince praised as being very wholesome. The conversation was lively
and unconstrained. The general related some pretty stories of the
simplicity of the Russian soldiers. The subject of the last war then
came up, and I reminded the Chancellor of Herny, where he was quartered
in the garret of a farmhouse; of Clermont, where in the absence of
a bedstead he was obliged to sleep on the floor; of Madame Jesse’s
house, the goblin clock and the historical table. He related a number
of anecdotes on the same subject, among other things his interview
with madame, and the way in which Hatzfeldt had “rescued” the table,
replacing it by one exactly similar.
The Prince then turned the conversation upon Kings and Princes, and the
way in which they regarded the world.
“They live above the clouds,” I said.
“How do you mean?” he asked.
“Above the cloud of courtiers and other menials,” I replied, “separated
by them from the ideas and feelings of other mortals, whose wishes and
opinions only reach them in a mutilated or adapted form, and sometimes
not at all.”
“The comparison is a good one,” said the Prince. “Gods, and yet very
human. They ought to be better educated, so that they should know
how things look here below, how they really are. Not appearances,
but truth. The great Kings have always clung to truth, and yet have
suffered no loss of dignity.”
Education in general was then discussed, and the Prince observed,
_inter alia_: “I was not properly educated. My mother was fond of
society, and did not trouble much about me. Afterwards I was sent to
an educational establishment, where too severe a system prevailed,
insufficient and poor food, plenty of hardening, thin jackets in the
winter, too much compulsion and routine, and unnatural training.” I
said that too much severity in schools was not good, as after the
restraint was removed young people were apt to abuse their liberty,
and even while the restraint lasted nature sought relief in underhand
ways. The Saxon Fuerstenschulen were an example of this, their pupils
turning out the wildest of all University students. He replied that was
so; it had been the case with him too, when he went to the University
at the age of seventeen. “It was different,” he continued, “with my
sons. They, on the contrary, have had too good a time. They were too
well fed, as is customary in the houses of diplomatists, Herbert also
afterwards, as he spent his apprenticeship in such houses.” Herbert
had, in the meantime, joined the party, when his father introduced me
to him; he remembered very well having met me at Pont-à-Mousson and
Versailles.
Between 8 and 9 o’clock the Princess, the Countess and Count Herbert
retired, returning after a while, the ladies in evening toilette and
the Count in a dragoon uniform, as they were going to a Court soirée.
The Polish lady disappeared with them. At the desire of the Prince the
rest of us remained and continued the conversation, smoking the while,
the Chancellor using a long pipe, while another waited ready filled
alongside his chair.
At 10 o’clock the general rose, and I followed his example. When we had
reached the door, however, the Chief said: “Please wait for a minute,
doctor, there is something more I would like to tell you.” He then
added a few particulars to what he had said on the previous afternoon
respecting the Empress and her _Bonbonnière_. I asked, “How has Thile
acted in this affair? I have always considered him a decent sort of
man.” He replied: “That is not quite the case. He did not behave very
well in the Diest-Daber matter;” which he then proceeded to explain.
I again promised to make diligent use of what he had communicated to
me on the previous day. It would be necessary to keep on constantly
repeating it, and not to let it drop too soon--it should have young
ones, as he had said formerly to me respecting one of my articles. “I
shall be very grateful to you for doing so,” he added. I then thanked
him once more for his confidence, and said I would let myself be cut
to pieces for his sake, as for me he was like one of God’s prophets
upon earth. He pressed my hand, and dismissed me with the words, “Auf
Wiedersehen in Varzin!” Blessings on his head!
Immediately on my return to Leipzig I wrote the second “friction
article,” based on the information I had received in Berlin.
“The Imperial Chancellor on Leave.
“Berlin, _April 19th_.
“The Imperial Chancellor has taken leave of absence. His resignation
has not been accepted, and he has not insisted upon it. The crisis
is, therefore, at an end. The Prince will return, although probably
somewhat later than usual. Restored by his course of baths, country
air, and release from current affairs, he will again take the helm, and
all will be as it was before. Let us be thankful that it is so!
“The foregoing is roughly the view of the situation which finds
expression in the press. Permit me to submit another view. The crisis
is not at an end, but only postponed. The question whether Prince
Bismarck is to retire from the service of Prussia and the Empire has,
to the relief of all who wished well to both, been answered in the
negative, but that answer is only for the time being. Those who are
acquainted with the situation still regard the future with anxiety. It
is by no means certain that the Imperial Chancellor will return in that
capacity, and if he does it may be taken as certain that things will
not remain as they were before. In other words, the Prince will lay
down his conditions before he resumes his official duties, with their
aims and burdens, and these conditions must be agreed to if we are to
see him again at work as of old.
“Public opinion can render some assistance here. It will do well not
to rest content with the present situation, but, on the contrary, to
show a clearer perception than it has hitherto done of the grave causes
which have mainly produced this lingering and protracted crisis; and
to give it unremitting and persistent expression in the press, at the
same time urging the removal of those strangely abnormal conditions
under which even a Bismarck cannot work effectively; much less any such
successor as has been suggested within the past few weeks, however
distinguished, independent and tactful he may be. The press may do good
service if it will pay attention to the following hints, and give them
the widest possible publicity.
“Erroneous views are held of the Chancellor’s position in many
respects. Just as he is considered from his appearance to be more
healthy, and from his extensive estates to be more wealthy than he is
in reality, so there is a widespread misconception as to the influence
which he exercises, inasmuch as it is usually thought to be unlimited.
That is not at all the case. The Prince has to reckon with the
Ministers, over whom he has not the authority which he ought to enjoy
as their Chief, and whose opposition has already on several occasions
hampered his schemes. It has also happened that high officials in
his own department have entertained entirely conflicting views, and
have both openly and secretly opposed him, and indeed even tried to
undermine his authority. Count Arnim, who, after having shunned his
earthly judge, seems to have suddenly fallen under the judgment of God
(he was already suffering severely from diabetes, of which he died
in 1881), was the worst of this melancholy species of diplomatists,
but was by no means the only specimen of his class. A whole series
of Excellencies and others who had been shelved owing to incapacity
or some other failing, or for reactionary or ultramontane leanings,
&c., made opposition, conspired and intrigued, always zealously,
often with the foulest weapons, and sometimes in combination with the
lowest associates, against the greatness which overshadowed them. They
attempted to cross the Chancellor’s plans and to blacken his character,
or, at least, to irritate him, and thus to injure his health. A section
of the party in the Reichstag upon which the Prince relies to support
his measures, made difficulties and curtailed his influence inasmuch
as--certainly with the best intentions--they regarded criticism as
the pride and first duty of a popular representative. But the main
obstacle is that which I pointed out a fortnight ago, and it will
perhaps remain the Prince’s chief difficulty, unless public opinion
opens its eyes and takes more vigorous and persistent action. That
obstacle is the anomalous condition of affairs at Court, where, in a
certain exalted quarter, the dregs of the _Kreuzzeitung_ clique, and
the irreconcilable opposition in the Upper House have combined with
ultramontane poison out of the sewers of Rome. There fresh troubles are
constantly being prepared for the Chancellor, fresh difficulties are
being placed in his path, now at one point and then at another, and the
constant encouragement given to his opponents retards the victory which
otherwise would doubtless have been his before now.
“We must forego for the present a more minute description of this
_Bonbonnière_ full of _Kreuzzeitung_ comfits and Jesuit sweetmeats.
Nevertheless attentive newspaper readers may be reminded by a few
instances (which shall be indicated with as much indulgence as
possible) of the manner in which the forces, aims, and intrigues of
this Court faction have made themselves felt during the last few
months. It should be mentioned, by the way, that its mines have been
laid for a considerable time past. The chief editor of an important
reactionary paper, which has endeavoured for many years to alienate
public opinion from the Government and the Emperor, was at length
prosecuted and condemned for libel against Ministers. (Incorrect.
See last note.) This man has been pardoned on the petition of the
offended Ministers, owing to the intercession--well, let us say--of
an exalted lady. (According to another version, at least released.)
The same exalted lady wrote letters to Catholic associations, which
were afterwards published, in disapproval of the ecclesiastical laws.
Two members of the distinguished Polish family recently mentioned,
both belonging to the Centre fraction, one a former secretary to
Ledochowski, and the other a priest who was engaged in the notorious
Marping farce, are welcome guests in the circles that gather around
this lady. According to all appearances direct instructions were
issued by her to the authorities in the affair of the Ursulines.
This may perhaps recall to many of your readers Eugénie’s action
during the war. A Count and Master of the Household who is known as
a zealous Ultramontane, whose relations to the _Reichsglocke_[16]
were disclosed during the prosecution of that paper, and who took
part in the conferences of the editorial staff at Olbrich’s, received
immediately after that scandal one of the highest Prussian Orders--a
recognition which few can explain, and which, of course, no loyal
reader can account for, except by supposing that the achievements of
the _Reichsglocke_ were regarded with extreme favour in certain circles.
“How does the reader like these incidents, to which many others equally
striking might be added? That they were distasteful to the Imperial
Chancellor must, of course, be obvious. It is, indeed, quite possible
that he may have made use of the expression attributed to him, namely,
‘that his greatest difficulties arise out of his having to undertake a
diplomatic mission to our own Court.’”
On the 21st of April Bucher, to whom I had communicated an outline of
this article, wrote as follows respecting the former article:--
“In the opinion of the prescribing physician all the ingredients
should not be administered in one dose. I fear the elixir may be too
potent, and would suggest, if it is still possible, that two doses
should be made of it, and that a different medicine should be given
in the interval. The latter could be prepared from the article in the
_Kölnische Zeitung_ of the 15th (‘Plans of Reform’) which was written
by Camphausen, and the answer in the _Post_, which I wrote from
instructions received upstairs. Camphausen, it may be mentioned, is
a very many-sided man. He not only belongs to the Manchester School,
but has relations with the Castle at Coblenz, and is at the same time
in high favour with a Liberal and enlightened circle, (that of the
Crown Princess Victoria,) where he is regarded as a corner-stone of
Constitutionalism and a sound Protestant. You will shortly receive the
flaying (of Schleinitz) and the paragraphs on the branch (of the Berlin
_Bonbonnière_) at Karlsruhe. P.S.--Speaking in the Reichstag two years
ago Camphausen said: ‘The word _impossible_ is printed in very small
characters in my dictionary.’”
I based the third article of our series upon this and another letter
from Bucher of the 26th of April. This article, which appeared in No.
19 of the _Grenzboten_, ran as follows:--
“Further Friction.
“Berlin, _April 26th_.
“In the article ‘The Imperial Chancellor on Leave’ attention was called
to the fact that besides the opposition of the Court there were other
sources of friction that worried and wearied the Prince, exhausting
his powers, hampering his work, and thus stimulating his anxiety to
be released from office. We select for consideration to-day those
that lie in the attitude of certain authorities working immediately
under him, or more correctly associated with his work, in respect of
various important reforms which the Prince has greatly at heart, but
which are making no progress towards fulfilment. In other words the
Imperial Chancellor when he sought to resign had been disappointed of
the co-operation and support which he had expected from one of his
colleagues (Camphausen was meant) in connection with some measures
affecting the Customs and commercial policy and taxation--measures
which he regards as indispensable, but which have hitherto not been
dealt with.
“‘When a sportsman becomes faint and weary,’ said the Prince a few
months ago, in conversation with a party of friends, ‘and is about
to go home, he will not alter his mind because he is told there is a
covey of partridges near at hand. It would perhaps be different if he
were told that there was some pig in the next glen. The chance of a
boar hunt would revive his strength and courage.’ So goes the story
(not quite accurately, by the way), according to an article in the
_Kölnische Zeitung_, written apparently by a member of the Minister’s
immediate _entourage_, and certainly emphasised by the sarcastic tone
in which it frequently deals with the difficulties in the way of
reform. The simile is so far to the point, that the wild boar referred
to represented certain reforms in the Customs, and in the fiscal and
railway system. But the correspondent omitted the real moral of the
story. When he says, ‘As soon as Prince Bismarck is in a position
to submit complete and well-founded schemes calculated to withstand
criticism, there will be no longer in our opinion any difficulty in
finding in the Reichstag a large and resolute party, in favour of
such reforms of our commercial policy;’ and when he makes a similar
assertion respecting the taxation laws, and the railway system, he
transposes the actual relations of things and circumstances. There is
no question of the Imperial Chancellor submitting measures which would
have to run the gauntlet, first, of the Minister to whose department
they properly belong, and then, of the Reichstag. The Prince has no
intention of preparing such measures himself. He is anxious for these
reforms, but he has no idea of embodying them himself in Parliamentary
measures to be submitted to the Legislature. He expects his colleagues
to undertake that work, and has informed them so. That he has failed to
induce them to take any such initiative is, as the _Post_ of the 19th
assures us--we believe on the best authority--one of the reasons that
have led the Chancellor to send in his resignation.
“According to the _Post_, the true moral of the above story is to
be found in the words which the Prince added on that occasion: ‘He
could only remain in office if his colleagues took up the reforms in
question of their own motion, and independently.’ Otherwise, he wished
to retire, as he did not feel strong enough to bear the strain of
Ministerial crises, together with a breach with his old colleagues,
and the necessity of accustoming himself to new men. It was unfair
to ask him to do all the work, and submit it to the criticism of a
departmental chief bent on another course. (The ‘other course’ referred
to was doubtless that of the Manchester School.) He had laid his
own course in the railway question, and had ostensibly received the
approval of all his colleagues. When it came, however, to the carrying
out of his proposals he met with the customary passive resistance, and
the usual refusal--just like the Progressive party, whose invariable
reply was, ‘No, not in that way, but in another way’--that is to say,
in some way that would never work. On that occasion the Chancellor
said: ‘What I have to do is to ascertain whether my present colleagues
will, of their own initiative and free conviction, carry out those
reforms which I regard as indispensable, in such a manner that they
will take the responsibility for me, and not I for them. If they would
only do so I would willingly continue my credit and my name to the
firm, in order to carry through these reforms.’
“The writer in the _Kölnische Zeitung_ has expressed himself so
confident with regard to the reforms desired by the Prince, that one
may perhaps inquire why the same success which he promises if the
Chancellor submits them to the criticism of Ministers and of the
parties in the Reichstag should not attend them if the colleagues,
whose business it is, were to draft these measures and recommend them
to the acceptance of the Legislature. The particular colleague who,
as already observed, had no small share in preparing the article
in question, is as self-confident as he is many-sided. He seems to
possess power and influence. Two years ago he said in the Reichstag:
‘The word _impossible_ is printed in very small characters in my
dictionary.’ He has connections with the Castle at Coblenz, and is at
the same time highly appreciated in certain exalted circles in Berlin,
where people are most liberal and enlightened, as a corner-stone of
Constitutionalism and a pillar of Protestantism. Why does a man of
so much importance and ability decline to take the initiative of the
reforms which the Chancellor has at heart? Is it, perhaps, that he
fears to jeopardise one side of his many-sidedness, or to renounce
thereby his past, his principles, and his connections as a member of
the Manchester School?
“And now to another point, which requires refutation, viz., the
rumour mentioned in a leading Berlin paper of friction with another
department. The _National Zeitung_ of yesterday, in an article on
Moltke’s speech, says it doubtless referred to a conflict between
considerations of military and political necessity. It might be
inferred from this insinuation that the Imperial Chancellor was opposed
to the strengthening of the German garrisons in the neighbourhood of
Metz. Such a supposition would, however, be erroneous. On the contrary
the Prince has, in this respect, not only been in complete agreement
with the highest military authorities, but has done everything in
his power to support and promote their views. For years past they
have asked for better railway communications with Lorraine and more
troops in that part of the Empire. It was impossible to do anything
in the former direction until the Chancellor had exercised sufficient
pressure to overcome the obstruction of the Ministry of Commerce,
and compelled the Minister to proceed with the construction of the
line between St. Ingbert and Saarbrücken, a connection which the
_spiritus rector_ of the Prussian railway system had postponed for
years out of consideration for petty trading interests. The Prince
has also done all he could to secure an increase of the garrison in
Lorraine. This increase is, however, understood to have remained in
abeyance, as it still does, because in a non-official, but exalted and
influential quarter, it is feared that the French might feel hurt or
offended--_i.e._ the gentlemen who speak that language so fluently,
who for the most part have beautiful black whiskers and profess the
Catholic religion, which, of course, is much more distinguished than
the Evangelical!
“P.S.--A member of the Reichstag, who is at the same time an intimate
friend of the Imperial Chancellor, has felt constrained to issue
a warning in the _Magdeburger Zeitung_ against our articles. He
would be surprised if he knew with what composure we have read his
communication. Of course, ignoring all further contradictions of this
kind, we shall continue to say what we _know_, and _we shall obtain
credence for it_.”
I may add that the member of the Reichstag and friend of the Prince
here referred to was Amtsrath Dietze (Barby), and that he certainly
issued his warning against the “friction articles” without previous
communication with the Chief. Of course he acted in good faith.
A few days after the publication of the _Grenzboten_ article Bucher
wrote me:--
“Exception has been taken in a quarter upon whose approval everything
depends to the closing words of the ‘P.S.’ It is thought that they
sound as if the Chancellor had spoken through the writer of the
article. It would be well to avoid such an authoritative tone. Thus far
the message I have to deliver. I fancy such an impression would not
have been made if the _Magdeburger Zeitung_ could have been read at the
same time, but I could not lay my hands upon it. Of course it would not
be desirable to state expressly that such an impression is incorrect.
Perhaps it may be possible to efface it indirectly by saying something
to the following effect.” He then gave me a recipe, in accordance with
which I prepared as follows the fourth article of our series, which
appeared in the next number of the _Grenzboten_.
“In Explanation.
“Berlin, _May 6th_.
“We observe that the second of our articles on the Chancellor crisis
has been judged in very different ways by the press. The _Germania_
has discovered amongst other things that it is directed against the
Empress Eugénie. Other papers were astounded at information which
they received from us for the first time. Others, again, considered
themselves so fully acquainted with the truth, which is generally
known to lie at the bottom of a deep well, that they declare the
contents of the article to be untrue, or--as some with discourteous
indignation chose to express themselves--invented. Finally, another
section of the press, including the chief organ of public opinion in
a small German capital (this referred to the _Weimar Zeitung_), found
that the bulk of what we had stated was long since known. In spite of
its unfriendly tone towards us, we must do that organ the justice of
acknowledging that its statement is correct. In other words, we do not
enjoy the power of slipping through keyholes, we cannot make ourselves
invisible in order to spy out what happens in otherwise inaccessible
spheres, and finally we have no devil upon two sticks at our disposal
to remove for us the roofs of palaces and clubs. We have nothing more
than a tolerably good memory and the habit of collecting material. In
dealing with what we have read in the press and heard in conversation,
we act pretty much as the botanist does when collecting specimens
in upland meadows and lowland marshes--we place carefully side by
side the specimens we have found scattered in various directions and
examine their affinities, noting how they complement each other. To our
great surprise we now find that the result of this surely very simple
process has produced here and there the impression that we possess
magical powers, and that we had brought profound secrets to light.
It is certainly quite true, however, that we have said nothing that
attentive readers with a certain capacity for comparative analysis and
sound deductions have not been long ago aware of. Why, then, all this
excitement?
“In conclusion, if we trusted too much to our memory in some details
of minor importance, and misunderstood insult for libel or Ministers
for members of a High Consistory, we must in future be more careful to
label correctly the various specimens in our collection.”
During this week I received from Bucher nearly a dozen letters with
suggestions, warnings, explanations and supplementary matter, but
principally with raw material for further articles connected with the
three subjects treated above. On the 27th of April he sent me over two
sheets of material for the article, “A Branch of the _Bonbonnière_,
or the Causes of the Change at Baden.” He added: “I can only give you
the ideas without any indication of the style in which they should
be expressed. I feel that it will be difficult to put it into proper
shape.” On the 30th I received from him the warning: “Do not on any
account take up with the _Post_. It is intimately connected with R.
D. Z. (Radowitz), one of the _Bonbonnière_ circle.” On the 3rd of May
he presented me in the person of the widowed Queen of Bavaria with
“still another flower to be added to your garland of ladies.” On the
6th he wrote: “I would strongly advise you not to publish the article
(‘The Angel of Peace’) in the next number, 1. Gamaliel (the Chief) will
be here on the 10th, and will stay for some days, and he would thus
find himself right in the heart of the excitement which it is sure to
cause, and that would certainly be unpleasant for him. From here he
will proceed to his watering place, where he will be quite out of touch
with the world. 2. In a few days an incident will become known which
seems as if it were specially made to account for the publication of
such an article, and which will surprise many who might otherwise feel
disposed to criticise it. Perhaps in the meantime as a stopgap you can
use the suggestions in my last letter and some older materials. Or it
might be better still to have a pause. One should not spoil the public,
or it may easily grow too exacting and look for the same spicy fare
every week, which you would not be able to provide.” On the 13th he
reported: “The patient (he meant the Chief) proposes to go direct to
the watering place without touching at B. (Berlin). This I consider to
be certain. He thinks of starting on Thursday, but that is uncertain.
If I ascertain any change by Tuesday I will telegraph to your wife:
‘Fritz better, is to go out on such and such a day for the first time.
Anna’--or, ‘Fritz must remain here during his holidays.’”
The _Grenzboten_ now published the fifth “friction article,” which ran
as follows:--
“The Angel of Peace.
“We learn for the first time through an Austrian journal that the
_Czas_ (which is known to be the organ of the Polish aristocratic
ultramontane party, and which occasionally, through its patrons the
Radziwills, the Czartoryskis, &c., receives very good information
indeed respecting sentiments, intentions and occurrences in Court
circles and in the upper regions of society) has published the
following comparatively colourless statement respecting the Chancellor
crisis in Berlin. Some time ago Queen Victoria wrote direct to Prince
Bismarck, urging upon him to prevent the war between Russia and the
Porte. The answer was evasive. Then followed a second letter from her
Britannic Majesty to the Imperial Chancellor, repeating her request
more urgently. This time the reply was somewhat more positive in form,
but was still not to the taste of the Queen, who then turned to the
Emperor, and made him and Germany responsible for the outbreak of war.
“We do not know what truth there is in this report, but we do not
consider it incredible. Moreover, this remarkable suggestion that it
is our duty to compel our faithful neighbour Russia to maintain peace,
not because we have any special cause or reason to do so, but solely
to oblige the English by relieving them from all anxiety as to their
interests on the Bosphorus, and by enabling them to continue their
huckstering in all tranquillity of mind, has, we believe, reached the
Emperor through another channel (which the readers of these articles
will be able to guess), and has received warm support here. It must
be borne in mind that his Majesty is thoroughly devoted to peace, and
sincerely desires that he himself, the German people, and the whole
world, may be saved from fresh wars. These being his sentiments, he
is disposed to consider the wishes and counsels which, in the opinion
of those who submitted them to him, are calculated to serve the cause
of peace. But such counsels, if they do not emanate from a great and
far-seeing mind, which takes all the circumstances and possibilities
into account, may lead to the exact contrary of what is desired,
that is to say to war. In January _The Times_ implored the Imperial
Chancellor to give orders for the maintenance of peace. Somewhat later
it addressed a similar affecting appeal to the Emperor, and we may take
it for certain that Queen Victoria was induced by her cunning Semitic
adviser to use her influence in the same direction through the channel
indicated above.
“Let us suppose that Germany had allowed herself to be
‘nobbled’--indeed, it is hardly possible to use any other
expression--had struck an attitude, and shouted ‘Peace in Europe!’ and
that Russia had not halted at the word of command, but let her troops
advance--what would have happened then? Why, we should then, for the
maintenance of peace, have been obliged to wage war against Russia,
which at the best would serve to pull the chestnuts out of the fire
for magnanimous Albion, or our word of command would have proved to be
impotent, and we should have made ourselves ridiculous--and ridiculous
merely in the service of England, a Power that has never honestly
wished us well, and has only accepted our position in Europe in the
hope that it may some day be utilised for the furtherance of its own
mercenary policy.
“The case of the Paris Exhibition is quite similar. This affair also
excited warm sympathy in the quarter which we have in view, where it
has become a second nature to ‘work for peace.’ When the Government, in
spite of all such representations and appeals, declined to take part in
the Exhibition, MacMahon sent the Marquis d’Abzac, an amiable gentleman
upon whom exalted eyes had rested with special favour on a former
occasion, to Berlin in order to make a last attempt. The marquis sung a
hymn to peace in the most melting accents. We can hear him whisper with
a winning smile that in this invitation France reached out her hand to
Germany in reconciliation, that the Exhibition would be at the same
time a peace congress. Why rudely reject the proffered hand of a former
opponent who had now become a friend? How wonderfully an olive wreath
would adorn the brow of a certain august lady! And other graceful
speeches calculated to flatter and to touch the feelings. Then another
appeal in the highest quarter on behalf of France, so unsuspicious,
so well-meaning, so prettily persuasive, warmer and more urgent than
before, and, at last, offensively persistent. It was all to no purpose.
M. le Marquis did not, after all, succeed in securing anything more
than one of the highest Orders for himself.
“But let us again in this instance suppose that the affair had been
decided differently, and that, in spite of wiser counsels and a truer
insight into the nature of the circumstances, the messenger sent
by the President of the French Republic had returned to Paris with
the acceptance of the invitation to the would-be festival of peace,
what would the probable consequences have been? Germany would have
co-operated in the Exhibition, and her exhibitors would have found
themselves, to say the least, in an exceedingly uncomfortable position.
They would have been exposed to dangers of all kinds--we have had ample
experience of what the vindictiveness of French Chauvinism means, even
in more harmless circumstances--and incidents might and probably would
have occurred, resulting at least in irritation, perhaps in an exchange
of hostile notes, and conceivably even in something worse.
“The same idea of a special mission to maintain and promote peace--our
readers will, of course, read between the lines--governs similar
relations with the Ultramontanes, and has, together with other motives,
led to advances which would be otherwise inexplicable. After having
opposed the Government during the elections with almost unexampled
violence, and indulged in the vilest slanders and the most malignant
intrigues against all loyal candidates, these worthy people hide the
cloven hoof in patent leather shoes, and join the circles to which we
have referred with an air of innocent cheerfulness as if butter would
not melt in their mouth, and sun themselves in the radiance of the most
exalted graciousness and favour. Indeed it is even said that in the
council which is usually held to consider the lists of invitations, the
faithful adherents of Rome who condescend to come--this is not done by
all of them--are never omitted, but those who are loyal to the King are
generally struck out.
“It may be permitted, perhaps, to draw the moral of these
communications as follows:--
“In itself a love of peace is always a becoming feature, and
particularly in a woman. But in our humble opinion such love of peace
should not lead to a desire to play the part of ‘Angel of Peace,’
to take pleasure in hearing one’s self so styled, and to act up to
it by thwarting the Chancellor’s plans, opposing wise counsels, and
persistently promoting a course calculated to bring on war, and to
perpetuate existing feuds, inasmuch as it encourages the enemy to
regard the ‘Angel of Peace’ as an ally and to construe her efforts as a
fresh stimulus to resistance.
“Heaven is the true home of such angels of peace, and there doubtless
their sentimental politics will afford them a plentiful supply of
beautiful emotions. We, however, live upon the earth, and the hard
necessities of this life can only be properly estimated and dealt with
by the understanding.”
On the 21st of May Bucher wrote respecting this article:--“The doctor
considers that the medicine prescribed is too strong and has been
administered too rapidly. The patient will now require a _longer_ rest.
I should like to see the next prescription before it is sent to the
apothecary’s.”
In my reply, I asked what the Foreign Office thought of the new Cabinet
in Paris, and whether anything should be said on the subject. Bucher
answered on the 23rd:--“I have nothing to say with regard to the new
French Ministry except what the entire press says: that we view it
with mistrust. It might be mentioned in rectification, that though
the statement that Jules Simon’s fall has been promoted from Berlin
is quite incorrect, this does not exclude the co-operation of G. B.
(Gontaut-Biron) in the matter, which is indeed very probable.”
On the 25th of May Bucher sent various supplementary items for the
article dealing with Baden which I had forwarded to him for inspection
previous to sending it to the press. On the 11th of June he sent me a
sketch of another prominent member of the _Bonbonnière_, in an article
in which I found little to alter, and which therefore appeared in the
_Grenzboten_ in all important particulars, both of form and substance,
as it left his hands. It ran as follows:--
“A Minister _in partibus_.
“Berlin, _June 9th_.
“A few weeks ago a Berlin local newspaper (he was thinking of the
_Tribune_) published a statement that Baron von Schleinitz, the
Minister of the Royal Household, has felt it his duty to submit the
notorious _Grenzboten_ articles--it is not said where or to whom--and
to propose that an inquiry should be instituted with the object
of ascertaining whether they issued from the Press Bureau--which
Press Bureau is not specified. The business of the Minister in
question, apart from Court functions with which we are not very
well acquainted, consists in the administration of the property of
the Royal House. According to Rönne members of the Ministry of the
Household are not State officials, and questions affecting the press
and the administration of the laws do not in any way fall within their
jurisdiction. Perhaps this piece of news is only meant as a humorous
reminder to us that one portrait was missing from the little gallery we
recently presented of persons whom the achievements of the Chancellor
have had the misfortune to displease. We certainly passed over the
gentleman in question, but had by no means forgotten him,--any more
than many others; but we thought that to each day sufficed the evil
thereof. Herr von Schleinitz when he held the seals of the Foreign
Office, certainly pursued quite a different policy to that of Prince
Bismarck, and, therefore, it is after all small blame to him that he
does not approve of the Bismarckian policy. We refrain from an analysis
and discussion of the nature and success of the Schleinitz method,
which was known in its time as the policy of _moral_ conquests. We
leave that task to history, where we are inclined to believe the name
of Schleinitz will hardly figure except in a parenthesis descriptive of
Court life. We take the liberty, however, of asserting openly that he
has had no luck as a diplomatist.
“We hear it said that the property of the Royal House would yield a
considerably larger income if it were differently administered. That
may be the case, and yet we should not blame Herr von Schleinitz. A
diplomat is not called upon to understand the administration of great
estates and forests, and if he has no knowledge of the subject he may
regard it as a misfortune that he should have been appointed to such
duties.
“That is not the only misfortune which has befallen Herr von
Schleinitz. Diest-Daber heard, and related at the trial, that the
_Reichsglocke_ had been sent to the Emperor by a lady named Schleinitz.
Herr von Schleinitz has denied this statement in the _Reichsanzeiger_,
but malicious journalists are now asking whether the evidence of a
husband in favour of his wife is conclusive. A contributor to another
paper (the _Tribune_) comes to his rescue with another supposition.
The gossip might have originated in the circumstance that a former
subordinate of the Minister of the Household, who is still frequently
to be seen at his residence, the Geheimer Rechnungsrath Bernhardt
(who had been mentioned by the Chief as the channel through which the
Empress corresponded with certain foreign Sovereigns) took in ten
copies of the _Reichsglocke_. Certainly Herr von Schleinitz has good
reason to exclaim, ‘Heaven defend me from my friends!’
“He has reasons for this prayer in other respects also. When the war
between ourselves and Austria was at hand the Austrians selected
his residence as their rendezvous, as did the French at a later
period, after they had waged against us a war which they have not yet
forgotten. And in that quarter--our readers know the place--where every
form of hostility to Prince Bismarck centres, Herr von Schleinitz has
always been regarded as the future Chancellor or Minister for Foreign
Affairs, or, to express it more suitably in a phrase borrowed from the
Curia, as Minister _in partibus_. We credit his Excellency with too
much self-knowledge to believe that he personally entertained the hope
of being Prince Bismarck’s successor. And now he is understood to have
actually received no other than Herr von Gruner as coadjutor designate!
Surely the man may bewail his misfortunes!”
The information contained in the seventh and last “friction” article
was supplied exclusively by Bucher, who also wrote the greater part of
it. It was as follows, published on the 28th of June in No. 27 of the
_Grenzboten_.
“Causes of the Change at Baden.
“Strassburg, _June 24th_.
“A Baden correspondent of your journal has repeatedly expressed his
anxiety at the attitude towards the struggle between the State and the
Ultramontanes which the ruling circles at Karlsruhe have for some time
past shown a disposition to adopt, and indeed which they have actually
begun to adopt, since the change of Ministry last September. This
attitude, although for the present it is manifested rather in desire
than in deed, means a retreat before Rome and her allies. The last time
such indications became evident was some two months ago. I immediately
made inquiries as to what truth was in them. It is only now however
that I have received trustworthy explanations. It requires a closer
knowledge of those circles than can be obtained here to say exactly in
what way the change of sentiment referred to has come about, whether
through influences that have gradually insinuated themselves there,
or in consequence of tendencies which already existed and which those
influences divined and afterwards developed. It is regarded as certain,
however, by persons who are in a position to know, that the change of
weather in the upper regions is associated with certain influences
proceeding from Strassburg.
“Frequent visits are paid to Karlsruhe, among others by a gentleman
of this city who has lately received an appointment at our
University--experts assert less for his scientific attainments than
through the recommendations of a coterie whose ramifications extend
across the Channel. The following may serve to identify him. M. (I
mention no name) formerly had charge of the interests of certain small
Republics as Minister Resident in Berlin. There was not much work for
him to do there, and as he was of an enterprising turn of mind and
felt the necessity of playing a part in the world, he was impelled to
dabble in politics more or less openly on his own account. He acted
chiefly as letter carrier and newsmonger to the diplomacy of the
smaller States (this refers to Professor Geffcken, who was associated
with the Coburger, Samwer and Freytag), and endeavoured to promote the
ends of the clique which he had joined by means of articles in the
newspapers. As a matter of course, he was a zealous free-trader, and
equally of course he was strongly in favour of the Augustenburger, at
the time when the Schleswig-Holstein question was approaching its final
solution. If things had followed the course he desired, Hamburg would
have taken the field against Prussia in 1866, and would to-day be a
Prussian city. People ought, therefore, to have been thankful to him
in Berlin, but were not, and on the contrary refused to have anything
to do with him. The Senate then sent him as Minister Resident to
London, where many doors were opened for him by his enthusiasm for the
House of Augustenburg. (It will be remembered that Queen Victoria is
the mother-in-law of a brother of the Hereditary Prince of that day,
now Duke of Augustenburg.) He therefore always had news to send, but
the Senate ultimately found that it cost them too dear, and abolished
the post. M. thereupon took a position in the administration of his
native State, but seems to have himself soon realised that his work
was not quite up to his pretensions. It was, therefore, necessary to
devise ways and means in some other direction, and this was done.
His Manchester principles recommended him to the official then at
the head of the Imperial Chancellerie (Delbrück), who appointed him
his assistant, (miracles, you see, still happen!) and his friends
converted the unsuccessful diplomatist into a Professor in Ordinary at
the High School of the Reichsland. In 1875 he launched a book entitled
‘State and Church,’ which is almost as thick as the Bible. The bulky
proportions so essential to a professorial production were attained by
a superficial historical compilation of some six hundred pages. The
last chapter contained an unfavourable criticism of the Falk laws,
written--to put it politely--in a very popular style, somewhat as if
it were intended to be read by ladies. The real significance of the
work,--of course not expressed in so many words, but clearly to be read
between the lines,--is: ‘I am a model Minister of Public Worship!’ It
is said that the author received further recommendations from Baden,
which, however, failed to produce the intended effect in official
circles, owing to a knowledge of his past, and to the accurate estimate
formed of the same. Since then, M. has been delivering public lectures
on all sorts of subjects, some with a political flavour, so much to
the taste of the Francophil Philistines that they flock to hear the
professor.
“Another professor found his way across the Kehl Bridge, and to the
district which may be described as the handle of the Karlsruhe Fan.[17]
I also forbear to give his name. (Max Müller is the professor here
alluded to.) For the moment I will merely mention that he belongs to
the Bunsen Club, and that--as far as I know--he is one of those German
savants who are most indebted to an energetic and persistent system
of advertisement. He is a member of the Berlin Academy of Science,
and also of the French Institute, and is understood to be a capable
Sanscrit scholar, which I do not question, although I certainly
question the good taste of his friends in the _Augsburger Zeitung_,
who seldom mention his name without describing him as ‘our celebrated
countryman.’ The publication of Indian texts, which he is bringing out
under the patronage of one of the Orleans Princes, has brought him
into communication with that interesting family. In addition to his
lectures at Oxford he occasionally delivers others in London, where
he holds forth before a fashionable and feminine audience upon the
growth of language, the origin of religion, and similar subjects. His
numerous admirers in Germany announced a few years ago that he had been
induced to deliver lectures here in Strassburg also. It is true that
his friends in England put a different complexion on the affair. They
say that British soil is no longer so congenial to him as it used to
be, or, as they express it, England has become too hot for him. Be that
as it may, he put in occasional appearances here, and read lectures. It
is asserted that he was at the same time occupied with other matters
also, great expectations and desires, which I will now merely indicate.
Notwithstanding the skill which he displayed in his lectures on the
origin of religion, in harmonising the demands of science with the
devout respectability which is indispensable in England, he did not
consider himself qualified for the post of Prussian Minister of Public
Worship. But, after all, it is no new idea that Falk’s inheritance
might be divided between two individuals, and he would probably not
consider it beneath his dignity to accept the Department of Education
(first, perhaps, at Karlsruhe, and then in Berlin). But for this
purpose, of course, Falk must first be got rid of. _Hereditas viventis
non datur._
“A reaction from the East upon the West, from the right bank of the
Rhine upon the left, is understood to have taken place since the winter
of 1874-75. This is said to be manifested in the lively interest
taken in the rights of the French language, which are alleged to be
infringed in the teaching of French and in the teaching of religious
and theological instruction at the girls’ schools in Alsace-Lorraine.
It is related in official circles that in this matter there has been
developed a sort of voluntary system reaching up to the most exalted
authority in the State, and down again to the lowest. It is true that
all these endeavours have, fortunately, been fruitless so far as my
information goes.
“Finally, a journey was made to Rome. Between this incident and the
commencement of the change at Karlsruhe, there must have been a number
of connecting links which I cannot specify. Possibly, although it may
not seem quite credible, one may be allowed to associate with this
change a certain exalted lady, a widow of ripe years, who allowed
herself to be converted to the only True Church by a fascinating
priest, and who now, with the customary zeal of converts, considers
it her duty to promote the restoration of peace with Rome, ignorant
of the fact that Rome will never hear of peace, but only of complete
subjection or of a truce. It may be taken as tolerably certain that
bodily and mental conditions, a feeling of discontent, and numerous
other more interesting visits than those of the two professors,
have helped to place a noble nature in the service of schemes the
significance of which such a nature is less able to appreciate than
others. Those who are acquainted with the circumstances and persons
concerned can easily imagine that in this instance Rome has exercised
its influence, not as in the case of Luther, but rather as in that of
Mortimer, although not with such striking effect, and that its acute
Monsignors knew how to take advantage of their opportunity, even had no
Vienna newspaper given a hint of a similar occurrence in that capital.
It is perhaps fortunate that the peaceful assurances of ‘persons of
high position at the Vatican’ were illustrated on the 12th of March by
the allocution of the Holy Father in favour of a crusade.
“All this is very sad for men of patriotic sentiment, but it will be
all the more welcome in another quarter where similar views have been
entertained and a like influence has been exerted for years past, and
where such assistance ‘in the cause of peace’ will be utilised to the
utmost.”
CHAPTER VI
AT VARZIN AND FRIEDRICHSRUH
At the beginning of June, 1877, I had completed my plans for the
_Gartenlaube_ article. These had, in the interval, undergone a
considerable change, inasmuch as I now proposed to give reminiscences
from my diary during the campaign, and then to add a description of the
houses and estates belonging to the Prince. I wrote to Bucher in Berlin
respecting the visits I proposed to pay to the latter, and on the 6th
of July received from him the following answer: “At the beginning of
August the Prince will go to a watering place for about six weeks. Your
visit should therefore be arranged for the latter half of the month
of September. It would not be advisable to mention the matter now.
Report yourself about a week in advance, addressing yourself not to the
amanuensis who may happen to be at Varzin, but to the Chief personally.”
Seeing from the newspapers in the early part of October that the
Chancellor had returned from Gastein to Varzin, I wrote to him and
begged to be informed whether and when my visit would be agreeable. By
return of post I received the following, dated Varzin October 11th:--
“Dear Sir,--My father has received your friendly letter of
the 10th, for which he returns his best thanks. He has instructed me
to inform you in reply that he will be pleased to see you here in the
course of next week. He begs of you to let him know the time of your
arrival, if possible on the previous day, as otherwise we may not be
at home. Next Sunday or Monday, for example, we propose to drive out
to one of my father’s farms about four (German) miles from here, which
will occupy the whole day.
“With the most profound esteem,
“your devoted
“Count Herbert Bismarck.”
I acted on these suggestions. Before my departure, however, I requested
Bucher to make an appointment for me to see him in Berlin, so that he
might explain to me the customs of the house at Varzin, and the proper
way of behaving there. He replied on the 14th of October: “Owing to
the absence of the Secretary of State I must spend practically the
whole day at No. 76. A meeting there would, however, not be desirable.
As you may perhaps bring back instructions from Varzin, it will be
better that your journey thither should not be known. I will be at the
confectioner’s at the corner of the Leipzigerstrasse and Wilhelmstrasse
on Monday at 4 o’clock.” He had not arrived, however, when I went to
meet him, having been detained by business; but I was able to obtain
from him later on the necessary information.
On the 16th of October, shortly before 1 P.M., I started from
Berlin, first to Stettin, and from there to the little town of Schlawe,
in Further Pomerania, whence at that time one proceeded in the post
cart or in a private conveyance, whereas later on a connection was
established by railway _viâ_ Stolp.
In the period of nine years from the autumn of 1867 to spring 1877 the
Imperial Chancellor spent the greater part of his time at Varzin, from
the budding of the leaves until their fall, and sometimes well into
the winter. It was, therefore, a celebrated place to which the eyes of
the whole nation were directed. It was also to be expected that later
on the Prince would seldom, if ever, go there, as Friedrichsruh, his
estate in the Sachsenwald, was more convenient as a summer resort.
Varzin may accordingly undergo considerable change, and it therefore
seemed to me that it would be well to draw, for future generations, a
picture of it as it then appeared.
On the way to Schlawe, which I reached at 10 o’clock at night, there
was little to note, as I only proposed to occupy myself with the
Chancellor and his immediate surroundings. All that I found worth
recording were some pretty anecdotes. They belonged to Bismarck’s
Storm and Stress period, myths that had gathered in Pomerania about
the Kniephof estate and the “mad squire” who lived there from 1838 on.
The young Fräuleins and their mothers and cousins at the neighbouring
country seats shuddered, while their fathers and uncles shook their
heads and prophesied a horrible end, as they heard of extravagant
drinking bouts, of floods of champagne and porter mixed in “war bowls,”
of furious rides as if the wild huntsman were tearing past, of the
routing up of guests by pistol shots in the middle of the night, and
of all kinds of mischief and wantonness perpetrated in audacious
mockery of traditional usage. The old manor house of Kniephof, not
inappropriately rechristened “Kneiphof” by the boon companions, as
well as by the censors of the Junker (it has long ago been replaced
by a more elegant structure), could doubtless bear witness that a
great many of these stories were true, but also that many of them
were largely the product of imaginative neighbours. The misfortunes
predicted by staid folks have also remained mere fancy. As the world
knows, in spite of all the froth and foam of that period of ferment,
the young wine cleared itself in due time.
The old legends of the “wild Junker,” however, still wander up and
down the country, and one of them took a seat by me in the railway
carriage at a station between Koeslin and Schlawe, in the form of a
sturdy peasant. Among various other stories he told me that Bismarck,
on one occasion, instead of having a rickety old building at Kniephof
removed in the ordinary way, brought it down with cannon shot. A
reader of a critical turn will probably inquire where he could have
obtained possession of this piece of ordnance. I reply with the
counter-question: Whether my honest peasant had not merely heard the
sound though he did not see the shot fired? and whether the popular
legend which speaks through him had not, in the obscure impulses of its
creative activity, confounded the Minister Bismarck with the Junker?
We all dwelt with the latter in an old and rickety house known as the
“Germanic Confederation,” and that, indeed, as it could not be removed
otherwise, he was forced to bring down with the cannon of Königgrätz
(Sadowa).
On the 17th of October, at 9.30 A.M., a cold, wet morning,
which afterwards cleared up, I continued my journey to Varzin in a
hired conveyance. We reached the village in about three hours, and
another few hundred yards along the paved road brought us to the centre
of a group of buildings which formed the principal courtyard of the
Varzin country seat. The postilion wished to stop here. I told him,
however, to drive further on to the inn, in order that I might change
my clothes and send word of my arrival. I found quartered in this
miserable hut some Berlin policemen, who kindly vacated their room for
me, and reported my advent. After a while, their chief, a man with a
long beard, whom I had met at Versailles, came back and said: “His
Serene Highness begs you to come.” I had in the meantime pulled on a
dress-coat which I had brought with me, and now drove back to the door
of the house, where I was received by two servants, who took me and
my travelling bag to a room on the first floor. It was a large and
handsome chamber, divided into a sitting and bedroom by a curtain which
reached to the ceiling.
In a quarter of an hour I was called to lunch, which was laid in a
salon downstairs. Here I met, at first, only Count Herbert, General
Erkert, Geheimer-Regierungsrath Tiedemann, and a Miss Jenny Fatio, a
Frenchwoman from Orb, in West Switzerland, who had been for years in
the Prince’s service, and who now managed the house in the absence of
his wife, who was taking the waters at Toelz.
After a few minutes he himself came, having just returned from his
morning walk. He wore plain clothes, in which I had not previously seen
him--black coat, waistcoat, and trousers, and a white necktie with
blue and red spots. He shook hands, and was very friendly. After he
had sat down and eaten a few mouthfuls he observed: “As I was walking
in the wood and heard your horn, doctor, I thought to myself, that is
certainly some Croat or Magyar who wishes to discuss politics with me,
and come to my assistance with his advice. I was just on the point
of making myself scarce when I remembered that you had written from
Leipzig that you were coming. Once a man came to see me who sent word
that if I would not receive him he would hang himself. My reply was,
that if he must needs do so, I would have the newest and strongest rope
brought down from the garret for his use. He did not get to see me
all the same, and went off again without, so far as I am aware, doing
himself any harm.”
While he drank his milk and black coffee he read the letters, reports,
and telegrams received that morning, and instructed his son as to the
replies, at the same time discussing matters with Tiedemann, who, as
I afterwards learned, acted as kind of second amanuensis, principally
in administrative affairs. The Prince looked fresh and strong, and
seemed also to be in good humour. In reply to my question how Gastein
had agreed with him, he said that up to the present it was highly
satisfactory, and in particular that he slept better than formerly.
“It would have been still better,” he continued, “if a great deal
had not happened between Gastein and here. The next time I have to
go to Gastein, I shall let the King do what he likes afterwards, and
come straight back here, where I have no need to worry myself over
preconceived notions that cannot be altered.” As we stood up, observing
that I was in evening dress, he smiled and said: “Dress clothes!” and
then invited me to accompany him to the new wing that had been added
to the house, and in which he had taken up his own residence. After he
had shown me those rooms, I asked if he had received the “friction”
articles in the _Grenzboten_, and if he was satisfied with them. He
replied: “Yes; only they followed each other too rapidly, and in one
of them you allowed it to be seen too clearly in what quarter you had
received your information.” I expressed my regret, excusing myself by
stating that Dietze’s communication in the _Magdeburger Zeitung_ would
have considerably weakened their effect upon the public if I had passed
it over in silence.
In the afternoon Erkert started for St. Petersburg. After he had gone
the Prince asked me, “Do you ride, doctor?” “I do not fall off, your
Serene Highness,” I said, “and in the East I have repeatedly, for a
fortnight at a time, spent eight to ten hours daily on horseback; but
I am afraid I should not cut too good a figure, and I should not like
to make an exhibition of myself before you.” He then gave orders that I
should be taken over part of his estate in a carriage. He himself and
Count Herbert proceeded on horseback in another direction, the Prince
wearing a soft green-grey felt hat with a very broad brim, a grey
jacket lined with fur, which made him look stouter than he really is,
and a quilted silk vest.
We went to dinner between 5 and 6, and were afterwards joined by the
Councillor of Embassy, von Holstein. The Chief was in high good humour
and very talkative. He first spoke about Moritz von Blankenburg, whom
he described as “my oldest and dearest friend” (I now forget how
his name came up), asserting that he had “acted very imprudently in
the affair with that shabby Diest.” “I had told him,” he said, “in
the course of conversation on the Bodencredit shares, that possibly
Bleichröder, who had the administration of my money, might have bought
some such securities for me on one occasion. I could not really know,
however, as all my surplus income went to Bleichröder, who made all
large payments on my behalf, and acted on his own discretion in these
matters. There would therefore be nothing wrong in it if he made
some money for me without my knowledge in securities of this kind.
Blankenburg had related what I had said as a fact, and Diest made use
of this in Court. Bleichröder ultimately proved from his books that no
such purchase was ever made. That was of course very satisfactory, but
in the meantime Blankenburg’s clumsiness had thrown a temporary slur
upon my good name, and that led to our falling out.”
This reminded him of an attempt that had been made by one Löwenstein
to bribe him after he had been appointed Minister at St. Petersburg
and was about to start for his post. The Prince said: “He was an agent
who worked at the same time for Buol and Manteuffel, spying, carrying
out commissions, &c. He came to me with a letter of introduction from
Buol. On my asking what I could do for him, he said he had come to tell
me how I could do a good business whereby I might make 20,000 thalers
or even more. I replied that I did not speculate, and, moreover, had
no money for that purpose. Oh! I did not need any, I could manage it
in another way. I said I could not follow him--what was I to do? If I
would use my influence in St. Petersburg to bring about good relations
between Russia and Austria. I pretended that I wished to consider the
proposal, but did not trust him. Löwenstein pointed to his letter
of introduction. I considered that insufficient, and wished to have
a promise in writing. The Jew, however, was too sharp for that, and
said the letter was a sufficient guarantee. I then turned rough, and
as he was leaving told him the truth, viz., that I never dreamt of
accepting his offer, and threatened to pitch him down the stairs. He
thereupon took himself off, but not before he had threatened me with
the anger of Austria. His proposal was better appreciated by Manteuffel
and Schleinitz, who doubtless may still be receiving subventions from
Vienna.”
There was then some question of telegraphing to the Crown Prince,
congratulating him on his birthday, the Chief being in favour of doing
so “for form’s sake.” He then added, “I purposely omitted to do that
in his mother’s case--from a feeling of what is due to my personal
honour--(turning to me, who sat at his right) for Augusta’s intrigues
against me still continue, and that is one of the reasons why I have no
wish to return to Berlin.”
Afterwards, at tea, we were joined by the Prince, who spoke on a
variety of subjects, and particularly of his estates and their
relatively poor returns. Apart from the mills, Varzin brought him in
nothing. It was hardly possible to dispose of the grain, as the railway
tariffs for foreign corn were too low. It was just the same with
timber, which realised very little, owing to competition, and even the
neighbourhood of Hamburg to the Sachsenwald was of little use to him at
present. He then spoke about the powder factory which a Würtemberger
had established on a piece of ground belonging to him on the banks of
the Elbe, describing it and the manner in which it was worked. He said
that the Würtemberger paid him an annual rent of 12,000 marks, and
that after a certain number of years the factory would become his, the
Prince’s, property. The lessee was doing a very good business during
the present war, as he was earning 150 per cent.
The time passed in this way up to 11 o’clock, when the Prince, looking
at his watch said, “The gentlemen will excuse a sleepy man,” and went
off to bed. Count Herbert, Holstein and I remained sitting for some
time longer over a glass of grog; and I handed the Count, for his
father, Nos. 1 and 2 of the “Reminiscences,” which had in the meantime
appeared in the _Gartenlaube_, after the Chief had seen them in proof,
made a few alterations, and struck out about a dozen lines.
On Thursday, the 18th of October, we had bright sunshine in the
morning, then rain, and finally, towards 10 o’clock, a heavy fall of
snow, which came down in thick flakes, covering the ground three inches
deep in less than half an hour. I thus had an opportunity of seeing
Varzin in its winter dress.
When the snow had stopped I inspected the exterior of the house and the
buildings annexed to it, taking a walk round the whole premises.
Internally as well as externally, there is no pretension, no love of
luxury about the residence of the Chancellor and his family, though
it is at the same time pleasant and comfortable throughout. It is the
house of a prosperous country gentleman, rather than the château of a
Prince. The floors, it is true, are almost all inlaid, but the ceilings
of the smaller rooms are simply whitewashed. There are no luxurious
carpets, portières or curtains, or artistic carving, or clocks of great
value. Gilt chairs covered with silk, marble tables and consoles are
only to be found in the reception-rooms and in the apartment of the
Princess. There are very few oil paintings, but on the other hand,
there are numerous comfortable niches affording a pleasant prospect
from the windows. Nearly all the sitting-rooms are well supplied
with cushioned seats, rocking-chairs, divans and sofas, and all have
earthenware stoves with chimney-pieces. These are heated on the first
approach of even moderately cool weather, as the Prince--like all
nervous people--is fond of warmth, which is probably necessary for his
health. The autumn here is also considerably colder than in Central
Germany.
Having returned to the ground floor, let us first visit the
dining-room. This is of medium size. The wall-paper shows a design in
brown and dark blue arabesques on a grey-blue ground. The furniture
consists of a yellow table over which hangs a lamp with a shade and
globe in opalescent glass; a carpet with a design in black and red; a
leather armchair, in which the Prince presides at dinner; about a dozen
plain yellow cane-bottom chairs; two ancient-looking cupboards in dark
oak, and a buffet of the same material. An owl perched on the corner of
one cupboard, and another bird of prey that occupies a similar position
on the second, watch the guests at the table with their glassy eyes. On
the wall opposite the two windows hang a number of framed lithographs
of scenes in the North American prairies.
Dinner was served here at 5 to 6 o’clock in the evening, and during my
stay at Varzin it usually lasted till after 7, the conversation being
for the most part very lively, and sometimes of memorable interest.
At the end of the dinner the Prince used to feed his dogs with his
own hands, giving them cooked meat from a plate. If I confess that
the tall figure in the armchair at the head of the table and the two
big dogs on the right and left with their eyes fixed upon his face
recalled to my mind pictures which I had seen of the god Odin and his
two wolves, I shall possibly incur the censure of severe critics with
“masculine souls” and hyper-serious (or hyper-comical) self-conceit,
who are accustomed to fling about such polite terms as “flunkeyism” and
so forth. Their disapproval will disturb or affect me as little as the
chatter of our literary financiers in the less distinguished organs of
the daily press about my views of the Chancellor. First plunder, and
then abuse--such is their wont. Let them clap their hands or hiss, it
will always remain a matter of complete indifference to me!
So far as possible nothing was consumed at table that was not bred,
grown or shot on the property. The Prince himself said to me one
evening: “Almost everything that is eaten here comes from my estates,
including Schönhausen--meat, fowl, game and fish, the vegetables, the
artichokes, which of course do not thrive so well here as in the south,
the peaches, the walnuts and the hazel nuts. But I must occasionally
buy a sheep from the farmers, and my household is not large enough for
me to kill an ox. It is only Dietze who can do that, as he employs so
many people in his distillery and sugar factory, and feeds them.” It is
scarcely necessary to add that the cellar at Varzin is well stocked.
We now continue our stroll through the house. Passing through the
folding doors in the wall with the pictures of prairie life we enter
the drawing-room, which is about the same size as the dining-room.
The wall-paper, which is surrounded by a narrow gold border, shows a
flowered design of a conventional pattern, in reddish-brown and gold
upon a fawn-coloured ground. The furniture consists of tables with
marble tops and gilt legs, cushioned chairs and divans covered in
bright red silk, a large mirror in a gold frame, and a marble console.
On the latter stands a lamp with a bronze figure of one of the soldiers
that stormed the Danish redoubts at Düppel in Schleswig, a present from
the King, and two rose-coloured porcelain vases encircled by white
serpents. In a corner stands a large vase in blue and gold porcelain,
with a half-length picture of the Emperor William, who presented it to
the Prince on the occasion of his silver wedding. In another corner
there is a terra-cotta statue of the Emperor. On the walls are a few
oil paintings, a woodland scene from the Varzin district, a view of
Gastein, two types of female beauty, an incident of the battle of Mars
la Tour, and near it a full-length figure of a soldier of the last
century, in a yellowish-white uniform, cuirass, three-cornered hat and
jack boots, holding a musket in his hand. If I rightly understood,
this is a great grandfather of the Chancellor’s, who met his death at
Czaslau as a colonel of dragoons. In the corner of the breakfast- and
billiard-room, where the conservatory joins on to the verandah, there
is a bronze statue, a copy of Rand’s goddess of victory, also presented
by the old Emperor.
I do not know how it came to pass that on seeing this statue I thought
less of its beauty than of an instance of the Prince’s graciousness. In
the summer of 1871, when the triumphal procession of the German army
passed the stand that had been erected in the Königgrätzer Strasse
against the wall of the garden attached to the Foreign Office for the
officials of the Ministry, the Imperial Chancellor looked up to us as
he was riding by, and taking one of three laurel wreaths that were
hanging on the pommel of his saddle, threw it across to us.
Another work of art in the room also evoked strange memories. On
the wall opposite the windows in a niche between the two stoves, a
bright-coloured porcelain vase on a pedestal draped in red attracts
the eye. It is about four or five feet high. The front shows a seated
female figure, a Germania, perhaps, and the back some trophies in gold.
As the Prince himself explained, this figure has a history with a
certain symbolic significance. It was presented to the Chancellor in
1870, having been at first intended for Hardenberg, for some reason or
through some dispensation of fate to whom it was never given. Looked
at more closely, the trophies turned out to be French arms captured in
the war of liberation from 1813 to 1815. The female figure at that time
represented Borussia.
Near the second stove against the wall by which this historic vase
stands, and opposite one end of the billiard table, begins a large
recess, three sides of which are occupied by a rather lengthy divan,
while opposite to it stands a piano of the Princess, who has the
reputation of being an excellent player. During my stay the Chancellor
was accustomed to seat himself in a large easy chair when taking his
coffee, which was served immediately after dinner, and lighting one of
his long student’s pipes, while another was held ready in reserve, he
smoked and conversed with his guests, making--as was almost always the
case on such occasions--many memorable remarks and statements. I will
here reproduce some of these which I noted down before going to bed on
the evenings upon which they were made.
On the 18th of October, on my remarking that one of his first services
had been to keep the King from attending the Congress of Princes at
Frankfurt, the Chancellor’s reply agreed in all important particulars
with the statement he made to us during the campaign in France. “Yes,”
he said, “that was a difficult task. The Most Gracious insisted on
going (to Frankfurt) at any cost; a crowned head, the King of Saxony,
had come to him as a messenger, and there was now no help for it. I
managed to talk him out of the idea, but with the greatest difficulty,
and he was quite nervous about it. I said to Beust, however, ‘If you
do not leave us in peace now, I will send to Rastatt for a detachment
and post a sentry outside the King’s door, who will let no one in.’”
I then turned the conversation to the portraits in the Chief’s study
in Berlin, and he related first how he came into possession of that
of King Victor Emmanuel. When the later visited Berlin he brought as
a present for him, the Chancellor, a snuff-box set with diamonds, but
first made inquiry as to whether he would be prepared to accept it.
“Of course I declined,” he continued, “as if it had become known it
would have looked like bribery. The snuff-box, with the brilliants,
was believed to be worth about fifty thousand francs. He then merely
gave me a small picture, writing his name and a few friendly words
under it. The King of Bavaria, however, is grateful to me for having
saved him from a loss of territory in 1866. Our most gracious master
would insist upon having Ansbach and Bayreuth, because they had been
in the possession of his ancestors. I said to him that the people
there had long since forgotten that, and had grown accustomed to
the union with Bavaria. The King wished that each (of the defeated
German Princes) should cede a slice of territory--as a punishment.
He wanted to play the part of divine justice. I remarked to him that
that would not do, it must be left to God, and that no more territory
should be taken than was required. He then wanted to take Northern
Bohemia--Reichenberg--Karlsbad--or Austrian Silesia from Austria, and,
on military grounds, to take Lausitz from Saxony. I said, however, that
either the whole country should be kept, or, if that was impossible,
none of it. For a long time he was not at all disposed to agree to
this. Saxony owes her preservation to the Austrians, who for once
behaved in a decent way. The Ultramontane sentiments at Court, and
the friendship between the Emperor Francis Joseph and the then Crown
Prince Albert doubtless also contributed to this result. But I am
not to blame for the terms of peace. At that time I lay dangerously
ill at Putbus. Savigny is responsible, having, as an Ultramontane,
spared the Ultramontane Dresden Court as much as he possibly could,
and in particular allowed them more military independence than was
desirable. When I heard roughly what had been agreed I offered him my
congratulations, but when I read the paragraphs more closely I withdrew
them.”
We then spoke of the Bohemian campaign, and in the course of the
conversation the Chief, among other things, recalled the following
characteristic episodes: “In the council of war at Nikolsburg, which
was held in my room, the others wished to continue the campaign,
proceeding right into Hungary. I was, however, against this. The
cholera, the Hungarian steppes, the questionable change of front, as
well as political and other considerations, gave me pause. But they
held to their plan, and it was in vain that I spoke once more against
it. I then left them and went into the bedroom, which was only divided
from where they sat by a wooden partition, closed the door and threw
myself on the bed, where I sobbed aloud from nervous excitement. After
a while they became quite silent in the other room, and their plan
was subsequently dropped. When it was feared that the French would
intervene, Moltke wished to retire to the Elbe, let the Austrians be,
and turn upon the French, who were then weak. I convinced him, however,
that that would be a mistake, as 100,000 South Germans, with at least
25,000 red-breeches, might prove extremely inconvenient to us.”
The Imperial Chancellor is regarded as a man of iron character, whose
self-confidence never fails. Many will think that he must look back
upon his deeds and creations with something of the feeling with which
God the Father on the seventh day regarded the world He had made. I am
not disposed to question that. But he has also softer moments--moments
of apparent or real dissatisfaction with his achievements and his
fate--a vein of melancholy or, perhaps we should say, pensive
sentiment, that finds expression as _Weltschmerz_. He sometimes recalls
Achilles in his tent, sometimes Solomon, exclaiming: “Then I looked on
all the works that my hands had wrought, and on the labour that I had
laboured to do: and, behold, all was vanity and vexation of spirit,
and there was no profit under the sun.” Many of these expressions also
recall the spirit in which Hamlet sadly meditates:--
“How weary, stale, flat and unprofitable
Seem to me all the uses of this world!
Fye on’t! O fye! ’Tis an unweeded garden
That grows to seed: things rank and gross in nature
Possess it merely.”
Perhaps it is some mystic change in his spirit, or possibly it may be
an affection of the nerves, arising from bodily conditions such as
over-excitement and fatigue.
Thus on Sunday, the 21st of October, while seated in the position
I have already described, and after gazing for a while into space,
he complained to us that he had had little pleasure or satisfaction
from his political life. He had made no one happy thereby, neither
himself, nor his family, nor others. We protested, but he continued as
follows:--
“There is no doubt, however, that I have caused unhappiness to great
numbers. But for me three great wars would not have taken place, eighty
thousand men would not have been killed and would not now be mourned
by parents, brothers, sisters, and widows.” “And sweethearts,” I
added, somewhat prosaically and inconsiderately. “And sweethearts,” he
repeated. “I have settled that with God, however. But I have had little
if any pleasure from all that I have done, while on the other hand I
have had a great deal of worry, anxiety, and trouble,” a theme upon
which he then dwelt at some length.
We kept silent, and I was greatly surprised. I afterwards heard from
Holstein and Bucher that during the last few years he frequently
expressed himself in a similar strain. But I would repeat that such
utterances can surely be but symptoms of a temporary and sentimental
estimate of his mission and success. He is nevertheless a man of deep
feeling, as Fräulein Jenny told me on the morning after this outburst
that the “tears ran down his cheeks” when he first spoke of his falling
out with Moritz von Blankenburg.... The principal room in the new
building is a large hexagonal chamber, used by the Chancellor when he
is working by himself. Here also the prevailing characteristic of the
arrangements is a refined simplicity. The most prominent object in the
room is a huge fireplace, nearly four metres in width and about five
in height. It consists of green glazed earthenware, and, according
to the Prince, was manufactured at the Friedenthal Pottery Works at
Gussmansdorf in Silesia. It is adorned on both sides with fluted
columns, over which two small coats of arms have been placed. In the
middle of the chimney piece appears the motto: “In trinitate robur”;
and over this, in a yellow field, the eagle of the new German Empire;
while the whole is surmounted by a white plaster bust of the Emperor
William. The cornice upon which it rests is supported upon each side
by eagles on laurel branches which form part of the chimney piece
itself. The arms and motto have a history of their own. The former are
the escutcheons of Alsace and Lorraine. When the Imperial Chancellor
was raised to the rank of Prince, the Emperor thought of having these
emblems embodied in his new arms. “But,” as the Prince informed me
while standing before this chimney piece, “I considered the title of
Duke of Lorraine too grand for me. His Majesty then wished to put
the eagle in my escutcheon. But that too seemed to me a questionable
measure. I feared that the eagle might devour my clover. A way out of
the difficulty was then found by giving me supporters with the banners
of Alsace and Lorraine.”
The motto, on the other hand, dates from an earlier period, though
it is not that of the Bismarcks. When Bismarck was at Frankfurt as
Minister to the Diet, the King of Denmark invested him with the Grand
Cross of the Danebrog. Now, it is customary to have the names and
arms of the holders of this decoration set up in the Cathedral at
Copenhagen, with a device which each member is to select for himself.
“I then pitched upon this one, ‘In trinitate robur,’”--said the
Chancellor “the oak in the trefoil, the old blazon of our family.” “And
‘my trust is in the Triune God’” I suggested. “Quite right, I meant it
so,” he added, thus confirming my suggestion in a friendly but serious
tone.
Near the fire, in which huge beech logs splutter and blaze, stand a
number of high cushioned chairs. In the next wall is a door which opens
into the Chancellor’s bedroom. Between this and the window there is
a glass case with arms and antiquities, its most noteworthy contents
being, to my mind, a collection of prehistoric lance heads and a heavy
gold arm ring of spiral form with a green patina, which had been found
in a barrow; a rifled pistol with which the Prince, while he was still
a Junker, performed all sorts of miracles of marksmanship; a hunting
knife which used to accompany him when out bear hunting in Russia,
and two large Japanese Daimio swords of the finest steel, with which
the Chancellor was invested by the Mikado in the year 1872--invested,
inasmuch as these took the place of the decorations bestowed by other
potentates upon those whom they desire to honour. Near the swords lay
a scimitar in a violet velvet sheath. The Prince took it out and drew
it from its cover. It was a genuine Damascus blade. “This was presented
to me by the Bey of Tunis,” he said. “It is believed to be a fine old
weapon of the time of the Crusades. I have also received an Order from
him, but not the right one. He sent two, one for the Emperor and the
other for me. The one was set with brilliants as large as hazel nuts,
the other was common tinsel. Curiously enough he had not said to whom
they should be given. I mentioned it to my gracious master, and asked
what he thought. He said that of course the one with the brilliants was
for him. It was doubtless worth some 50,000 thalers.”
The large window that now follows has double curtains--white on the
outside, and lined with the same flowered chintz with which the
furniture in the room is covered. In this bay window stand a walnut
writing-table, inlaid with designs in ivory, and a small sofa and easy
chair; while on the wall hangs a plan of Varzin and of the estates
attached thereto. This is said to be one of the Chief’s favourite
haunts. It is easy to believe it, as it offers a pleasant prospect--a
pond in the foreground, on one side a corner of the park with two fine
trees, an oak and a beech, standing alone, and under them a bench which
invites to rest, while in the background a stretch of rising arable
land, which in summer delights the eye with waving fields of corn,
leads to dark wooded heights beyond.
Opposite the bay window, and with its back turned towards it, there
is a large sofa with a number of cushions. Among them is one of light
blue velvet, on which the following is embroidered in silver thread:
“Exodus xxxiii. 12; Psalms xviii. 28.” Beneath this inscription is a
crown, and a monogram formed of the letters O, B and E, with the date
“28 July, 1847-1872.” It is a gift presented to the Chancellor on his
silver wedding. As I can hardly expect all my gentle readers to have a
Bible at hand, I quote the passages referred to: “And Moses said unto
the Lord, See, thou sayest unto me, Bring up this people: and thou hast
not let me know whom thou wilt send with me. Yet thou hast said, I know
thee by name, and thou hast found grace in my sight.” “For thou wilt
light my candle: the Lord my God will enlighten my darkness.”
A narrow dark passage leads from the Chancellor’s bedroom, which also
opens on to the park, down a few steps on the right to the bathroom.
On the same side, through a mysterious little doorway at the head of
a narrow winding staircase, the eye loses itself in the darkness of
what seems to be a bottomless abyss. Inspired by the spirit of George
Louis Hesekiel, I suggested “The dungeon keep?” The Prince smiled as
he replied, “Only a postern gate.” And he then explained it enables him
to retreat unobserved when he is threatened with tiresome visits. The
prospect of such visits suggested the idea of providing an escape when
the house was being built. “When unwelcome acquaintances make their
appearance,” he said, “I slip out here, and bring myself in safety to a
certain bench in the park, where I wait till I am told that the danger
is over. We have named this door after Senfft-Pilsach, a loquacious
bore; but you must not publish that, as he is still living.” The length
of this subterranean passage, the exit from it, and the place of safety
to which the pursued makes his escape, must remain untold so long as
the Prince spends part of his time at Varzin, as otherwise the object
of the contrivance would be frustrated. The particulars now given are
intended to warn those who may consider this contrivance to be directed
against them.
I now continue the notes of my stay at Varzin....
_Friday, October 19th._--At lunch while the Chief was reading his
letters and despatches, he mentioned to us among other things that
his wife had written to him from Toelz that King Lewis had recently
sent her a magnificent bouquet, at least three-quarters of a metre in
diameter. We learnt at the same time that the Ruler of all the Bavarias
still sends the Chancellor letters, expressing his anxiety about the
continued existence of his country by the side of or incorporated with
the German Empire. Hermann von Arnim was then mentioned, and the Chief
said: “Yes, the Commercial Court at Leipzig (sitting as a Disciplinary
Court) has had the case before it for an age without coming to any
decision, although he does not deny the authorship (of the insulting
pamphlet against the Prince, which he published whilst holding an
appointment at the Foreign Office). That, however, is conceivable. Pape
(the President of the Court at Leipzig), now that he feels himself
safe in harbour, displays his Westphalian Ultramontanism. Formerly
he affected great loyalty to the Empire, and was a stout radical.”
The Prince’s remarks on the Russian campaign against Turkey were also
deserving of notice. On mention being made of the unfavourable turn
which things had taken for Russia, he said: “If I were the Emperor
Alexander I should now withdraw my troops to the left bank of the
Danube and remain there for the winter, at the same time announcing
in a manifesto to the Powers that if necessary I should continue the
war for seven years, even if I were obliged in the end to carry it on
with peasants armed with pitchforks and flails. I could depend upon my
Russians. Next spring I should seize a few of the large fortifications
on the Danube and then gradually push forward.”
In the evening the Prince had four other guests in addition to Holstein
and myself, Tiedemann having departed in the meantime. These were
_Regierungspräsident_ von Auerswald, a landed proprietor, a high Post
Office official from Köslin, and the Post and Telegraph clerk from
Wussow. Among other things we drank some Rhine wine of the year 1811,
which came from Borchard’s in Berlin. In conversation with the Köslin
gentlemen the Chief spoke chiefly of a redistribution of districts in
Pomerania--a subject which I did not understand, with the result that
I failed to remember what was said. He then mentioned that in a short
time he would probably make similar arrangements in the Sachsenwald to
those which now existed at Varzin, as Friedrichsruh was nearer Berlin
and the climate there was milder than that of Further Pomerania, while
his private interests and business there were also of more importance.
He then again complained of the small returns he received from Varzin.
In the course of the subsequent conversation he remarked: “I have a
mind to get the King to appoint me Aide-de-Camp General. That would
be quite constitutional, and I should exercise more influence in that
position than as Minister. How was it under Frederick William IV.? At
that time Manteuffel could do nothing against the will of Gerlach, who
was Aide-de-Camp General.”
While taking our coffee after the Köslin gentlemen had left, the Chief
gave a somewhat different version to that which he related at Ferrières
of the cigar incident at Frankfurt. He said: “It was in the Military
Commission. At first only Buol smoked. Then one day I pulled a cigar
out of my case, and asked him to give me a light. With a look of
surprise at my audacity he gave it to me, to the profound astonishment
of the other Powers. The incident was reported to the various Courts
and also to Berlin. Then followed an inquiry from the late King, who
did not smoke himself, and probably did not appreciate the thing.
Thereupon the two Great Powers alone smoked for perhaps six months.
Then suddenly Bavaria also appeared with a cigar, and after a time
Saxony followed suit. Finally, Würtemberg also felt it necessary not to
remain behind, but this was obviously compulsory sacrifice to dignity,
for he puffed his yellow weed with an air of surly determination, and
afterwards laid it down half smoked. It was only Hesse-Darmstadt that
abstained altogether, probably not feeling equal to such competition.”
At tea, which was served in the Princess’s room, the Prince suddenly
stood up, went to his wife’s writing-table, and began to scribble away
on a large sheet of paper. He then came to me, handed me the writing,
and said, “There, but take care, it is still wet.” It was the letter
of introduction to Schönhausen and Friedrichsruh which I had asked
for on the previous afternoon, as I wished to start next morning. I
was very pleased, and thanked him. “I find it very difficult to write
with a pen,” he said; “but then you wished to have it in my own hand.”
“All the more honour for me, your Serene Highness,” I replied. “Now I
have the souvenir I desire.” “But why do you wish to leave so soon?”
he said. “Stay a little longer. You are not at all in the way, and you
should see a little more of Varzin.” I thanked him and said I should be
delighted to remain a day or two longer, as I was only too happy to be
near him. He said: “But you must allow me sometimes to go out walking
or riding alone.”
_Saturday, October 20th._--The snow still lies to a considerable depth
about the house and grounds, but it is thawing. In the morning I
took another turn through the park, going farther and in a different
direction. Back to lunch early, and finding only Fräulein Fatio, had
a chat with her. She said the Prince was very pleased at my visit.
She related part of her own biography, and gave me some particulars
of the Princess, who is very simple in her habits, dresses herself,
and is a diligent housekeeper, &c. Her mother was greatly opposed to
her marriage with Bismarck, and said one day she would rather see her
daughter married to a swineherd than to him. She then spoke of the
Countess Marie, who, according to her account, was very musical, but
did not play as well as her mother. She had also other accomplishments,
but was somewhat phlegmatic, and neglected many things, as, for
instance, languages. But she could be extremely energetic when she took
anything into her head. For example, once when they refused to let her
have the carriage in which she was accustomed to drive to the future
mother-in-law’s, she immediately jumped into a cab.
After lunch another run through the park as far as the large pond on
the edge of the big clearing. After that an excursion with Holstein
beyond the clearing and into the beechwood on the Schwarzenberg. The
Baron told me that at present the Chief was not on good terms with the
King, but that, on the other hand, he was on an excellent footing with
the Crown Prince and also with the Princess. It was desirable that
this should continue, as the Prince intended to resign on the death
of the Emperor. He did not believe the Chancellor’s statement that he
would then return as the Leader of the Opposition was meant seriously.
If he ever saw one stone after another of the structure he had raised
crumbling away he would soon die of grief--_quod Deus bene vertat!_
On our return we learnt that the Chief had intended to take a drive
with us. At dinner we mentioned where we had been, and I praised
the park for its great extent and variety. The Prince said: “It is
certainly beautiful, and formerly it was even larger than it is now.
My predecessor could wander for seven or eight miles through his own
forests, mostly deciduous trees. He had those great clearings made and
turned into arable land, as it was believed that where beeches had
grown the soil would prove good. But the wind dried up the thin layer
of mould and blew it away, and I am now replanting it.”
He then spoke of the Chorow farm, which Count Blumenthal had bought
“out of the heart of the estate,” and which had now been repurchased by
him. “I afterwards let it,” he said, “to the woman who had previously
farmed it. She is also one of those by whose death I should benefit,
as I am receiving a thousand thalers less rent from her than I could
get if she died and I were no longer bound to her, as I have been for
fourteen years.”
Of his further remarks during dinner the following are of special
interest. We were talking of the result of the war with France, and
the Chief said: “When I was made Prince, the King wished to put Alsace
and Lorraine into my armorial bearings. I should have preferred
Schleswig-Holstein, as that is the diplomatic campaign of which I am
most proud.” Holstein asked: “You wished that from the beginning?”
“Yes, certainly,” replied the Prince, “immediately after the death
of the King of Denmark. But it was difficult. Everything was against
me--the Crown Prince and Princess on account of the relationship, the
King himself at first and, indeed, for a long time, Austria, the small
German States, and the English, who grudged us such an acquisition.
It would have been possible to arrange matters with Napoleon,--he
thought he could place us under an obligation to him in that way. And
finally at home the Liberals were opposed to it, suddenly discovering
the legitimacy of princely rights--but that was only their hatred and
envy of me--and the Schleswig-Holsteiners themselves would not hear of
it either. All these, and I know not who else besides. At that time
we had a sitting of the Council of State, at which I made one of the
longest speeches of which I ever delivered myself, and said a great
deal that to my audience must have seemed unheard of and impossible.
I pointed out to the King, for instance, that all his predecessors,
with the exception of his late brother, had added to their territories,
and asked him whether he wished to follow that brother’s example. To
judge from the amazement depicted on their faces they evidently thought
I had made too free with the bottle that morning. Costenoble drew up
the protocol, and when I looked through it afterwards I found that the
passages in which I had expressed myself most clearly and forcibly
were omitted. They contained precisely my best arguments. I called his
attention to this and protested. Yes, he said, that was so, but he
thought I should be glad if he left it out. I replied, ‘Not at all. You
must have thought, I suppose, that I had taken a little too much. But I
insist upon all that I said appearing exactly as I said it.’”
It is true, the Minister observed, as we were afterwards talking of
our adventures in France, that he has no longer a good memory, except
for matters of business. (“If I have read anything in a despatch or
elsewhere in the course of business, I remember it,” he said, “but
in other things I am not sure of myself.”) The foregoing statement,
however, agrees in all important particulars with what he told me at
Reims on the 11th of September, 1870, about those events.
Including the time spent over our coffee in the billiard-room, this
sitting was an exceptionally long one. We sat together for nearly two
and a half hours, and the Prince spoke on a great number of interesting
topics, especially political movements, events, and personages. He
described exhaustively the way in which Manteuffel (the Minister, not
the general) tried to make money on the Stock Exchange, utilising
his official position for that purpose. “The Embassies had to send
him the Bourse quotations or something of that kind, extracts,
reports on special securities, which he received from the telegraph
office with the despatches earlier than the bankers. He then got his
agent--Löwenstein, who tried to bribe me on behalf of Buol--to make use
of this information without delay. He also wished to employ me in these
manœuvres when I was at Frankfurt, but I took no part in them.” He then
repeated his former statement that Manteuffel was bribed by foreign
Governments, and asserted the same of Schleinitz, whom he had always
regarded with disgust, as an individual who was physically unclean,
with dirty linen, a face that was never properly washed, “the grease
oozing out of his pores.” Speaking of the corruptibility of mankind,
he suspected that there were also some rotten fish of that description
on the press. He said: “I have never had any doubt so far as Brass is
concerned. He took whatever was offered to him by friend and foe. And
doubtless the _Kölnische Zeitung_ was not much better. It was in favour
of the Danes because the English were on their side; and Kruse, who was
formerly a private tutor at Palmerston’s, was drawing a pension from
Broadlands. Now it was in favour of the Turks, because Oppenheim had
Turkish securities which he wished to unload on to other people.”
At tea he spoke again of the “conflict” and his conversation with
the King at that time, which he had related to me on my last visit
to him in Berlin. He now said: “During the ‘conflict’ they thought
out a variety of measures which they intended to take against me--the
scaffold, or at least the confiscation of my property. I consequently
raised as much money as I possibly could upon my estates. I was then
called the Prussian Strafford--you remember Parliament condemned him
to the block in the Revolution of 1641. The King was also afraid of
being beheaded--the women had talked him into it at Baden. He wished to
abdicate if he could not find any one who would govern with him. When I
went to meet him on the railway he was quite discouraged and depressed.
At length he asked me: ‘But what if they were to send us both to the
scaffold?’ At first I merely said, ‘What then?’ but I afterwards added,
‘You are thinking of Louis XVI., but I would remind you of Charles I.
He died with honour, at all events.’ That produced a very sobering
effect upon him. I had touched his conscience as an officer.”
From this incident he came to speak of the behaviour of the King at
Ems in presence of the attacks of Benedetti, and said: “I soon noticed
that he was beginning to take fright and was ready to pocket another
Olmütz. I was at that time in Varzin, and as I drove through Wussow, on
the way to Berlin, the Pastor stood outside his house and saluted me
as I passed. I described a sabre cut in the air to show that we meant
business. But the news in Berlin was by no means good. I accordingly
telegraphed to him (the King) that I requested my dismissal from office
if he received Benedetti again. No answer came, and I telegraphed once
more that if he had now received Benedetti I should regard it as an
acceptance of my resignation and return to Varzin. Then came a telegram
of two hundred lines (doubtless words) from Abeken. I thereupon invited
Moltke and Roon to a dinner of three, and told them how the matter
stood. Roon was beside himself, and so was Moltke. I asked if we were
quite prepared for such a war. He replied that so far as it was humanly
possible to foresee we might hope for victory. I then took the two
hundred lines, and, without altering a word of the King’s, reduced
them to twenty, which I read over to them. They said it would do in
that form. I then had it sent to all our Embassies, with the exception
of Paris, of course, and got it inserted in the Berlin papers. And it
really did do. The French took it excessively ill.”
_Sunday, October 21st._--A beautiful bright day. The snow has
disappeared. At lunch the Chief, while reading through despatches and
telegrams as usual, said to Holstein: “Write that it would be desirable
for the press to let it be understood that it is intended, in case of a
French _coup d’état_, to recommend the Emperor to convoke the Reichstag
for the consideration of such eventualities as may then arise.”
Towards 12 o’clock there appeared before the door a carriage for
Holstein and myself, and two saddle horses for the Chancellor and his
son. We were to make an excursion to the south-eastern part of the
estate towards the long chain of hills which I noticed on the horizon
as I drove here from Schlawe. We first drove through a beech wood, then
through fields and meadows, afterwards through more beeches with some
marshy ground, and finally, after crossing old and new fir plantations,
we reached a bare height in the neighbourhood of Annenhof, the ranger’s
house. From this point it is possible to see the château of Crangen
with its four towers and blue lake nestling in the valley beneath:
while on turning to the other side one has a view of the entire estate
of Varzin. On my saying that this was quite a magnificent little realm,
the Prince replied: “Why, yes. If I had bought Varzin merely for riding
and driving it would have been a good acquisition; but as it is--potato
land!”
It was 4 o’clock when we got back from Annenhof to Varzin. The proofs
of No. 3 of the “Reminiscences” had in the meantime been received from
Kiel. After a while the Chief called me to his room and explained some
of the corrections he had made. Among other things he had struck out
some of the opinions he had expressed with regard to Radowitz, and the
passage about the six shots and the six cartridges in reserve of which
he had spoken in his account of the battle of Gravelotte. “I certainly
said that,” he observed, “and the remarks about Radowitz are also quite
accurate. But please omit them all the same. His son is now serving
under me.”
As I wished to leave next morning I took this opportunity of thanking
him for having allowed me to spend some days with him, which had
been a source of great happiness to me. He reached me his hand and
said: “I hope we have not seen each other for the last time. I have
a great regard for honourable men.” “You have placed a great deal of
confidence in me,” I replied, “and I beg of you to continue to do so,
and to remember me should there be anything to do in the press that
ought not to be generally known.” I also added: “Your Serene Highness
has imparted to me a great number of important facts. These must all
be kept secret for the present, but nevertheless will not be lost for
the future. You make history, but do not write any, perhaps not even
memoirs.[18] Bucher also seems to have made no notes.” He was silent.
Then he spoke of the power of the press, which had done a great deal
of harm. “It was the cause of the last three wars,” he said, “the
Danish press forced the King and the Government to annex Schleswig; the
Austrian and South German press agitated against us; and the French
press contributed to the prolongation of the campaign in France.”
I broached another subject. “Your Serene Highness believed once at
Versailles that you knew how long you would live. You mentioned various
figures, seven and nine, but I cannot now remember the year. I fancy
it was seventy-six--the year of your life, I mean.” “Seventy-one,” he
replied; “but God alone knows that.”
When dinner was announced he let me go in front of him, and as he
walked behind patted me a couple of times on the back, caressingly,
evidently in the humour in which he was at Ferrières, when he called me
“Büschlein,” his little Busch.
Of what he said this evening at dinner and afterwards over our coffee I
have only retained one delightful anecdote. Once upon a time the Junker
of Kniephof had a visit from a lieutenant of hussars who was about to
call upon an uncle in the neighbourhood. The uncle was particularly
punctilious in the matter of etiquette and good manners, and he was
next day to give an entertainment that would be attended by a number of
guests of similar character and opinions. Overnight Bismarck induced
the lieutenant to drink freely, and primed him so well with good liquor
(if I remember rightly it was “Kriegsbohle”--war-bowl--composed of
champagne and porter) that in the end he had considerably more than
he could carry. Next morning Bismarck drove his guest to his uncle’s
country-house in a car without springs. The roads were not good, the
rain having transformed them into seas of mud, so that the two young
gentlemen were badly bespattered when they arrived, while in addition
to this the lieutenant was decidedly sea-sick. As they entered the
drawing-room, the company of some forty persons (the ladies _en grande
toilette_, the gentlemen in evening dress) regarded them with mixed
amazement and disgust. The hussar presently disappeared. Bismarck,
however, sat down to table with an air of careless gaiety, in spite
of the evident disgust which the good people manifested, and acted as
if there were nothing in his appearance that anybody could object to.
People wondered at the time how it was he failed to have any idea of
the unpleasant impression he had made.
I left Varzin on Monday morning at 11 o’clock, again taking the post to
Schlawe, proceeding thence by rail to Berlin and to Schönhausen.
Before I ask the reader to accompany me further, I wish to make a
few more remarks on the Varzin estate which I noted down on various
occasions from statements made by the Imperial Chancellor. First, a
few words as to its history, and then as to the manner in which it is
administered and governed by its owner, and as to the life he led there
in other respects, in 1877, and shortly before and after that year.
In former times Varzin formed part of a much larger and more valuable
group of estates, some of which were originally held by the Zitzewitz
family, the greater portion, however, being in the possession of
the Counts Podewils, who, up to the year 1805, were large landed
proprietors here. Tradition has it that this old family of Pomeranian
nobles obtained the nucleus of their possessions through an act of
bravery. According to an account given to us by the Chancellor, a Duke
of Pomerania was attacked by Saracen pirates during a pilgrimage to the
Holy Land. They had boarded his ship, and one of them was on the point
of making an end of the Duke, when the faithful Ritter von Podewils
rushed from the kitchen, spit in hand, and transfixed the heathen
with the weapon in question. He was then told that he might ask a
favour, and he begged to be invested with the land surrounding Crangen
Castle (about four kilometres from Varzin as the crow flies), in the
vicinity of which, at that time, there was a great deal of forest and
game. Subsequently this estate was considerably enlarged, _per fas et
nefas_, by the Counts Podewils, who repeatedly held the helm of State,
and were consequently powerful and influential. At the commencement
of the present century, however, the estate, which had dwindled away
again, passed into the possession of Herr von Blumenthal, who, in
1814, received the title of Count. The estate, further reduced in the
interval by the sale of Chorow, was purchased from a member of this
family by the Imperial Chancellor in the spring of 1867, out of the
national grant bestowed upon him by the Prussian Diet for his services
in the reorganisation of German affairs.
At that time the property, the area of which had been reduced from
over 100,000 acres to something more than a fifth of that extent,
included, in addition to Varzin, the estates of Wussow, Pudiger, and
Misdow, together with the farm manor of Charlottenthal. Since then
the Prince has been at pains to gradually extend it by purchase. In
1868 he acquired the Selitz estate, and in 1874 he bought back Chorow,
which had been sold by his predecessor, so that the total extent of his
landed property here, at the present time, is some 30,000 acres.
But the Prince has not only added to his little realm, but he has also
been an active and circumspect reformer. He always was and still
is a capable landlord, displaying in agricultural pursuits the same
qualities which have marked his creative work in politics. As his early
management of Kniephof showed, in spite of youthful excesses, Bismarck
always understood how to make a neglected estate prosper, and his
administration of Varzin is a fresh proof. Whoever can do that will in
favourable circumstances, that is to say, given the necessary political
education, knowledge, and position, generally be found equally capable
of restoring the prosperity and dignity of nations.
In what follows, many analogies may possibly be traced between his work
as a landowner and his last two campaigns in the Reichstag, as well as
earlier indications of his bent without expressly directing attention
to them in each instance. Before his time, for example, the beautiful
woods were cut down and transformed into bad arable land, which, in
spite of all the theory upon which these proceedings were based,
yielded no returns or only very poor ones.
The present owner of Varzin, who has been careful to remedy this
mistake, has also in other places planted fir trees in light sandy
soil, which previously grew nothing but bushes and heather. If Nature
be not disposed to assist his work, he compels her to do so, a thing
which, by the way, as Imperial Chancellor, he has repeatedly done in
other fields, viz., in those of political and economic reform. He
forces Nature’s will to bend before his own by skilful strategy and
stubborn perseverance. In several places I saw fir plantations in
which the young trees were of different heights, nearly three-fourths
of the plants having failed in the first year, owing to the sand and
wind, while scarcely half of those planted in the second year ever
throve. Perseverance, however, and persistent replanting got over the
difficulty, and now the third and fourth years’ seedlings gave every
promise of as healthy and fine a plantation as any of those in the
neighbourhood occupying a more sheltered situation and better soil.
The forest is at present rather a plantation than a game preserve.
There has, however, been a considerable improvement in the latter
respect also during the decade 1866-77. Formerly deer were very scarce
here, indeed had almost disappeared. But the new owner of the Varzin
forest, in co-operation with his neighbours on all sides, succeeded in
maintaining a close season, and now there is a fair number along the
course of the Wipper and the Grabow and on the wooded heights, where a
stag is also met with occasionally, as well as wild boar. The herons,
large numbers of which formerly decimated the fish in the ponds, have
been mostly destroyed or have left a district no longer safe for them.
It would appear that efforts to check the devastation caused by the
otter have not yet met with the desired success.
The Chancellor has also devoted a great deal of attention to the arable
land which he acquired. Whole tracts that hitherto lay fallow have now
been cultivated and made tolerably productive. Thanks to the system
of drainage he has introduced, marshy ground has been turned into
good meadow land; and irrigation has also been provided where it was
necessary and possible. Nevertheless, the agricultural returns from
the estate remain small compared with its extent, and the surplus left
after the indispensable outlay is probably not very considerable. The
Prince’s territory with its hills and uplands (rising, in one instance,
over 500 feet above the level of the Baltic), with its dells and
valleys, its beech groves, forest glades, and clear streams, is, on
the whole, more picturesque than profitable.
Up to 1878 it was hardly possible to dispose of such corn as was grown,
the railways conveying the crops raised in South Poland and in Hungary
with cheaper labour to our markets for less than it costs our farmers
to grow their own.
Timber is also very low in price--the Varzin forest consisting of not
more than one-quarter beech to three-quarters fir trees. This timber
was formerly floated down the Wipper to the Baltic, where it was cut
into railway sleepers and shipped to England. This trade, however, did
not yield much to the landlord. The same may be said of the glass works
at Chomitz and Misdow, which are now closed. They turned out excellent
window-glass, but swallowed up huge quantities of wood, so that the
profit realised was very small.
The owner of Varzin has found a better use for his timber and at
the same time more profitable employment for his water-power in
the three paper mills on the Wipper. The railway between Stolp and
Rummelsburg, which was in course of construction in 1877, now sends
its goods trains through the Varzin district, and it is intended to
form a connection between Further Pomerania and Posen. This has, of
course, somewhat increased the value of a portion of the agricultural
and industrial products of this district. At a not very distant date
the paper mills, in connection with which the Prince already draws a
considerable rent from his water-power and to which he sells a not
inconsiderable proportion of his timber, will, under the contract with
the present holder, come into his possession, together with all their
appurtenances. It is this rent, I was told, which alone forms the
annual surplus income of the whole estate. This, doubtless, means that
the other profits, which are indeed comparatively slight, are swallowed
up by the cost of improvements, drainage, irrigation, plantations, &c.
The present owner, therefore, as a matter of fact, derives probably
little or no direct profit from the estate, though he is making it more
productive and valuable for his successors.
The village of Varzin lies for the most part to the north and east of
the Prince’s residence. It consists merely of a double row of houses
along the highway, and, if I rightly understood, there are only five
farmers among the inhabitants. The rest of the population consists of
“small people,” as they are usually called--tenants of a house and
garden, day labourers and village artisans. The policemen, who live
in the village inn, are there for the protection of the Prince, and
only remain while he is at Varzin. Of course Varzin is connected by
telegraph with the capital of the Empire, and there is a Post Office
official in the place or in the neighbouring village of Wussow. I
was told that recently, in the course of one year, no less than some
6,500 letters and packets, and over 10,000 telegrams passed through
this man’s hands, and it should be remembered that, with very few
exceptions, these were all received during the five or six months which
the Chancellor spent here in that year.
There is no church in the village. Whoever wants to hear the sermon
must go to Wussow, which is at a distance of about three-quarters
of an hour. Although the Prince, as I have already indicated, is
a God-fearing man, whose strength and sense of duty are based on
religion, and who regards death as the _janua vitæ_, he seldom attends
divine service--possibly out of consideration for his health.
The Chancellor’s life, during his retirement at Varzin, is very simple.
It is devoted largely to recuperating in a good climate, amid green
woods and fields, from overwork, Parliamentary speeches, and the strain
of notorious and deplorable friction; also to the active pursuit of
his favourite occupation of farming, and finally to the enjoyment of
Nature, by which he has also felt himself strongly attracted. It is
generally known that he has for years past suffered from insomnia.
His Gastein cure in the summer of 1877 produced a great improvement
in this and other respects. Consequently the Chancellor rose earlier
than he had been accustomed to do, and went for a walk about 9 o’clock
in the morning, a habit which a little wind and rain did not appear
to interrupt. On these occasions he was accompanied by his two Ulmar
dogs, Sultel and Floerchen, the former a present from Count Holnstein,
Master of the Horse to the King of Bavaria. Shortly after my visit to
Varzin, the newspapers reported that some ill-disposed fellow, who
remained undiscovered, injured the dog, to which the Prince was very
much attached, in such a way that it died soon afterwards. Since then,
however, it has been replaced by another of the same breed, only less
good-natured, or perhaps one should say, more suspicious. Many of our
members of Parliament will have met it (I only speak from hearsay) at
the Saturday receptions in the Wilhelmstrasse.
The order of the day at Varzin is somewhat as follows: Between 10
and 11 A.M. the Prince sits down to an English breakfast
with his family and any guest who may be staying with him. I have,
however, only seen him take milk, one or two cups of black coffee,
a little dry toast, and a couple of soft boiled eggs. He takes this
opportunity of reading the letters and important communications
that reach him by post or wire, respecting which, as a rule, he
immediately gives the necessary instructions. Shortly before or after
this meal personal affairs are discussed with officials of the estate,
farmers and peasants of Varzin, and any workpeople engaged on the
premises, important political questions being subsequently considered
and disposed of. Between 1 and 2 P.M., if the weather is
favourable, he usually takes a drive in an open carriage or a long ride
sometimes to inspect a new building or plantation, to see the progress
made by the labourers, to watch the fishing in one of the ponds in the
wood, or to look in at the paper mills, and frequently also for the
mere sake of exercise and fresh air. Visits to or from the neighbours
seem to occur very rarely, perhaps because of political differences.
Before his stay at Varzin in the summer and autumn of 1877 the
Chancellor found it difficult to ride far, and galloping in particular
affected him very much. The Gastein waters brought about an improvement
in this respect. In the expedition to Annenhof on Sunday, the two
horsemen galloped for a considerable distance both at the beginning and
end of the ride. With the exception of a few short breaks they were
nearly four hours in the saddle.
Dinner begins between 5 and 6 in the evening, and during my stay at
Varzin it usually continued up to 7 o’clock, the conversation being as
a rule very bright and sometimes most memorable. When dinner was over
the Prince would join his hands together as if he were offering up a
short prayer. After dinner nearly an hour is spent in the billiard-room
over a cup of coffee. Here the Chancellor, as already mentioned,
generally sits by the stove, smokes a couple of pipes of tobacco, and
occasionally feeds the fire with some fir cones from the basket, which
stands ready at his side. At about 10 o’clock tea is served in the
Princess’s boudoir. The Prince himself, however, did not partake of it
while I was at Varzin, but took a glass of milk instead. Generally at
about half-past 11 every one retires for the night.
The Chancellor has given up shooting for some time past, leaving it
to his sons. On the other hand, he still enjoys taking long strolls
through his park, which indeed fully deserves his affection. It is
as extensive as it is beautiful, full of secrecy, variety and forest
music. Stately beeches and oaks, and in some places red-stemmed firs
raise their crowns high over the underwood on the hills and the grass
and moss of the open glades. All the heights and hollows are connected
by winding bridle paths, in addition to the narrower footpaths that
pierce the woods. On the edge of that part of the park which adjoins
the large clearing made by the Chancellor’s predecessor--with its dark
green furrows and its ditches overgrown with heather--is a broad still
fish-pond which reflects the tree-tops and the clouds above them, the
reeds and the water-lilies. Here and there a bench under a beech tree,
adorned with mementoes, initials, &c., invites the wanderer to rest
and meditate. The Prince knows every beautiful tree in his park, which
he seems to have studied thoroughly. The moon and stars have seen him
wandering here, and doubtless during these solitary walks many pregnant
ideas have arisen and many a plan ripened which have afterwards borne
fruit for us, his people. He unconsciously takes his favourite haunts
with him wherever he goes--even during the campaign in France, when
they appeared to him in dreams with the glint of the sunshine on the
trees. At Varzin he spoke repeatedly of what he had noticed in the
park, and could tell many pleasant stories about the rooks in the
tree-tops, how they “taught their children to fly,” and how they
afterwards “took them to the sea-side in order to give them a diet of
worms,” and how, “like people of position, they take a town residence
during the winter in the church towers of Stolp and Schlawe.”
I have finished my account of Varzin, and take leave of that hospitable
country seat in order to show the reader over some other possessions
of the Prince. In taking their departure, I hope they will join with
me in calling down blessings and prosperity upon the house and its
master--_Slawa_ and _Wawrezin_--fame and laurels for evermore!
We will omit the visit to Schönhausen, as the Chancellor himself was
not there at the time, and has indeed for many years past been seldom
seen there, and then only for short periods.
I proceeded from Schönhausen by way of Stendal and Wittenberg to the
third large estate of the Prince, the extensive domain of forest land
known as the Sachsenwald in Lauenburg, of which the little village of
Friedrichsruh forms the centre. Owing to my letter of recommendation
from the Prince, I met with a good reception at the hands of the head
forester Lange, who showed me through the Chancellor’s residence,
the nearest parts of the forest, and some adjoining farms that had
been recently purchased. Here, however, a great deal was still in a
preparatory stage. The little château was being altered and extended,
the park behind it was being embellished, and the small stream that
flowed at one side of it was being dredged and regulated. I therefore
stayed but a short time and was able to note but little of permanent
interest.... So I shall draw my picture of Friedrichsruh and the life
there from materials collected during a later visit to the Prince when
everything which was in course of preparation in 1877 had gradually
been completed. But I will first relate a characteristic anecdote as it
was told to me in Berlin by Lothar Bucher, who also published it in the
_New York Tribune_.
When Bismarck was in the United Diet and afterwards in the Prussian
and Erfurt Parliaments the opponents of the principles which he then
represented denounced him as a “Junker,” and George von Vinke went so
far as to declare in a debate in the Lower Chamber that he regarded
Bismarck as the “incarnation of Junkerdom,” _i.e._, an extreme
adherent of the party which was at that time opposing desperate
resistance to the efforts made by the Prussian National Assembly and
its Parliamentary successors to abolish feudal rights, aristocratic
privileges and other relics of the middle ages. Our anecdote will
show how little there was left even in 1865 of the fine old Junker.
Under the Gastein Convention the Duchy of Lauenburg passed to the
Prussian Crown. This little country was a judicial curiosity, and in
comparison with the neighbouring States including even Mecklenburg,
a monstrosity. It was a petrified specimen of the Germany of the
seventeenth century, and well deserved to find a place in the Museum
of the German antiquities. It had never occurred to any one to make a
clearance of the mass of feudal lumber under which all the relations
of life were smothered. From whatever point of view the institutions
of the Duchy were examined, the observer saw the genuine spirit of
the mediævalism holding unrestricted and unmitigated sway under the
sun of the nineteenth century, and witnessed the exploitation of the
majority by a small privileged minority. Lauenburg was the Pompeii of
German constitutional history, or, what amounts practically to the
same thing, it was the paradise of Junkerdom. The monstrous privileges
of the nobility which were set forth in a certain parchment entitled
“The Compact” (“Der Recess”) had been confirmed without examination by
successive sovereigns at Copenhagen on their accession to the throne.
The German Confederation, which occupied the little country in 1863,
and the Austro-Prussian Commissioners by which it was afterwards
administered, had been unable to provide any remedy for these evils.
Their time had been too short, and the difficulties of the situation
too great, as it was still uncertain to whom the territory would
eventually fall. Therefore up to the final occupation of the Duchy by
Prussia, apart from the chaotic condition of laws which no attempt
had ever been made to codify, it was the custom to fill the numerous
overpaid official positions with members of certain “fine families,”
of course for the most part aristocratic, who farm out the extensive
domains amongst themselves, naturally at a rent far below their real
value, thus monopolising a great part of the wealth of the country.
On the 25th of September, 1865, King William went to Ratzeburg, the
chief town of the Duchy, in order to receive the oath of homage and
allegiance of his new subjects. He was met at Buchen, on the frontier,
by a deputation of the Estates, who delivered an address, in which they
said, _inter alia_: “We have your Majesty’s word that you will rule
over us justly, according to the customs and laws of the country.”
By this they unquestionably meant the preservation of their feudal
privileges rather than reasonable justice. In his reply the King made
no reference whatever to that passage. This was in itself enough to
cause uneasiness, and a change was indeed at hand.
On the afternoon of the 25th, the day preceding the ceremony of homage,
which was to take place at the Church of St. Peter at Ratzeburg,
Bismarck, who had accompanied the monarch, was enjoying the freshness
of the evening on the banks of the beautiful little lake near the town,
in company with a Herr von Bülow, Hereditary Marshal of the Duchy, a
typical Junker of those parts. As the latter had as yet heard nothing
to show that the new ruler of the country intended to confirm the
privileges, and was much concerned at this uncertainty, he at length
took heart and said:--
“_À propos_, Excellency, how is it with our Compact? I hope his Majesty
will confirm it before he demands our homage.”
“I imagine that the King will not do so,” observed Bismarck.
“In that case,” replied the Junker von Bülow, “we shall refuse to take
the oath to-morrow in the church.”
“In that case,” retorted the Minister, coolly, “you shall hear
to-morrow in the church that you have been incorporated in the nearest
Prussian province.”
The two gentlemen then continued their conversation on the beauties
of the district, the Hereditary Marshal being probably ill at ease
and out of humour, as was to be gathered from the slight acrimony of
his subsequent remarks. Immediately on his return to his quarters,
Bismarck drew up a decree announcing the incorporation of Lauenburg
with the province of Brandenburg, so that in case the aristocratic
Estate really had the audacity to refuse the oath and the lawful
hereditary homage, it should be read next day in the church, when a
demand would be addressed to all present to take the oath of allegiance
_en masse_, a demand which the popular Estate would immediately comply
with. He assured himself of the approval of the King, and with this
little torpedo in his pocket he entered the church next day. First a
hymn is sung. A sermon by the pastor follows. Then the vassals are
called upon to take the oath, and Bülow has to make a start. He steps
forward hesitatingly, pauses for an instant, and glances at Bismarck,
meets, however, with a look of determination probably not unmixed with
just a shade of contempt, and then proceeds to the altar and swears
allegiance. All the other members of the Estates do the same. No
confirmation of the Compact! Bucher had this delightful little story
from the best imaginable source--the Chief himself.
And now for a description of Friedrichsruh as I came to know it during
my somewhat lengthy visits to the Prince between 1883 and 1893,
together with a few words respecting its history....
When the railway station was opened at Friedrichsruh, and it had
thus become a favourite Sunday excursion and summer resort for the
inhabitants of Hamburg, a man named Specht, from the neighbouring
town of Bergedorf, erected, at a short distance from the local inn, a
lodging-house, or hotel, somewhat in the Swiss cottage style, which he
called “The Frascati.” This venture failed, however, in a few years,
when the building was purchased by the Chancellor, to whom the Emperor
William--who was at that time still exercising absolute rule as Duke
of Lauenburg--had shortly after the war with France made a present
of the Sachsenwald domains. The Chancellor, by means of additions
and alterations, converted it into the present not very stately but
pleasant and comfortable residence for the summer and autumn.
The forest presents a great variety of timber, including many members
of the pine family, deciduous trees, beeches (of which there are
several very beautiful groves, with tall stems like pillars in a
cathedral) oak, ash, and birch. There are also some peat bogs, one
of which, lying along the road to Dassendorf, has been turned into a
preserve for deer and wild boar. In other parts the shooting has been
let. The returns from the forest in the way of timber vary with the
prices received. The wood is not only sent to the market to be sold
for firing and other purposes, but a portion of it is also used in the
powder manufactory that has been erected by a Würtemberger on that
part of the Elbe that flows through the Prince’s estate, and in the
steam saw mills. I was told in 1877 by the head forester Lange, who,
with seven assistants, administers and has charge of the Sachsenwald,
that if there were an improvement in the low prices then prevailing he
would feel justified in cutting down trees to the annual value of over
300,000 marks. In each of the twelve years preceding 1891 he must have
felled timber to three times that value. There is good fish to be had
in the two rivers of the district, trout being also found in the Bille.
Agriculture and cattle breeding are only carried on at the two small
farms of Silk and Schönau, situated on the edge of the forest across
the Bille, which, together with their farmhouses and outbuildings, were
purchased by the Prince in the seventies.
The Chancellor’s residence is a two-storied building, painted yellow,
and consists of two parts--the old Specht inn and the new building.
These meet at right angles and have the stairs in common. The upper
story in the old building has for the most part remained much as
it formerly was when it was an inn, and, indeed, still serves for
the reception of the Prince’s guests. At the top of the stairs one
enters a long, gloomy corridor, to the right and left of which are
rooms of various sizes, more or less elegantly furnished. At the
further end, to the right, is another staircase. On the ground floor
are a number of family rooms, which contain among other things the
handsome “grandfather’s” clock, and the large oak cupboard with writing
materials, paper of all sorts and sizes, envelopes, pens, penholders,
and pencils, &c., presented to the Prince a short time ago by the
manufacturers of Germany as a token of their veneration. Here also is a
good-sized room opening on to the park, in which the meals are usually
served. The kitchen and appurtenances are situated in the basement
beneath. The Chancellor’s apartments are on the ground floor of the new
building. Passing from the hall up a few steps we enter an antechamber,
to the left of which is a room used as an office by the clerks, while
on the right a second antechamber leads into the very roomy study, and
beyond it again to the Prince’s bedroom. The Princess’s apartments
are on the first floor, where her daughter, the Countess Rantzau, and
her three little sons also occupy a few rooms occasionally. Even the
corridors are provided with Berlin stoves, those in the rooms being so
constructed that the fire can be seen as in an open fireplace, for the
Prince is fond of warmth and of the visible living flame. Doubtless
this thorough heating of his residence is no longer a necessary
of health. At least his physical condition during the three years
preceding 1890, and particularly in the autumn of 1888, when I was his
guest for nearly five weeks, was very much better than in the late
autumn of 1883, when I also spent a few days with him here. He was
then obliged, in accordance with the instructions of his doctor, to
follow a strict diet, and to give up, not only shooting, to which he
was formerly much addicted, but even long walks in the open air, and in
particular riding. So far as I am aware, he is not at present obliged
to impose any such restrictions upon himself.
When the Chancellor took a holiday, his object was to find recreation
in the solitude of Nature, to feel himself once more a country
gentleman, and to seek daily in the stillness of the wood “a nook
in which only the woodpecker is heard.” It is true that he never
quite succeeded in securing this isolation, and indeed still less at
Friedrichsruh than in Varzin, which is far from cities and the great
lines of communication. The world followed him by railway and over the
telegraph lines, for it needed him as its Atlas, even when he did not
want the burden and would rather have shaken it from off his shoulders.
It came to him in letters and bundles of telegrams, and in the form of
visits from native and foreign Ministers, Ambassadors and Councillors,
who all brought with them questions of greater or less importance, and
who were mostly in a great hurry. There was therefore at all times
work to be done here, not so much, and in particular not such a load
of petty matters, as in Berlin, but more than enough all the same. He
was accompanied by Privy Councillor von Rottenburg, Chief Clerk of
the Imperial Chancellerie, and a secretary, to assist in disposing
of this work, which often gave them plenty to do. And the hours of
labour which were not claimed by the great Empire were wanted for the
Prince’s own smaller realm, with its needs and cares, its creations and
developments. The duties of a great landed proprietor are performed
by the Prince with intelligence and diligence, while he is no less
strict in insisting upon the corresponding rights of his position.
He receives regular reports on the administration of his forests and
arable land, and when riding, driving and walking through his property,
he sees personally how things are going on and what is lacking, what
progress is being made with this or that improvement, how the crops are
prospering, how their new pasture agrees with the cows, and so on.
The Imperial Chancellor’s daily life in Friedrichsruh, as at Varzin,
was somewhat as follows. In the morning at work at his desk, then, if
the weather were fine, a walk or ride, or a drive in the neighbourhood,
where the roads are for the most part good, many being kept like public
roads. Then luncheon, at two o’clock, with the family, Rottenburg, the
secretary, and any guests who might have arrived. During this meal the
Chancellor would read his letters and telegrams, and give Rottenburg
instructions as to dealing with them. The Prince then retired once more
to his study, or, sometimes, he went on a second excursion alone, or
with a guest. Dinner was served at 7 o’clock, followed by coffee in the
next room, and while the guests smoked their cigars, the Prince retired
to the little sofa behind the table, and selected one of the three long
porcelain-headed pipes prepared for him. He took little or no part
in the conversation of the others, which was mostly carried on in a
whisper, but read the papers, including the leading Hamburg journals.
He retired after about an hour (instead of coming in to tea, which was
served at 10 o’clock), as he now went to bed early.
CHAPTER VII
I RETURN TO BERLIN AND RENEW MY INTERCOURSE WITH THE CHANCELLOR--THE
HISTORY OF MY BOOK--BISMARCK ON THE OPPOSITION OF THE FREE TRADERS
AND THE HOSTILITY OF THE NATIONAL LIBERALS--HIS OPINION OF THE
EMPEROR AND OF THE CROWN PRINCE AND PRINCESS--HIS INSTRUCTIONS
TO ATTACK GORTSCHAKOFF’S POLICY--MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT WHO
HAVE NO EXPERIENCE OF REAL LIFE--CONVERSATION WITH VON THILE
RESPECTING HIS RETIREMENT--THE TURNING AWAY FROM RUSSIA AND TOWARDS
AUSTRIA-HUNGARY--MATERIAL FOR THE HISTORY OF THE ALLIANCE WITH THE
AUSTRIANS--THE PRINCE ON THE PARLIAMENTARY FRACTIONS--HE DESCRIBES
BÜLOW’S POSSIBLE SUCCESSORS: HATZFELDT, HOHENLOHE, RADOWITZ,
SOLMS, WERTHER, AND KEUDELL--THE CHANCELLOR’S REMARKABLE OPINION
OF STOSCH--ITALIAN POLITICS--POPE LEO--THE PRINCE ON THE CROWN
PRINCE--THE ENVIOUS AND AMBITIOUS IN PARLIAMENT--THE CAUSES OF THE
CHANCELLOR CRISIS IN APRIL--KING STEPHAN AGAINST KING WILLIAM--THE
NEW MINISTRY IN ENGLAND--DELBRÜCK’S ILLNESS AND THE PRINCE’S
OPPONENTS IN THE REICHSTAG--THE CENTRE PARTY DESCRIBED--THORNDIKE
RICE’S REQUEST.
The “Reminiscences” in the _Gartenlaube_ were in great part fragments
from the first half of the diary which I kept in France in 1870 and
1871. During their preparation I bethought myself that at the audience
in which I took leave of the Prince in March 1873 he had said it would
be useful and desirable if the whole of the diary were published with
the exception of those passages which tact and prudence rendered
it advisable to suppress. Therefore when I set about carrying his
desire into effect the only question was whether he was still of the
same opinion and would assist me in the work by looking through the
proofs sheet by sheet, striking out what he considered questionable,
correcting and possibly making additions. In order to be certain on
this point I proceeded to Berlin in the first week of April 1878, and,
giving a short account of my plan, I requested an audience for the
purpose of talking over the matter. On the same day, the 6th of April,
I received the following letter:--
“Verehrter Herr Doctor,--My father desires me to inform you
that he will be at home all day to-day, and would be glad to see you.
If you have time, he would beg you to come to dinner at 5 o’clock; if
not, to call at any hour convenient to you.
“With the profoundest esteem,
“Your most humble,
“Count Bismarck.”
I accepted this invitation, dined with the family, and afterwards
negotiated with the Prince respecting my proposal. He immediately gave
his consent, only pointing out with regard to the co-operation which
I requested, that if he were to read through and make alterations and
occasional additions in the proofs he would be regarded by the public
as one of the authors of the book. I overcame his scruples on this head
by assuring him that, during his lifetime, no one except the publisher,
a friend upon whose discretion I could rely, would know that he had
permitted and assisted the publication within the limits laid down--not
even the printing office, as I would have two proofs sent me, one
for him and one for myself, and would reproduce in my own copy any
excisions, corrections, and additions which he might make in his, and
only send the former to the printer. On these conditions he also agreed
to this part of my request. As the manuscript was so far complete that
it could be sent to press, the work was taken in hand in accordance
with the terms arranged.
On the 5th of July, 1878, the proofs of the first two sheets were sent
by the publisher to the Prince in Berlin, and the subsequent ones to
Kissingen, where the Chancellor--who was undergoing a cure--remained
till the third week in August; then to Gastein, where he again took the
waters up to the 16th of September; afterwards to Varzin, and finally
once more to Berlin, where I had once more taken up my residence.
The proofs were returned to me with the Chancellor’s corrections,
for the most part in a few days after they had been despatched by
the publisher, in order that I should reproduce the alterations in
the copy intended for the printer. No arrangement having been made
for their destruction I considered myself at liberty to retain them
as a memento of my intercourse with the Prince, and I still preserve
them. In some sheets there were no corrections, in others a few, while
considerable excisions were made in a number of them--the portions
struck out, however, not exceeding in all more than one-fiftieth of the
whole. At the same time it was evident that the Prince had read the
whole very carefully, as he had corrected even unimportant printer’s
errors. My princely censor had justified some of the larger excisions
by marginal explanations, and also in the letters sent through the
Imperial Chancellerie with which the proofs were accompanied. These
refer for the most part to statements made by the Prince respecting
personages still living whom he was anxious not to offend. My princely
“collaborator” also made occasional short additions to my text. It
is hardly necessary to say that all alterations were conscientiously
reproduced by me and included in the work.
So far everything seemed to be in proper order. Up to his return to
Varzin the Prince had apparently no objection to my undertaking beyond
those to which he gave expression in the excisions and marginal notes,
as well as in the accompanying letters already mentioned, written by
his secretary, Sachse, and which might be regarded as disposed of by
myself and the printing office. Now, however, some further objections
must have occurred to him. On the 27th of September I received the
following letter:--
“Varzin, _September 26th_.
“My dear Sir,--I take the liberty of sending you herewith the
proof-sheets as corrected. My father would like to speak to you once
more about the whole work and its contents before you allow it to be
published, as he believes that, after verbal communication with him,
you may perhaps make a few further abbreviations. Possibly you may
be able, at the beginning of next month, to come to Berlin, where my
father will be very pleased to see you. In this case I would beg of you
to send word a little in advance, to me or to Baron Holstein. We shall
be in Berlin from Sunday on.
“With the profoundest esteem,
“Your most humble,
“Count Herbert Bismarck.”
Having at that time again taken up my residence in Berlin, I called
upon the Prince at his new palace, No. 77 Wilhelmstrasse, on the 4th of
October, and had an interview with him in his study looking out upon
the garden, which lasted from 4.15 to 5.15 P.M. He received me
in a very friendly way, gave me his hand, and, after inviting me to sit
down opposite him at the other side of his large writing-table, said:--
“Well, then, you have once more become a Berliner?”
“Yes, Serene Highness; I found Leipzig too dull in the long run, and,
besides, I wished to be near you in order to offer you my services as
occasion arose.”
He: “And you have broken with the _Gartenlaube_?”
I: “Keil (the publisher) died six or seven months ago, and the new
editors considered many things to be trivial, and wished to have
them struck out. I was of a different opinion, however, and, as the
gentlemen held to their own view, I took back my manuscript. I shall,
however, in future have the _Grenzboten_ entirely at my disposal, or at
least the whole political part of it, which, at present, is not what it
ought to be. The article in question was that on Varzin, which, it is
true, I treated in great detail. But I look on these things with the
eyes of the next century, and I therefore find nothing which concerns
you trivial and insignificant; and I feel sure that posterity will be
of the same opinion.”
He: “But not the present day. That also applies to the book, which has
grown too bulky owing to the numerous details, and you will not make
any profit on it. Besides, there are passages that could be turned into
ridicule, and the comic papers will not fail to take advantage of that
opportunity. And I, too, should come in for my share. I do not mind
that, however, but you?”
I: “It is also a matter of indifference to me. I have no fear, either
of them or of the other critics, if I only know that I have not lost
your good will thereby.”
He: “Oh! certainly; but you have given the remarks made by others at
my table--what was said over the wine, and should not be made public.
You will make yourself many enemies in that way. I have not struck out
much, and have left in a great deal that really ought to have gone out.
Other things, however, had to go.”
He took up two of the proof-sheets and looked them over. “For instance,
that my poor father ate bad oysters. And here, where Lehndorf tells the
story about Princess Pless and the Crown Prince. What will Lehndorf
think when he sees what he said at my table published by some one?”
I replied that I was not aware he had meant the Princess Pless, and
that she had not been named by me.
He: “Yes, but that would be inferred from what preceded. And here
again, that I drink freely in order to mitigate the weariness of
tiresome company. The _Germania_ and the Socialist papers will seize on
that and make me out to be a drunkard. And that story about Rechberg.
What would he say? Besides, the affair was quite different to the
account you give in the first eight or ten lines. It was not he who
had given the provocation, but I, and it was he who first spoke of a
challenge.”[19]
The Prince then came to speak of other matters in the sheets before
him which he considered unsuitable for publication, as for instance
a passage in the second volume, page 262, of which he remarked: “H’m,
‘That is boiling thought to rags--mere flatulence,’ I know I said that,
but everybody must recognise that that applies to the King. And Augusta
will read the book--carefully--underline it for him, and comment upon
it. Of course I know I had a hard time of it with him at Versailles
for whole weeks. I wished to retire, and there was nothing to be done
with him. Even now I have often a great deal of trouble with him. One
writes an important note or despatch, revises it, rewrites it six or
even seven times, and then when he comes to see it he adds things that
are entirely unsuitable--the very opposite of what one means and wishes
to attain--and what is more, it is not even grammatical. Indeed, one
might almost say that the Nobiling affair was a piece of good luck--on
account of the Congress. If that had not happened I should not have
secured anything at the Congress; for he is always in favour of schemes
that will not work, and is wilful and opinionated in maintaining them.
Others too in his most intimate _entourage_ have to suffer from this
aggravating peculiarity of his which he calls conscientiousness. You
should see them when they no longer have to deal with him--they look
quite changed, just as if they had returned from a holiday. But the
Crown Prince is entirely different.”
In reply to my question he then expressed himself favourably respecting
the Crown Prince and his Consort. On my leading the conversation on
to the Duke of Coburg, the Chief observed: “I have also been obliged
to strike out some passages here, as that would cause great offence,
seeing that he is the ‘dear uncle.’” He chiefly referred to one or two
passages respecting the efforts of his Highness to represent himself as
resolute and fearless. In this connection he mentioned the Eckernförde
picture, and I related to him the true story of the affair according
to Tims’s account. On my observing that the exalted gentleman had no
courage whatever he said: “He cannot help that, it’s his nature--but
that he should have had himself painted as a hero--a stage hero!”
I inquired how he now stood with the Empress. He replied: “Just as
before. She does what she can against me, and she is not always
unsuccessful with the Emperor. She will ultimately drive Falk from
office. The Court Chaplain? Christianity by all means, but no
sectarianism! It just occurs to me,” he went on to say, “that in the
Horsitz affair you write that Prince Charles sent Perponcher to offer
me a bed. It was not he who did that, but the Duke of Mecklenburg. Such
an idea would never occur to the Prince. He hates me and has already
caused me plenty of heartburning.”
I then expressed the hope that he would not attribute the passages
that had been struck out to any bad will on my part but rather to
thoughtlessness, as I had intended the whole work to serve and not
to injure him. He replied: “A great deal of it is good and quite
satisfactory, as for instance the portion dealing with the Pope and the
Catholics. I only wish you had made it fuller. But that perhaps can be
done later, when a good many things might be added. But could you not
now abbreviate some parts of it?”
I replied in the negative, as thousands of the forty or forty-one
pages which we had read through were now printed, and any alteration
would occasion great expense. When a second edition was being issued
I would beg him to let me know what he wished to add. I could also be
of service to him in the _Grenzboten_, which, it was true, was a small
newspaper, but still enjoyed a certain prestige. Besides, we could
get its more important articles reproduced in the daily papers, as has
been done with success during the previous year. He seemed disposed to
consider this suggestion.
On my asking after his health, and whether Kissingen and Gastein had
done him good, he replied: “Gastein, yes--but the waters are dangerous.
They oblige one to be very careful afterwards, particularly with regard
to worry and excitement. Otherwise they make one quite dull and heavy.
I have now found that out. I suppose you know about my last illness?”
“Yes, it was another attack of shingles.”
“No, it was something else. The shorthand writers turned against me
in connection with my last speech. So long as I was popular that was
not the case. They garbled what I said so that there was no sense in
it. When murmurs were heard from the Left or Centre they omitted the
word ‘Left,’ and when there was applause they forgot to mention it.
The whole Bureau acts in the same way. But I have complained to the
President. It was that which made me ill. It was like the illness
produced by over-smoking, a stuffiness in the head, giddiness, a
disposition to vomit, &c.” He then gave a full description of this
ailment, as also of the shingles.
I inquired whether he was returning to Varzin or would go to
Friedrichsruh, adding “or perhaps to the new Bavarian estate which is
mentioned in the newspapers.”
He smiled and said: “Bavarian estate! I have not the least idea of
buying one. I lose enough on the one I bought in Lauenburg, where the
purchase money eats up the income of the whole property. How can an
estate yield anything when the bushel of corn is sold at the present
low price?” He explained this point fully, and then continued: “I told
them that long ago and tried to find a remedy. It is ruining our entire
agriculture.”
I mentioned that I had heard the farmers at Wurzen and farther up in
Muldenthal complain of the intolerable competition of the Polish and
Hungarian corn, in view of the high wages they have to pay, and that
people looked to him for assistance. “Yes,” he said, “there will be no
improvement until there is an increase in the railway rates or a duty
on corn.”
I then turned the conversation once more on the _Grenzboten_, remarking
that the publisher put it at his disposal unconditionally, and that I
should be able to say whatever I liked in it. I should not, however, be
in a position to do this before January or the beginning of February.
If he would permit, I then proposed to come from time to time and
ascertain his wishes.
“That will be a very good arrangement,” he said, “but I do not know
whether I shall be back in February. We must first marry our daughter.”
I congratulated him. “It is time,” he replied. “She has already had
several good offers, but she is an obstinate, capricious creature. You
know there was formerly Count Eulenburg, who had absolutely nothing but
his salary, and the present one also does not draw more than a thousand
thalers a year from his property, which after all is not exactly a
large income.” I interjected: “But the Rantzaus were formerly very
rich! I believe I read somewhere that they had about seventy estates
and houses.” “Formerly,” he replied, “but not now--and moreover he is
not the eldest son. But I fancy they can live very well on what they
now have and will receive later on.”
As we did not appear to have quite settled about the _Grenzboten_
scheme, I returned to it once more, pointing out that my idea was to
report myself and request his instructions on occasions of particular
importance, domestic crises, foreign complications, &c. I must draw
my information from the fountain head, as, although I was on friendly
terms with Bucher, I understood that he had no longer much intercourse
with the Prince. “Bucher!” he said, “yes; but it is the same with the
others since I have got a representative--and Bülow. Altogether I am,
in fact, no longer anything more than a Ziska drum.” I suggested: “But
I can come at night, like Nicodemus.” “Certainly come. I shall be very
glad. But why like Nicodemus? You can also come in the day time.”
He then repeated that the comic papers would turn the book into
ridicule, that the Ultramontanes and Socialists would make capital out
of it against him, and that I, too, would make myself many enemies by
it. It was a matter of indifference to him, but I ought to be on my
guard. I repeated that I was not in the least anxious on the subject,
as his opinion was the only thing I cared about. He then stood up, came
with me as far as the door of the antechamber, and shook hands with me
on parting.
About a fortnight later I read in the papers an account of the death
of Bismarck-Bohlen, our comrade during the French campaign. The news
was doubly sad. The merry Count had become a melancholy man and had
taken his own life. Italian papers gave the following particulars of
his last days. In consequence of a distressing complaint he had for
the past five years spent the winter in Venice, where he occupied a
handsomely furnished flat in the Zattere. This year he had arrived on
the 7th of October, accompanied by his valet. He seemed to be utterly
prostrate in health, and had not gone out for several days previous to
the catastrophe, nor seen any one except his servant and the doctor.
The report proceeds as follows: “On the evening of the 15th he retired
to his bedroom. As, up to 10 o’clock next morning, he had not rung
the bell the servant came to his door, listened, and then knocked.
Receiving no answer he opened the door, when he saw his master lying
on the bed, covered with blood, and holding a revolver in his hand.
The doctor and the German Consul were sent for. The former certified
that the Count was dead, and that his death took place under peculiarly
ghastly circumstances. The track of blood showed that he had, in his
dressing-room, opened the veins of both arms and both legs, at the
same time giving himself two gashes in the throat. All this was not
sufficient to kill him, and so he had dragged himself, streaming with
blood, from the dressing-room into the bedroom, seized a revolver and
fired a bullet into his head between the ear and eye.”
The book, _Count Bismarck and his People_ (_Graf Bismarck und seine
Leute_) was published at the beginning of November. It immediately
attracted universal attention, and was reviewed in the German, and
soon afterwards in the foreign press from the most varied points of
view, forming for several weeks a general subject of conversation. All
the opinions agreed in one particular, namely, that _the author was
in a position to tell the truth, and had desired to do so_. For the
rest, there was a wide divergency of views, both as to the intention
and justification of the author in making his revelations, and as to
the literary value of his work. A remarkable circumstance was that
there seemed to be a certain fixed relation between the favour shown
by the critics, and the distance between Berlin and the place where
the reviews appeared, these growing more favourable as the distance
increased. It was amusing to note that many formed their opinion of
the book without having read anything beyond a number of sensational
extracts from it; and several papers showed questionable taste in
treating it in an unfriendly fashion after having filled column after
column with what struck them as its most interesting passages.
The views expressed by most of the large newspapers in Germany were
depreciatory, and, with a few exceptions, the smaller journals
copied the others in the usual way. The author met with a kindly and
appreciative treatment from only a few organs of the press, which
also, to a certain extent, recognised the real meaning and object
of his work. The _Weser Zeitung_ recommended it as “a collection, a
real treasury of impressive and pregnant details.” The _Hamburger
Correspondent_ wrote: “The figure of the famous Chancellor rises before
our eyes in Busch’s pages with a life-like vigour and colour which
surpasses that of all the biographies that have hitherto appeared;
while the surroundings and the historical background are drawn with
equal skill.” The _Norddeutsche Allgemeine Zeitung_ described the book
as being “readable and in a high degree instructive,” and observed:
“Notwithstanding the numerous publications on the events of 1870-71
that have already appeared, none of them is equal in interest to the
book now before us. It gives not only an insight into the private and,
we may say, family life of the then Chancellor of the Confederation
and his _entourage_, but it abounds in passages dealing with political
matters, some of which are of great importance.” A critic in the
_Berliner Boersen Zeitung_ said: “Every one is talking of Moritz
Busch’s collection of episodes and memorable utterances from the life
of the Imperial Chancellor.... These will be read throughout the whole
world. In itself the book would constitute a literary achievement of
first rank, even if its hero were a purely fictitious character, and
not the most powerful personality among the great politicians of our
century. Readers who have no appreciation for what is characteristic,
hold that the experiences and utterances of Prince Bismarck which
have been selected by Moritz Busch with great discrimination, include
many passages that are trivial and frivolous. Among these they often
reckon those strong characteristics which most strikingly reveal the
Chancellor’s nature, with its spontaneity, sober-mindedness, and
impartiality, and its almost plebeian unpretentiousness and simplicity.
Whoever admires the typical featureless hero of the German novelist,
a concoction of undiluted magnanimity and sentiment, will turn from
the portrait drawn by Moritz Busch with a feeling of embarrassment
and repulsion; but those who have educated their taste by a study of
the realistic authors will be enchanted with a picture the minutest
details of which are vivid and characteristic, even if their views
do not agree with those of the Imperial Chancellor.” The Scientific
Supplement to the _Leipziger Zeitung_, which was otherwise by no means
well disposed towards me, and had indeed taken a variety of exceptions
to the book and to its author, honestly and impartially recognised the
true tendency and significance of the work, saying that it contained
“records which may prove of the highest value to future historians,
indeed a great deal for which it will one day be the only trustworthy
source.” “As evidence of its value as a mine of historical materials
which is in some respects unique,” the critic then gave a number of
well-chosen extracts.
A few other organs of the German daily press expressed themselves in
a similar sense. As already mentioned, however, the great majority
of the newspapers were more or less decidedly unfavourable. This was
partly through a lack of political and general education, then because
the critics in question were incapable of appreciating the historical
significance of the work and lacked moral seriousness, while obviously
it was also due in part to low motives, hatred of the principal subject
of the work, wounded vanity, resentment against the author for having
published expressions of the Chancellor which referred slightingly to
party catchwords and party heroes, gave evidence of little sympathy
with the Jews, and--in the opinion of the critics--did less than
justice to certain belletristic products of recent decades. Finally,
it was evident that envy of the prospective success of the book was
also one of the influences at work. The author was indiscreet, and his
gift was a mere collection of trivialities, spicy stories, gossip, and
scandal. He was tedious, he had the soul of a flunkey, he had neither
taste nor literary ability, &c.
Quite comical was the position taken up by the _Post_, an otherwise
sensible, well-meaning, and sometimes well-informed paper. In an
article entitled “Indiscreet Books,” which appeared on the 10th of
November, it established, “by means of sound logic,” the genesis of the
work. Referring to the remarks made by the Prince at Versailles when he
ascertained the existence of my diary, the _Post_ (or its contributor,
Professor Constantine Rössler?) came to the following conclusions:
“Whoever is acquainted with the character of the Chancellor will agree
with us that he must have said to himself on that occasion, ‘If this
diary be in existence it must be published at the first opportunity.’
That is the method which the Chancellor has followed in the case of
diplomatic documents which have come into improper hands. Owing to the
difference between the position of the persons concerned, what called
for legal compulsion in the one case only required a mere hint in the
other. What is the characteristic feature of this method? We believe it
lies in the consciousness that there can be nothing more absurd than
secrets which have leaked out and which have passed, whether in the
shape of documents or as mere matters of memory, into the possession
of other men. The seal will be broken sooner or later, with greater
or less ease and skill, if the secret be worth the trouble, and it is
not in our power to dictate the time of disclosure, which may happen
at a very inconvenient moment. Therefore, break the seal, or rather,
never attempt to keep secrets that have once reached the outer world
in any form.... Prince Bismarck does not and cannot desire that there
should be any such secrets respecting himself. This is our explanation
of the reason why the present diary has been published, an explanation
which is as soundly established as any logical conclusion can be.”
This explanation (the author of which seemed to know nothing of secret
documents and archives, and to have overlooked the circumstance that
the diary had remained unpublished for nearly eight years) did not
hold water very long. Two days later it gave place to the following
correction: “Our attention is called to the fact that in the efforts
made to prevent the publication of these diary entries, Prince Bismarck
had no legal remedy to hand. Remonstrance, which was the only course
open to him, having failed, the Prince is obliged to count upon the
good sense of the reader of these utterances, which have been divorced
from their natural setting.” This _correction_ probably came from the
Imperial Chancellerie. An idea can be formed of its value from what has
been related previously. The circumstance that I let it pass unanswered
and did not state the true facts of the case, will perhaps not be
regarded as a mere matter of course by all persons, but the Prince knew
that it was so considered by me.
Let us now turn to the opinions of the foreign press. As was to be
expected, the book did not meet with approval in France, where its hero
as well as the author were made the subjects of embittered attacks. But
so far as my knowledge goes, it occurred to no one even in France to
question the _truth_ of the work. The _Mémorial Diplomatique_, among
others, wrote that “the book is thoroughly imbued with a spirit of
uncouth frankness, and the conversations and opinions which it contains
are expressed in a form of crude simplicity which does not belong to
the domain of the creative imagination.”
The work excited the greatest interest in the English press. _The
Times_ wrote a leading article upon it, and then devoted no less
than six of its huge columns in small print to extracts from it. It
was received with exceptional favour by most of the chief organs of
American criticism.
We have seen that the great majority of the German papers expressed an
unfavourable opinion on the Bismarck book, and that the action of our
press in many other ways was calculated to restrict its circulation.
Bismarck’s name, however, was too strong for them. The public
practically declared that their verdict was unfounded and did not
follow their leading, and for once the newspapers were not the great
power which they imagine themselves to be. Two editions, amounting
together to seven thousand copies, were exhausted within two months. A
third and fourth followed rapidly, and before the end of the first year
it was necessary to issue a fifth edition of the novelty which had made
so many enemies. There were at this time fourteen thousand copies of
the book in circulation, certainly a very considerable success in view
of the fact that times were not particularly good and the price of the
two volumes by no means moderate. Even then the run continued. A sixth
edition appeared after a certain interval, and subsequently a seventh,
a popular issue of ten thousand copies in another and cheaper form.
That was not all. In a few months after the first publication of the
book in German there were nine translations on the market. That was
nine translations in as many months, and an entire circulation at
home and abroad of about 50,000 copies. Moreover, the German literary
hacks who occupied themselves with Bismarck lived upon fragments of
my work and drew their supplies from it for years, frequently without
mentioning their authority. As to the domestic circulation of the
book, I may mention that about a thousand copies were sold in Berlin,
where the _Vossische Zeitung_, and the _National Zeitung_ had spoken
so slightingly of it and warned so strongly against it; and that of
all our cities Cologne was the largest purchaser in proportion to its
population.
Towards the end of November, 1878, I informed the Chief that if
he desired to see any additions made to portions of the book an
opportunity would be afforded by the preparation of the third edition
which the publisher had in view. I concluded this letter with the
words: “If I have left unanswered the gross falsehoods that have been
circulated respecting the book and its author by a portion of the
German press, and do not intend in future to make any reply, however
sharply I may be attacked, I trust I may flatter myself that I am
acting in accordance with your wishes. If I have not deceived myself
in this respect, all these insinuations and insults are a matter of
indifference to me, particularly as I see from the better German
newspapers, as well as from _The Times_ and the _Perseveranza_, that
my intention that the book should be of service to you has in the main
been realised.”
If it were no longer intended to extend certain portions of the work,
this letter required no answer, and as none came I took it for granted
that the intention referred to had been renounced. We now proceeded
to reorganise the _Grenzboten_, and I wrote several articles for it,
strongly supporting the Customs policy of the Imperial Chancellor, and
opposing equally strongly the champions of unqualified free-trade;
being actively assisted by Bucher with verbal and written advice. On
the 15th of January, 1879, however, I applied directly to the Chief
himself for further information, and received the following letter,
dated the 15th, from his younger son:--
“My dear Sir,--In reply to your friendly letter of the 10th
instant, I have the honour, as instructed by my father, to inform you
that he is just now very much occupied, and regrets being unable to
spare time for an interview with you.
“He hopes, however, that this load of work will shortly be reduced, and
he will then be very pleased to see you.
“With profoundest esteem,
“Your very devoted,
“Count W. Bismarck.”
On the 23rd of February the Prince sent me word to call upon him next
day, when I had an interview with him extending from 2.45 to 3.45
P.M., which was in many respects very remarkable.
Theiss announced my arrival and Mantey showed me out. The Chancellor
looked very well and was friendly, as he always is. He came a few steps
to meet me, gave me his hand and asked, smiling: “Well, are you still
of opinion that you have done me a service with the book?” “Yes, Serene
Highness,” I replied, “with all right minded and sensible people.”
We then sat down at the writing-table, and he said: “Yes, but they are
not numerous. It must give others the impression that I am a bitter,
censorious, envious creature, who cannot bear the vicinity of any
greatness. Humboldt--well, I give him up, he was really an envious
creature--Heise, Gagern. It’s well I struck out what I said about
Moltke. That would have been still worse, for when effrontery succeeds
it is all right. You have also come off badly--just as I told you.”
I: “Oh! certainly. They have made me out to be a fearful cur:
narrow-minded, indiscreet, tactless, tedious, and what’s more, a
flunkey and an Epicurean. All that is wanting is that they should say
I am accustomed to devour a couple of babies for breakfast. The Jewish
press in particular. But I despise this stuff too much to pay any
attention to it.”
He: “The Jews were angry at your letting me say they are not painters.
Meyerheim let me know that he is not a Jew, not even his grandfather.
All the same, I do appear in the book to be bitter and envious, and
I think I am not that. I know very well that you did not intend it.
We both knew the reasons why I was often angry and bitter, and I knew
still more about it. Such shameful things had happened that I wished to
retire--at Versailles.”
I: “Dupanloup?”
He: “Still worse.... Then in the diary form the whole thing was bound
to be fragmentary, and many connecting links had to be omitted.”
I: “I regret that it gives many persons that impression, but my
intention was only to show how Count Bismarck felt, thought and lived
at a certain period--during the war with France. It was not to be a
delineation of character, but only a photograph of an important period
in your life, so far as I could see it--a contribution to history. I
have not merely reproduced the scoffing remarks, but also the
appreciative opinions, and have communicated traits which, if I may so
express myself, show that you are good-natured and humane, and, in
particular, that you sympathise with the feelings of the common people.”
He: “H’m, and pray what might those traits be?”
I: “The sentinel at Bar le Duc, for example, and the Bavarian
stragglers after the battle of Beaumont, together with the first
sentence of the remarks you made at Ferrières, which began with
reference to the spot of grease on the table-cloth. Also your opinion
of Dietze, when the _politesse de cœur_ was discussed. You praised him
very highly.”
He: “Yes: but after all he is of no importance, not a politician. A
good deal that would have been useful to me ought to have been given
more fully, and other things should have been omitted. It was not
possible to do that, however, owing to the fragmentary form.”
“But that can be remedied in the fifth edition,” I replied. “You were
thinking of doing so the last time I had the honour of speaking to
you on the subject. You can give me additions, for instance what you
have said on various occasions respecting the Pope and the Catholics.”
“I would not recommend that now,” he replied, “in your interest and
in mine. The indignation aroused by the book has now subsided, and
anything of the kind would revive the discussion of the whole subject
in the entire press.”
I observed: “The book has also been praised by papers of high standing
in Germany, and more particularly in England and America. _The Times_
published three long articles on it, and it has been described as a
eulogy, but one which is based solely upon truth.”
“Yes, in England,” he said; “but here at home, that is the main point.”
I continued: “And then I have not given merely conversations, but
also newspaper articles which contained not my ideas but yours. I am
heartily sorry that it has injured you. I was pleased with everything
you said. I am quite indifferent to what people say about myself. Every
word of abuse was an advertisement. I do not care for the esteem of our
journalists or of those who accept their views. I have no fear, because
I have no hope.”
“No hope?” he asked, as if he had not quite understood me.
“Yes, Serene Highness,” I replied; “no hope--that is to say, I am
not ambitious and have no personal aspirations. I do my duty as I
understand it. For the rest, I hold to the principle which has been
described as the ninth beatitude: Blessed is he that expecteth nothing,
for he shall not be disappointed. I know too that I am not what they,
in their envy and wounded vanity, describe me to be. And finally, in
issuing this book I have not depended at all upon my own judgment, but
submitted it to you before it was printed.”
“That is true,” he replied; “but out of consideration for you I did not
strike out as much as I ought to have done. Arrangements had already
been made, and a good deal of it was printed. It would have lost in
interest if much had been omitted, and I did not wish to diminish your
success.”
“I thank your Serene Highness for that,” I said. “But I have myself
also left out a great deal of what appeared to me to be questionable
matter respecting princely personages, the Emperor and others. One
passage which some people think refers to the Emperor was overlooked. I
myself had not thought of him in giving the passage.”
He asked: “Why, what was that?”
I replied: “That in which the flags are referred to which were not
mentioned in the treaty and which they afterward desired to have
delivered up--the Parisian flags, Serene Highness.”
“Ah, that was less the King than Podbielski. Well, you must omit that
passage in future editions. For the rest, _once I am dead you can say
whatever you like, everything you know_.” I replied: “May that day be
far distant! and in the meantime the book shall remain as it is, unless
you wish to make any additions yourself. I have no idea whatever
of taking any independent action in the matter.” “How old are you,
doctor?” he asked. “Fifty-eight, Serene Highness.” “Well then, I am six
years older than you.”
He then spoke of the opposition of the free-traders in the Reichstag
who denounced his schemes of Customs reform. “It is remarkable,” he
said, “how they, Richter and Bamberger, in their speeches always attack
me personally instead of dealing with the question under discussion.
The personality is of course a matter of indifference. My former ideas?
How I have come to hold such views? Whether I have been consistent?
I formerly consented to that which I now oppose; I have been playing
a part; I am an amateur of genius, full of contradictions and always
disposed to experiment at random. That is the main point for them. It
is only incidentally that they refer to the matter itself. Whether I
have a system? Richter at length said the only sensible and correct
thing, that I doubtless had no system whatever. That statement is quite
true, if it be limited to economic affairs--people are eventually
forced to admit that I have one in politics. When I entered office
my task was mainly a political one: the unification of Germany under
Prussia. I was obliged to subordinate economic considerations, in so
far as they were in any way affected, to that end. Otherwise I should
have had no time. I had Delbrück for economic affairs, with which he
was thoroughly acquainted, having administered them for years and
being the first authority in his department. I reposed confidence in
him, and when I was of a different opinion I sacrificed my opinions
for political reasons, and also because I still wanted him for the
founding of the Empire, after 1866 and 1870. If I was of a different
opinion I did not enforce it officially. He has therefore acted for
years by my side with perfect independence. It is true that afterwards
my attention was called to the fact that we were not on the right
track, at first through the complaints and admonitions of the public.
But it was only when political questions no longer occupied the first
place that I was able to consider the matter on its merits and not in
connection with those questions. And it was not until Delbrück had
retired in consequence of ill health--perhaps he had himself recognised
that things could no longer go on as they had been doing--that I was
obliged to form my own opinion, since I had no one to replace him. His
two councillors were unsuitable. Michaelis is quite insignificant, and
the other is only useful for certain things. In that way I was actually
forced to take the matter in hand myself, and then I found that it
must be managed differently. Moreover the entire current of affairs
had changed, the other Powers being about to adopt a different policy
or having already done so: Austria and Russia had suddenly taken the
plunge by providing that in future the Customs dues must be paid in
gold, while France, in spite of the payment of the milliards to us,
was continuing to prosper, but not under a free-trade system. Then
the Americans, who, by an increase of the tariff, had been enabled to
drive others out of the market! Only two countries were constantly
losing ground: Rich, burly, full-blooded England, with its old industry
favoured in so many different ways; and poor, weakly Germany, which was
still engaged in making a beginning--the latter being the worse off of
the two. It was therefore necessary to follow suit and speedily.”
I said that the Opposition did not appear to feel any confidence
in their cause. A National Liberal member of Parliament, Roemer of
Hildesheim, had agreed with me when I told him the day before that
the Prince would certainly be victorious, and had added: “Why, in
his speech he threatened us with a dissolution, and if that were to
take place many of us would not come back after the elections.” The
Chief replied: “I have not exactly done that, but it may come to it.
If only the manufacturers would not isolate themselves, split up into
fractions, and cut themselves off from the agricultural classes! They
would like to negotiate respecting individual items, the iron tariff,
and so forth,--every one for himself. But that will not work. They must
hold together. If you can remember that as well as you did the bitter
remarks at Versailles I shall be very pleased.”
I suggested that it might perhaps be well for me to get some materials
for articles out of the documents that had already been drawn up on
the question in order to prepare the public mind. He replied: “Yes,
but these are not yet ready. There is great procrastination. I do not
mean that the officials are badly disposed, but they do not make any
progress, and the Commission is waiting for the necessary data. I have
taken this load upon my shoulders in addition to the others, and should
like to do it all myself. And then one has all sorts of vexation and
worry, which does not tend to improve the health, any more than the
enormous quantities of work I have been doing recently. I have been
busier at Friedrichsruh than in Berlin.”
I asked how his health in general now was. “Not what it should be,”
he replied. “I am weak in the legs and cannot stand for any length
of time. Leyden said to me: ‘If this weakness in the legs is to be
remedied, the head must do no work for three months.’ I ought to have
resigned, and I had intended doing so two years ago. But what is a man
to do when he cannot resist tears? Still I should have gone; but the
National Liberals began their attacks, and I was obliged to remain. And
then there was the outrage in addition: the old man with his bandaged
arm lying there, and hardly able to say ‘Yes’ at the Council respecting
the Regency--I thought to myself that it would be a sin against God if
I left him. And then the National Liberals were no politicians in the
autumn of 1877. Bamberger has recently declared, in an elegiac tone,
that they were justified in expecting consideration, or even gratitude,
from me. As if they had co-operated with me for sentimental reasons,
and not because of their Nationalist principles! I am represented as
having disowned them, while it was they who turned from me because I
could not be as liberal as they were. If their leaders had been real
politicians, they might have secured a great deal from me then, and
more still in the course of time. But the maintenance of the party
was of greater importance to them than the prospect of practical
benefit. When Bennigsen returned from Varzin they said: ‘He cannot
work _with_ this Minister, but _after_ him.’ It would be well if the
fifteen or eighteen members of the party, who by rights belong to the
Progressists, were to withdraw--but they remain. And now I am attacked
by their newspapers, the _Kölnische_, the _National Zeitung_, the
_Hannoverscher Courier_, quite in the style of the Progressist press. I
am opposed in the Reichstag on all questions--obviously to prove that I
require the support of these gentlemen--in connection with the tobacco
monopoly, the tobacco tax as I intended it, and the Anti-Socialist
laws.”
I remarked that doubtless this was also, to some extent, due to their
juridical turn of mind and their idea of a legal state, which, in
reality, would be nothing but a state of lawyers and County Court
judges, where they would rule and arrange everything according to their
own theories--a state which would have no more claim to exist than a
theologians’ or traders’ state.
“Yes,” he replied, “that is true; but the chief cause is their
enmity to me. And how ungrateful they were to the King about the
Anti-Socialist laws! The old man who had boldly risked his crown for
Prussia and Germany in 1866 and 1870 struck down by the hand of an
assassin--and even in 1864, when a coalition of the Powers on behalf of
Denmark (Schleswig-Holstein affair) was by no means impossible, they
did not wish to protect him because _I_ proposed it.”
The conversation then turned on the condition of the Emperor. The
Prince observed: “He has lost in energy and intellectual power, and has
thus become more open to improper influences.”
I inquired about the Successor, and how the Chancellor now stood with
him.
“Well,” he said, “quite well. He is more human, so to speak, more
upright and modest--his character resembling that of his grandfather
and of Frederick William I. He does not say: ‘I have won the battle,
I have conducted the campaign,’ but ‘I know that I am not capable of
doing it; the Chief of my General Staff has done it, and he therefore
deserves his rewards.’ The Most Gracious thinks quite differently. He
also cannot tell exactly an untruth, but he will have it that he has
done everything himself; he likes to be in the foreground; he loves
posing and the appearance of authority. The Crown Princess also is
unaffected and sincere, which her mother-in-law is not. It is only
family considerations that make her troublesome, formerly more than at
present.”
“The uncle in Hanover?” I suggested.
“No, not so much as the Coburger and the Augustenburger; but she is
honourable, and has no great pretensions.”
On leaving I said: “If your Serene Highness should want me at any time,
and should require anything in which I could be useful, I would beg to
be remembered.”
He replied: “Well, what I said to you just now about the Free-traders,
the National Liberals and Delbrück was intended in that way. Make it
public, and I should be glad if you would send me a copy.”
I accordingly wrote an article “On the Genesis of the Imperial
Chancellor’s Customs Reform,” which was intended to appear in No. 10 of
the _Grenzboten_, and sent him a proof for revision on the 28th. It was
returned to me in three hours. The Chief had struck out nothing except
the following. After the words “when Delbrück retired at this time,
owing to the condition of his health,” he crossed out the passage:
“and none of his fellow-workers in the department of political economy
was capable of replacing him;” as also the word “absolutely” in the
phrase: “The Chancellor was absolutely compelled to prepare himself by
a thorough study of the facts to take the matter into his own hands.”
It would therefore appear that I had actually retained what he had
communicated to me, nearly as well as the bitter remarks he had let
fall at Versailles.
In the meantime I had a further interview with the Chief. On the
forenoon of the 27th of February I received a letter from his
Secretary, Sachse, saying that the Prince requested me to call upon
him, if possible, some time before 5 o’clock. At 3 P.M. I
went to his palace. After waiting in the antechamber for a quarter of
an hour, a slight, thin elderly gentleman came out, being accompanied
by the Prince as far as the antechamber. This was Lord Dufferin, the
English Ambassador at St. Petersburg. I then went with the Prince into
his study, where we sat down facing each other across his writing-table
as usual.
“You recently told me,” he began, “that when I had anything to say you
could get it into the _Grenzboten_.” I replied: “Certainly, Serene
Highness; it shall be done without delay.”
“Well, then, I would beg of you to write something on the policy which
Gortschakoff is promoting in the Russian press, and particularly in the
_Golos_, and to draw a comparison between what we have done for the
Russians and what they have done for us. It must, however, be written
with tact, in a diplomatic way.”
“I will try to do so,” I replied. “I am acquainted with the articles in
the _Golos_ through the German _Petersburger Zeitung_. It shall be done
at once, as was the article on the subject of our last conversation.
With your permission, I will send you a proof of it to-morrow, in case
you should wish to add or strike out anything.”
“Please do so,” he said. “And now as to Gortschakoff. You know how
the _Golos_ incessantly attacks our policy and me personally, asserts
that we were ungrateful at the Berlin Congress, and recommends joint
action with France. That is the work of Gortschakoff and Jomini, and
this fact must be got into our press. Gortschakoff must be shown what
we have owed or have not owed to Russia during the past fifty or sixty
years, and what we have done for her in this period. Russia helped us
in 1813, but in her own interest. In 1815, the Russian’s policy was
in a general way a good one, but at the same time it injured us by
frustrating any organisation of Germany which might not have fitted
in with the Emperor Alexander’s plans for rearranging the world; our
demand for compensation also received but very lukewarm support from
the Russians. Finally, their gains were greater than ours, although we
had risked and achieved more, and made greater sacrifices than they had
done. You know that in 1828 we did them good service during the Turkish
war by Muffling’s mission for example, which helped them out of a great
embarrassment. In 1830, they wanted to attack us in co-operation with
France, for whom we were anxious to secure the left bank of the Rhine.
The execution of this plan was only prevented by the outbreak of the
July Revolution. Shortly before the February Revolution a similar plan
was being developed. In 1847 we suppressed the rising in Posen in the
interest of Russia. During the first war with Denmark they ran counter
to us. Of course, you know what took place at Warsaw, in 1850, when
the Union was under consideration. We have in great part to thank the
Emperor Nicholas for our pilgrimage to Olmütz. During the Crimean
war in 1854, we, who had been badly treated shortly before, remained
neutral, while Austria, who had been well treated, joined the Western
Powers; and in 1863, when the insurrection broke out in Poland, and was
supported by Austria and the Western Powers in their Notes, we took the
part of Russia, and the diplomatic intervention failed.--It should only
be a short balance sheet, giving the debit and credit sides--you will
have to read the subject up.--In 1866 and 1870 Russia did not attack
us--on the contrary. But that, after all, was in Russia’s interest too.
In 1866, Prussia was an instrument for venting the anger of Russia upon
Austria; and in 1870 also it was only sound policy on her part to side
with us, as it was undesirable for the Russians that Austria should
join against us, and that a victorious Franco-Austrian force should
approach the frontiers of Poland, it being a traditional policy in
Paris to support Poland at the expense of Russia, a policy which was
also followed in Vienna, at least of recent years. And then, if we had
reason to be thankful to them, we returned the compliment in London in
1870. We secured for them the freedom of the Black Sea. But for us they
would not have obtained it from England and France.”
After a short pause he continued, while I, with one of his big pencils,
noted down what he said: “Gortschakoff is not carrying on a Russian
policy, which takes us into account as friends, but a personal policy.
He always wants to cut a figure, and to be praised by the foreign
press, and in particular by the Parisian newspapers. He sympathises
with France, which cannot be said of the Emperor. He would like to
posture as the friend and supporter of that country. The Dreikaiserbund
only satisfied him for a short time. As far back as 1874 the threads
of the Gortschakoff-Jomini policy are to be found in the foreign
press--oglings and advances towards an intimacy between Russia and
France of ‘la revanche.’ The rejection of these addresses is due
rather to France than to Russia. This policy does not appear to have
originated with the Emperor Alexander. It culminated in the period
1875-77, when the rumour was circulated that Gortschakoff had saved
France from us, and when he began one of his circular despatches with
the words: ‘Maintenant la paix est assurée.’ You remember Blowitz’s
report in _The Times_. Read it again, and mention the matter. His
account was correct, except where he spoke of an anti-French military
party in Prussia. No such party existed. The same policy, which must
be distinguished from that of the Emperor, is now being carried on in
the _Golos_, which was formerly Gortschakoff’s official organ. Whether,
in spite of all signs of disfavour this is not still the case, and
whether Jomini does not still inspire it, is doubtful. At any rate it
is Gortschakoff’s policy which it represents. People are now talking of
his retirement, and that Lobanoff, the Ambassador at Constantinople, is
selected to be his successor. Those who are well informed, however, do
not believe this, nor do they think he will retire from office as long
as he lives.”
I said: “Lobánoff? How are these Russian names really pronounced?
Górtschakoff and Lobánoff?”
“He is called, Górtschakoff, but otherwise the position of the accent
is quite uncertain--sometimes before, sometimes after, and sometimes
on the middle syllable. He is now old, feeble, and decrepit; yet,
notwithstanding his failing powers, the anti-German publications are
placed to his credit--and not without reason. They also account in part
for his popularity in Russia--and his vanity has not decreased. After
1874 it seemed as if his thirst for fame would give him no peace. At
the time of the Reichstadt Convention he is understood to have said:
‘Je ne veux pas filer comme une lampe qui s’éteint; il faut que je me
couche comme un astre.’”
I had not rightly understood him, and asked: “How did you say that,
Serene Highness?”
He then repeated the French phrase more slowly, and said afterwards:
“Please show it to me. You will have written it correctly, I suppose?”
I handed him the paper, and he observed: “The ‘e’ is missing in
‘comme,’ and the accent in ‘éteint.’” He then continued: “You might
bring in, at the same time, that he has really been stupid as a
politician. He has only acted for himself during the last four
years--that was in the preparations for the Turkish war, and no one
can say that he displayed any particular skill in bringing it about.
The relations with Austria--or, indeed, even with Rumania--were not
skilfully managed. What did he do during the six months which he spent
at Bucharest? The old fop was more occupied with the fair sex than
with business. The relations with Austria and Germany were also not
properly cleared up, although it ought to have been his chief task to
assure himself definitely of the position of Austria towards the aims
of Russia.” In the further course of conversation, Schuvaloff’s name
came up, and I said he was regarded by many persons as Gortschakoff’s
successor. The Chancellor replied: “Schuvaloff is a clever man, but
he has no chance. There is too much Court intrigue against him, and
the Emperor Alexander will not have about him a man of real weight.
Otherwise Schuvaloff would be excellent from the point of view of
peace.”
The interview had lasted over half an hour. The Prince went out for
a drive immediately after--probably to return Lord Dufferin’s visit.
I went to the Foreign Office, where Bucher enabled me to take a copy
of the documents, and of Blowitz’s article in _The Times_. Three days
later the article desired by the Chief, to which I gave the title,
“The Gortschakoff Policy,” was ready. On the 6th of March I sent a
proof of it to the Prince, and was pleased to find that he only struck
out some seventeen lines from the nine pages of which it consisted.
It then appeared in No. 11 of the _Grenzboten_, and extracts were
reproduced in the entire European press. It gave rise to a particularly
lively controversy in the English and Russian newspapers, and some of
them discussed it in long leading articles as an event of the first
magnitude; so that it may be assumed that the object the Chief had in
view was satisfactorily attained.
After the first volume of the fifth edition of _Count Bismarck and
His People_ had been printed, Captain Derosne’s French translation
appeared in May, 1879. The translator made some additions to the
passages respecting Madame Jesse, which began with the words: “We are
in a position to add to Dr. Busch’s diary some particulars which were
noted down at the time by Madame Jesse, who owned the house occupied
by M. de Bismarck and his suite from the 6th of October, 1870, to the
5th of March, 1871.” I showed these to the Prince, who, after reading
them over, declared them to be mostly fables, and very poor fables. He
observed, in conclusion:--
“And as to this clock: ‘Je ne veux pas--je ne cède pas.’ On the
contrary, she let me know that if I would give her 5,000 francs in
compensation for the damage done to her house and property, she would
let me have the clock.”
I now informed him that the book had been translated by Derosne, a
captain attached to the general staff in Paris; that, on the whole,
his version read very well; and that, from his letters, the translator
appeared to be an ardent Bonapartist, who placed the Republic on a
level with cholera and the plague. I then mentioned, as I had already
informed him by letter, that Derosne also proposed to translate
_Letters to Malwine_, and that I had promised him an introduction and
explanatory notes, in case he (the Chief) gave his permission. He said:
“Yes, with pleasure.” I replied: “I had hoped as much; as it is evident
that, although the French do not love your Serene Highness, they take
an interest in you, and, indeed, a deep interest. The translation,
which was published on the 8th instant, was sold out in five or six
days, although the edition consisted of 3,000 copies; and an advance
collection of quotations from it (of which 10,000 copies are said
to have been issued) is also understood to have been very speedily
disposed of. Dentu is now printing the book itself. Six translations
have already been published--in England and America, as well as in the
Dutch and Russian languages. There has also been some talk of a Swedish
translation. The Dutch sounds very queer in some parts.”
“I can easily believe that,” he said. “Have you ever read a Dutch play?”
“No,” I replied, “but I have seen some passages from the Dutch Bible.”
“It sounds very strange to our ears; but,” he added, “one must not tell
them so, as they would feel greatly offended.”
He then said: “But tell me what you think of the last debates in the
Reichstag, and the position of the Customs Reform.”
I replied: “Well, I think one may congratulate you on the commencement
of victory in the matter. The manner in which you disposed of Delbrück,
in the debate on the corn tariff was simply delightful. Why, that was a
refutation, point by point.”
“Yes,” he replied, smiling, “but we cannot yet say how things will
go at the third reading. If it is not passed, I shall make a Cabinet
question of it; and, as the King will not let me go, we shall dissolve.
They, however, would seem inclined to procrastinate; and, in that case,
I am not yet certain whether we ought to dissolve. Another year can,
perhaps, do no harm, and the elections may in the meantime turn out
better. The Ultramontanes, with whom it is altogether impossible to
come to any permanent understanding, will hardly support the revenue
taxes. Then we must have a dissolution, as we regard the reform as a
whole, from which no part can be dissevered.”
I asked if I might say that in the press. He said: “I think not.
Emphasise in detail the position of the Eighty-eight (the Opposition)
in their private and business capacities, to the iron tariff. How
most of these gentlemen--lawyers, journalists, holders of funded
property--are people who live upon fees, salaries, pensions, dividends;
and, having no immediate connection with agriculture, are not
personally affected, and have no experience, yet have most to say in
the matter.”
“Who neither sow, nor reap, nor spin, as you said to Lasker,” I
observed, “and who are nevertheless fed and clad. Of course, you did
not refer to them alone, but to the whole class.”
“Certainly,” he replied. “Write that, and hunt up the necessary
personal information. That may prove useful as a means of clearing up
the situation for the elections. It must be shown that the majority of
our legislators are the people who have nothing to do with practical
affairs, and have no eye, no ear, no sympathy for the interests which
the Government, in this case, defends. Learned men, particularly the
leaders and principal speakers. Men of theory, who have no proper
feeling for realities, and who have acquired their knowledge, not from
experience, but from books, must no longer have the sole power and
chief influence in the Legislature.”
He then made a move, as though the interview were at an end. I rose,
and he gave me his hand, and then asked: “How are things in general
going with you? You look rather poorly!”
I replied: “Much obliged to your Serene Highness, but thank God I have
nothing to complain of. There is only one thing I want, viz., that you
should make more use of my willingness to serve you. The article on
Gortschakoff, for example, did its work in the press fairly well.” “I
know that,” he said, “but I have so much to do just now. Even as it is
I want five or six more hours in the day to get through my work,” “And
how is your Serene Highness’s health?” “Not good. It was better, but
the overwork and worry! I must shortly get out of harness again.”
I then went across to Bucher to get materials for the article which
the Chief desired me to write. On this occasion, Bucher told me that
“the stout fellow” (von Bülow, the Secretary of State) proposed to the
Prince that “Press-Hahn” should be taken into the Foreign Office as
First Councillor. Bucher added: “Bülow, who is a Mecklenburger, has no
thorough knowledge of Prussian affairs, and so Hahn would assist him.
The Chief also wished it, but Hahn had been gossiping, and so it got
into the newspapers. This was reported to the Chief, who then said: ‘A
man who cannot keep his own counsel cannot be employed by me here,’ and
so the appointment was not made. Bülow, however, declares that it has
only been postponed.”
On my calling upon Bucher again in the afternoon, he said: “I would
beg one favour of you. There has been talk of somebody being again
appointed here in connection with the press. I was to take over the
work in the meantime, as he wrote me from Friedrichsruh. I said to
Bülow, however, that that would not do, as it would first be necessary
for me to arrange for the necessary information, and prepare the files,
and that that would take some weeks. Probably Bülow has thereupon
simply written to the Chief that I declined. Now, I would request
you, when you are next called to the Prince, to take an opportunity
of mentioning that you got part of the material for your last article
from me, and that I have also been of assistance to you occasionally in
other ways.” I promised to do this.
The article which the Chief had ordered appeared in No. 22 of the
_Grenzboten_, under the title of “Some Characteristics of the Minority
in the Question of Tariff Reform.”
During the next few months I was actively engaged in the _Grenzboten_
in supporting the Chief’s policy and attacking his Free Trade and
Progressist opponents. I almost always took counsel with Bucher, who
sometimes suggested the articles, and between us the Prince’s opponents
came to hear many a bitter truth.
On the 9th of June I met von Thile at the corner of the
Flottwellstrasse and Lutzowstrasse. He stopped as he returned my
greeting, and we dropped into conversation, in the course of which I
also mentioned his retirement, and pointed to Keudell as the immediate
cause of it. “He wished to be Secretary of State,” I said, “and then
Minister.” “Your Excellency knows better than I do how incapable he was
of filling such a post. He had an excellent eye for his own advantage,
but he had no political ability.”
“He was a maid of all work,” replied Thile, who then related to me the
story of his resignation. “I sent a request to the Minister to let me
know whether I should tender my resignation to him, which was the usual
course, or to the Emperor. Keudell took this message to him. He then
came to tell me, under instructions from the Minister, that I should
apply to the Emperor in order to spare him, the Chief, the sight of my
hateful countenance. The story then got abroad, and Bancroft repeated
it to me, adding that it was ‘a message which no gentleman would have
carried to another gentleman,’--and you know what a high regard he has
for the Minister otherwise.” In conclusion, I begged Thile to permit me
to call upon him at some future time. He said it would afford him great
pleasure, and he gave me his address, No. 3, Flottwellstrasse.
Next day I sent him a copy of the French translation of the Bismarck
book, for which he thanked me in a very amiable letter. After careful
consideration, I postponed my visit for a time. It would not have
looked well had the Prince heard of it, as he is suspicious, and
certainly not without reason, even of his friends.
It was not until the 6th of October that I again saw the Prince, having
on the previous day received a letter from Sachse inviting me to call
upon him. When I entered the antechamber Philippsborn was with the
Chief. At six minutes past one he sent Theiss to call me in to him. I
remained for about three-quarters of an hour. He was in plain clothes
and in evident good humour. On reaching me his hand he said: “Well,
doctor, how are you? How are the patients getting on?”
I: “The patients? Whom do you mean, Serene Highness?”
He: “Why, the newspapers.”
I: “They are as ill as ever, or I should rather say, as stupid.”
He: “Well, just at present we could also find use for a doctor in the
Foreign Office. Things are getting very dull there. Bülow is seriously
ill, and is hardly likely to recover. I shall not see him again after
his holiday. And Gastein has not done me any good either. I was obliged
to work too much there, and yet to no purpose. I felt very well at
Kissingen, but now--my health was better when I left Berlin on the
closing of the Reichstag than it is at present. It was just the same
as long ago as 1877. I then took a longer holiday than usual, but
business followed me like my shadow. Radowitz is also not well. He,
too, complains, and requires some rest. There is now some talk of
looking for assistance to one of our Ministers abroad, Alvensleben and
Stirum being mentioned, as well as Schlözer, who is in favour with the
Crown Prince. With us the trade of a Minister is exhausting, and they
sometimes even die of it, as Brandenburg did after the Warsaw-Olmütz
events. A vast amount of nerve power is used up, particularly in the
Foreign Office among the elderly gentlemen. Fresh friction continually
arises. It was the same in former times, when three Ministers went out
of their minds.” He named them, Kernitz was one, and then continued:
“He (the King) has been wearing out others besides, for instance,
Falk, who retired solely on account of exhaustion and worry. He (Falk)
has no reason to complain of me, I took his part in all questions.
The King was always against him whenever he wanted to carry something
through. I advised him not to take it so much to heart. When the
Most Gracious, who is entirely under the influence of the Queen and
the Court Chaplains, sent him an order which he had to execute, he
should have pointed out that it must have his counter-signature if the
King wanted to keep up constitutional appearances, but that his own
convictions made it impossible for him to sign it, and he should then
have waited to see what would happen. But he is too easily offended,
and so he tendered his resignation--really on account of a mere trifle,
because a Herr von Hagen (so I understood him to say), an utterly
insignificant creature, a blockhead, a coarse, stupid Junker, who
had collected signatures to an address against him, had been elected
on to the Managing Committee of the General Synod. (?) But the real
reason was exhaustion, and vexation at not being able to make any
headway with the King. It was somewhat different in Friedenthal’s case.
He was an intriguer whom I was glad to see the last of. They would
have been pleased to retain him--at Court, where his wife was very
thick with the Empress, and the Emperor interfered very little in his
affairs. Hobrecht’s case was again different. He retired, doubtless
because he himself recognised his inefficiency. He was not at all
equal to his position, and was, besides, of too weak a character to
deal with the numerous obstructive forces in his Ministry. With us,
however, the Foreign Ministry is the worst of all. There the friction
never ceases. My nature is such that I have been able to stand it for
seventeen years; but Bülow, who conducted affairs during my absence,
and who, when he thought he was through with something, constantly met
with fresh hindrances and senseless and obstinate objections--he is
suffering from spinal disease and will die of it.”
He paused for a moment and then continued: “That comes chiefly of the
Emperor’s infatuation for Russia. I am also Russian in my sympathies,
but not blindly, like the Emperor, who, with the exception of his
brother, Prince Charles, and of Princess Alexandrine--is quite alone
in this respect at Court. He sees and hears nothing, and no argument
or evidence makes any impression upon him. He went to Alexandrowo in
spite of the fact that I repeatedly protested in the most positive way
against his doing so. They are making immense preparations in Russia,
have increased their forces by 400,000 men, as much as the peace
footing of the German Army. They can now put twenty-four new divisions
into the field, that is, twelve army corps. And a mass of cavalry is
stationed near the western frontier which could pour in upon us in
three days. The reports are reliable and the Emperor is acquainted with
the facts, but will not credit them. At Alexandrowo they turned his
head with sentimental talk and reminiscences of Queen Louise, so that
he does not recognise the danger, and nothing can be done with him. And
yet it is so evident. Against whom are those armaments directed? They
say in St. Petersburg that Constantinople must be conquered through
Berlin. Others say that the road lies through Vienna, but that Vienna
must be reached through Berlin. We must therefore seek support, and the
direction in which it is to be found is indicated. The sensible portion
of the 42,000,000 Germans would prefer to have a good understanding
with both Russia and Austria. But if one is obliged to choose between
them, then everything points to Austria, national reasons and others.
In that country there are some nine or ten millions of Germans, and the
Hungarians are also decidedly upon our side; indeed, even the Czechs
(with the exception of a dozen or so of irreconcilables who are of
no account) are at least disinclined to become Russians. But let us
suppose that Austria were a purely Slav country. Russia is strong
enough alone, and we cannot be of much assistance to her. Austria is
the weaker of the two, although at the same time a valuable ally, and
we can be of great assistance to her. She can also strengthen us in our
policy of peace. When we are united, with our two million soldiers back
to back, they, with their Nihilism, will doubtless think twice before
they disturb the peace. The idea of such an alliance has been very
favourably received by the German Princes; and they are in thorough
agreement with it in England also. France, too, is at present obviously
in favour of the maintenance of peace, but for how long? The Crown
Prince is quite of my opinion; it was a matter of course, he said, that
we should unite with Austria. It is only the Emperor--he has recovered
physically from the great loss of blood in the last attempt upon his
life, but his mental powers have been weakened.”
I remarked that the old gentleman’s age, his eighty-two years, must
doubtless also have some effect. Water on the brain was apt to set in
at that age.
“That too,” he added, “and consequently he does not understand what
is said to him, even when it is very simple, and will not adopt any
measures that are proposed to him. He and his brother and Princess
Alexandrine are the Russian Rütli. (An allusion to Schiller’s _Wilhelm
Tell_.) You must not say anything about this in the press--at least,
not as yet; nor of the intention to bring about an alliance for the
maintenance of peace either, as that is still in course of development.
But you may speak of the condition of affairs in the Foreign Office,
how one’s ideas and decisions are affected by consideration for
the political requirements of the Empire, by responsibility to the
Reichstag, and by the views of the Sovereign; and that the friction
thus arising wears some Ministers to death, and invariably injures
their health. Refer to Brandenburg as an instance which the present
situation recalls. Bülow has been destroyed in that way. It is our Most
Gracious who has done for him. The doctors say that the pain in the hip
indicates a dangerous spinal disease. He is to be brought in now from
Potsdam to Berlin, but I shall go out with my wife to see him. If he
goes to Italy, who knows if we shall meet again? I must not stay longer
than a quarter of an hour with him, as the excitement would be too much
for him. I am extremely sorry to lose him.”
I said: “I have heard him described as a particularly capable worker.”
“Yes,” he replied, “and adroit, sensible, and loyal; not like Thile,
who was the Empress’s messenger, and whom she kept here for a long time
after I had made up my mind to get rid of him, owing to his incapacity.
I learned to know and esteem him at Frankfurt (he was now referring
again to Bülow), whilst he still held the post of Danish Envoy to the
Germanic Diet. And when he had become Minister for Mecklenburg he also
showed great ability in the Federal Council, so that I was determined
to have him.”
He then recurred to the alliance with Austria, repeating in other words
what he had said to me, _inter alia_. With the exception of the Emperor
and the two other personages, almost the only people in Germany who
were still in favour of Russia were the East Prussian corn-dealers. In
reply to an inquiry as to the attitude of the Emperor Francis Joseph,
he said: “Very fair and reasonable. He came specially on my account to
Vienna from his shooting-box, adopted all my ideas, and was prepared to
do everything I proposed in the interest of peace.”
He observed, in conclusion, that he was leaving for Varzin in a few
days. “Friedrichsruh is too near,” he explained, “and I shall not take
any official with me.” He then rang the bell, and asked the servant if
the carriage which was to take him to the Potsdam railway station was
ready; and I took my leave, with good wishes for his health.
This interview resulted in an article, “Fresh Friction,” in No. 42 of
the _Grenzboten_, which was also discussed and commented upon at length
in the home and foreign press.
I did not see the Chief again that year. We continued, however, as
best we could to promote his ideas in the _Grenzboten_, Bucher, as
before, helping us faithfully and indefatigably with his counsel and
assistance as long as he was in Berlin. In these articles the party
Philistines were now and again treated to some pretty energetic
castigation, which is believed to have affected them rather painfully.
The Prince returned from his holiday late in the winter, and it was
only on the 9th of March, 1880, that I received an invitation from the
Imperial Chancellerie to pay him a visit. I went to his palace at the
time appointed, 1 o’clock, and had to wait for a quarter of an hour in
the large pillared antechamber. Whilst I was sitting there, Tiedemann
and the “Cerberus” (_Geheimer Hofrath_ Roland of the Foreign Office)
passed through the room. The latter seemed not to have been aware of
my renewed intercourse with the Chancellor, spoke a few words to me,
perhaps to satisfy himself that I was really the same person whom
he probably regarded as having fallen into permanent disfavour and
oblivion on account of my book, and had an opportunity of hearing the
Chancery attendant in a loud clear voice call me in to the Prince. If
he then further ascertained that I remained for nearly a full hour with
the Chief he will certainly have looked upon it as a miracle, and the
next time I meet him in the street I shall have the happiness of being
honoured by a friendly greeting from him. O these little bonzes!
So I wrote in my diary, which also contains the following particulars
of this interview with the Chief.
The Chancellor wore a dark grey coat (plain clothes) with a military
stock. During our interview he drank first a glass of beer, then some
Vichy water, which the attendant had to bring him. On my making my
bow, he reached me his hand across the table, and said: “I really have
not much to say to you to-day, but I was anxious to see you again. My
health is still indifferent. It is true I have nothing in particular
to complain of, and sleep well enough--nine hours last night--and eat
with appetite, but I tire immediately. I must not walk or stand for any
length of time, as it brings on neuralgic pains. That comes from the
overwork of last year, and from the violent excitement. You know that
that does not at all agree with the Gastein waters--it may even prove
dangerous.
“At that time I was extremely anxious on account of Russia, and feared
an alliance between her and Austria, which the French would also
have joined. Latterly the Russians had written us brutal letters,
threatening us in case we did not support them in the Eastern question,
and I thought they could never act in that way, unless they had
in Austria a good friend, who might become an ally. They had also
endeavoured to bring about an alliance in Paris, through Obrutscheff.
He is the adjutant and confidant of Miljutin, the Minister of War. But
the French did not want it, and informed us through our Ambassador
and others--just as a virtuous woman tells her husband when somebody
makes improper overtures to her. That worried me a great deal. I had
always desired to come to an understanding with Austria. As far back as
1852 I had an idea of the kind. It was--while the German Confederation
still existed--that Austria should not want to have the sole authority
in Germany, nor always hamper and coerce Prussia; she should grant
Prussia a position in the Bund, which would allow her to use her
whole strength in repelling the threatened attacks and pretensions of
neighbouring Powers. They would not hear of this in Vienna, however;
thought it was unnecessary. They held that Prussia had most to fear
from such pretensions, and required Austria’s good will and assistance
more than Austria required her’s. We had, therefore, to submit to
being treated as an inferior, and indeed treated abominably. You know
the Schwarzenberg policy, which was continued up to the Congress of
Princes. They refused to share, and insisted upon having everything for
themselves. We were therefore obliged, for our own self-preservation,
to give them a practical proof that they were mistaken in thinking
we must always lean upon them, and therefore give way to them, being
unable to do anything for ourselves. So we took the opportunity in
1866, pitched them out of doors, and came to an understanding with
the others--on fair terms. I then again thought of a reconciliation
with them, for instance in 1870; but it was impossible to do anything
with Beust, and so the preparatory steps came to nothing. Andrassy
seemed better disposed. It was necessary, however, to put my old idea
into a new shape, in consequence of the altered situation. _I wanted
an open constitutional alliance against a coalition_, indissoluble,
_i.e._, only to be dissolved on our side by the Emperor, the Federal
Council, and the Reichstag, and on theirs by the Emperor and Trans-
and Cis-Leithania. Then came the Turkish War, the Berlin Congress, and
the execution of what had been there agreed upon. In St. Petersburg
they expected us to look after their interests unconditionally, and to
support all their demands. We could not do that, however, as some of
them were unfair and dangerous. They began with imperious and arrogant
warnings, and finally proceeded to threats. I could only explain that
by the supposition either that an understanding had already been
arrived at between Vienna and St. Petersburg, or was being negotiated.
Andrassy’s Russian journey and various other circumstances seemed to
confirm these apprehensions, and so last summer I was in a state of
great anxiety. France would doubtless have soon joined the other two.
In these circumstances, it was questionable whether England would have
stood by Germany, as that country can never be easily induced to take
sides with a Power which does not seem to have the upper hand. It was,
therefore, with a heavy heart that I went from Kissingen to Gastein,
and when Andrassy came I was very curious to hear what he would say.
I then ascertained, however, that nothing of the kind existed. No
understanding had been come to with Russia. I then brought forward my
idea, which he immediately accepted, that is to say, he was in favour
of the alliance, but not of a constitutional one. He would not hear of
that, nor of publicity; and, indeed, in the end, it was as well not,
as their Reichstag would have picked holes in it from their ignorance,
and wanted this or that to be altered. Their Parliament is even worse
than our own.”
“Yes,” I said; “the Constitutional party there are still more
pettifogging than our Parliamentarians.”
“You are quite right,” he added. “With that exception Andrassy quite
agreed with me, and the Emperor in Vienna was perhaps even more
strongly in favour of the alliance. But our Emperor was not. He raised
really brutal objections, and wished to sacrifice the welfare of the
Fatherland upon the high altar of his Russian friendship, although the
Russians had been as perfidious and insolent as it was possible for
them to be--also towards Austria, so that the unquestionably russophil
Archduke Albrecht afterwards said to Andrassy: ‘I rejoice now in the
alliance with Germany, as the Russians are the most untrustworthy
intriguers.’ At that time I may have written I should say a thousand
pages, working day and night, using all sorts of arguments, and begging
and praying, but without the slightest result. And yet there was no
time to lose. Andrassy wished to retire. He, like myself, was tired,
and he could afford to rest and be lazy. He had already provided
himself with a successor, but considered it an honour to conclude
the treaty himself. Nor could I remain for ever in Vienna. Yet if it
were not now concluded with Andrassy, I felt the treaty would come
to nothing, as the others had no heart in it. Moreover, the Russians
might after all be able to come to terms with them against us. But the
Most Gracious did not understand this. Even in Berlin he continued
to hang back. At length he appeared to yield. I begged for leave of
absence, and it was granted in a particularly official tone. Hardly
had I turned my back when he issued a variety of contradictory orders,
and I was obliged to send Stolberg to him in order to bring him round
again. Stolberg behaved very well, and was not at all servile. And so
the thing was at length done, and I believe it will last. The Austrians
cannot help themselves now, and taken altogether the Emperor Francis
Joseph is honourable and trustworthy.”
“So he--I mean our Emperor--did finally sign it?” I remarked. “Until
now I thought, in spite of what the press said, that he had not done
so.”
“Yes, he _has_ signed it,” he replied.
“And it is a formal treaty, no mere protocol, as was stated?” I further
inquired.
He smiled as he answered in low German: “Dat kann ik Se nich seggen.”
(I cannot tell you that.)
“Well, I observed that your Serene Highness referred to it several
times as the ‘treaty.’”
“Yes,” he replied, “but that must not be written. You must not let
that be known. It would be all the same to me. I even wanted a public
treaty.”
He was silent for a few seconds, and then spoke about the weather.
“A very fine day. Last night we had three degrees of cold, and now
I should fancy there are fifteen degrees of heat. Can you see the
thermometer there? How high is it?”
“Nineteen degrees.”
He held his spectacles before his eyes and said: “Eighteen, no, you
are right, nineteen. I cannot go out, although I should like to; I
am afraid of catching cold. And yet I ought to show myself in the
Reichstag for once, and honour them with my presence. I have no mind
to it. I do not love their students’ club ways. For them the Party is
always the first consideration, and everything hinges upon that. It
is the case with the Conservatives as well as the Liberals. Instead
of working with the National Liberals, where it is obvious that the
leaders of the Left Wing no longer exercise their former influence,
instead of at least approaching them, the Conservatives prefer to
go with the Ultramontane Centre. And yet there is no trusting the
latter. I, too, desire peace, but they are not to be gained over by
any concessions whatever, so long as a Protestant Imperial House
rules here. Bennigsen manages his people very well. It is true that
nothing can be done with Rickert and the little Jew, Lasker. All the
same he acted sensibly with regard to Stosch. And Hänel, too, who is
otherwise accustomed to look up to the Court (the Crown Prince). He
ought to have been treated quite differently--I mean Stosch, a vain,
incapable fellow. But they are a servile lot. It is true that the Free
Conservative section is the party of the distinguished and the wealthy,
and it was their duty and that of the other Conservatives to oppose
anything that was really unwise or bad, otherwise they would have
forfeited their position. But they are all servile, Court Conservatives
in secret, and Court Liberals in public. They spare him because they
believe he is in favour with the successor, which is really not the
case, however.”
I observed that the same sort of thing happened in England, where they
all kneel and crawl on their stomachs before the Queen, and even look
up with devotion to the Prince of Wales.
He replied: “Perhaps, but it is harmless there. She has little to say
in matters of State, and cannot modify the policy of the Ministry of
the day. In that particular they do not hold with the Court, and do
not, as here, spare incapables because they are in favour there. And
he is not even liked by the future Master. He is only retained because
he is a Freemason of high degree. I have had that experience also with
others who were incompetent, but held high Masonic rank. He concluded
that mischievous military agreement with Saxony. I knew nothing
whatever about it until the Saxons appealed to its provisions, and
it was then too late. He did us harm also in France in 1871, when we
were negotiating respecting compensation for the troops that remained
behind, making us lose at least sixty millions. I do not want to bring
any charge against him, but one cannot help wondering what he got from
the Saxons and from Thiers. And our fleet, which has cost us such a
fearful amount of money, is quite worthless, because the right man has
never been put at the head of it. I thought it ought to be at least
equal to the Russian fleet, but it is not--the Russian is better. He
is a servile creature, and deceived the Emperor at the review. The
sailors had to show themselves smart well-drilled infantry men; and so
the Emperor, who is himself a foot soldier, thought everything was all
right. But they pass it over in the Reichstag because they do not wish
to offend the Court, and want orders and titles. It is just the same
with our press. Pindter, for example (the editor of the _Norddeutsche
Allgemeine Zeitung_), begged to be invested with a higher official
title. Well, he can have it. Those sort of people place their paper
at the disposal of the Government whenever it is wanted. But I should
prefer to be plain Herr Pindter, rather than Commissionsrath Pindter.”
The Chief then, after referring to Hohenlohe, “who also does not
wish to injure himself with the upper circles,” came to talk of the
appointment of the Secretary of State in the Foreign Office. There were
great difficulties in the way of this appointment, he said, as the
pecuniary position of those in view was such that they could not take
the post.
I asked: “Was Hatzfeldt really thought of in this connection?” “Yes,
but he cannot take it. He is in financial difficulties. He can manage
to get on as Minister in Constantinople, but not here. He would have
been capable enough. Hohenlohe cannot do so either. He has a great
château at Schillingsfuerst which costs him a great deal and brings
him in nothing. Radowitz, who is even more capable than Hatzfeldt, is
no better off in money matters. Moreover he has a Russian wife and six
children, which is also not quite the thing. Solms, in Madrid, is too
servile,--he would do everything that the Most Gracious desired.”
I: “How about Werther, in Munich, who used to write those brilliant
despatches with so little in them?”
He: “He, too, has not enough money.”
I: “He is understood to have a large estate in Thuringia, Beichlingen,
near Eckartsberg.”
He: “First of all that is not the place; then it is an entailed estate,
and his father has impressed upon him to live economically and extend
the property.”
I: “In that case I do not know any other who would be suitable.”
He: “Keudell, in Rome might be nominated.”
I: “He has a rich wife, but has he the ability?”
He: “Your question shows that you have formed a more accurate opinion
of him than others have done. He has a reputation for ability because
he knows how to hold his tongue, and people fancy that his silence
covers ideas and knowledge. I thought so too, but have convinced
myself that he has neither. Moreover, he is too hasty in judgment,
sanguine, and thoughtless. Finally, he would be unfair to his
subordinates, which would also be the case with Radowitz, who, it
is true, is not a German. Both are vain, and want admiration and
obsequiousness. Whoever is not prepared for that sort of thing will
find himself overlooked and treated with disfavour.”
I asked: “How is it now with the Empress, Serene Highness? Does she
still cause you difficulties?”
He: “Exactly the same as ever. She is still intriguing with the
Ultramontanes, and I know that the coarse and brutal notes which I have
received are due to her.”
He paused for a moment and then said: “Now if you have anything further
to say to me or to ask----”
I stood up, thanked him for giving me the pleasure of seeing him once
more, and took my leave, meeting Philippsborn in the first antechamber
on my way out.
I took the first part of this interview as the subject of an article
which appeared in No. 12 of the _Grenzboten_ under the heading “The
History of the German-Austrian Alliance.” This caused as great a
sensation in the German and foreign press as the previous articles on
Gortschakoff’s policy and the Fresh Friction.
The same number of the _Grenzboten_ contained another article by me,
which dealt with the second principal topic of the conversation of
the 9th of March. I had received, on the 10th of that month, further
materials for it from Count Herbert, on behalf of his father. It was
simply entitled “From the Reichstag.” The second half of this article
was also commented upon at great length in the Berlin newspapers....
About 12 o’clock on the 20th of March I received the following note
from Count Herbert:--
“My Dear Sir,--My father would be glad to see you, either
immediately if you have time, or at 2.30 P.M. He is going to
the palace at 1.45 to offer his congratulations. Therefore, if you
cannot come before 1 o’clock, 2.30 will be better.
“Respectfully,
“Count Bismarck.”
I was at No. 77 Wilhelmstrasse at 2.15, just as the Chief returned from
seeing the Emperor. In the hall I met Bucher, who looked very poorly
and complained of overwork. On my entering the Prince’s room I found
him sitting at his writing-table, which this time was so placed that
the Chief had his back towards the window opening on the garden. He had
on a grey coat, white trousers, and varnished top-boots, and wore an
order round his neck. He said, after shaking hands as usual, and while
he drew from an envelope the articles on the Treaty with Austria, and
on Stosch, which I had sent him on the previous day: “Did you send me
these?” I replied in the affirmative.
He: “H’m, I suppose, then, they are already printed?”
I: “Yes, already copied into the other papers and telegraphed to
London.”
He: “That’s a pity. On the whole, the article is very good--you have a
powerful memory--but there are some things in it which I should have
liked to see modified. It is somewhat too highly seasoned--too blunt.”
He then read aloud the passage in which it was stated that even towards
the end the Emperor still manifested great reluctance, and said: “That
is true, but it is too strongly expressed.” He then went on reading,
and on coming to the part in which the trickery and mendacity of
Russia were mentioned, he observed: “That is also true, but it ought
to have been expressed with more diplomatic tact, now that they struck
a different chord. Of course, what we now want is peace, after we have
buckled on our armour, or our revolver. And it would also have been
better if both articles had not appeared in the same number. Then a
great deal is mentioned which was not intended for the public, but only
for your own private information. They will now mark these passages and
send them to him--she (the Empress) or Prince Charles, who always tries
to injure me, and who has always been very Russophil, like his sister,
Alexandrine of Mecklenburg. He also knows why!”--and he made a motion
as if he were counting out money.
“Money, Serene Highness?” I asked.
“Well, or----Surely you know--the old rake!”
I observed: “Perhaps it would interest your Serene Highness to see
how an English correspondent has telegraphed the whole article at
full length to the _Daily Telegraph_ in London, so that it appeared
there simultaneously with the publication in the _Grenzboten_. In many
instances he has toned down the original.”
“Yes, I should be glad to see that,” he said. I gave him the newspaper.
He read the beginning, and then said: “Leave it with me, and I will
return it later.”
I now said: “Might I ask what is the attitude of England towards the
alliance?”
He replied: “They are entirely engrossed in the elections. A great deal
will depend upon the result. The Italians hope that Gladstone will be
victorious. You have doubtless read their assurance that they wish to
retain friendly relations with all the Powers, but reserve the right
to act in accordance with their own interests? They are like carrion
crows on the battle-field that let others provide their food. They were
prepared in 1870 to fall upon us with the others, if they were promised
a piece of the Tyrol. At that time a Russian diplomat said: ‘What!
they are asking for something again, although they have not yet lost a
battle!’”
I said: “Of these it is only the Piedmontese who seem to be any good as
soldiers. Always covetous and always weak. Look at Lissa, where their
powerful fleet was shamefully beaten, and their admiral fled like a
coward. If they would only seek to strengthen their position at home,
where no Ministry lasts more than a few months, and where the people
are crushed by taxation and debt!”
“Yes,” he replied, “that is the real _irredenta Italia_. They ought to
take that in hand instead of thinking of conquests. But one day they
will find themselves in the same case as Spain under Isabella, and the
Papal States and the Kingdom of Naples will be once more restored.
Russia and Italy are the only Powers opposed to peace. Russia who is
not satisfied with her 400,000 square (German) miles of territory and
wants further conquests. Well, I don’t know of anything else to tell
you.”
I suggested: “I thought I might at the same time get instructions to
write about the Pope.”
“Yes,” he said, “it might be pointed out that Leo’s conciliatory
attitude should not be over-estimated. Not only the _Germania_, but
also the Progressist journals exaggerate it, but only for the sake of
opposition, in order that they may be able to say, ‘The Curia desires
peace, but the Imperial Chancellor will not have it.’ The present
Pope is, it is true, more reasonable, and, perhaps, more moderate
than his predecessor, but the utterances in his letter are after all
capable of many interpretations, and on the whole are more academic
than practical. Of what good is it for him to say: ‘I believe I shall
be able to consent to this or to that?’” He then quoted a Latin
sentence, and continued: “And who will vouch for the accuracy of the
interpretation which is now being placed upon it? Who will guarantee
that his successor will think in the same way? The Church has been
putting forward the same claims for a thousand years, and will continue
to do so. One Pope may carry out the old policy in a more peaceful, or
in a bolder and more imperious fashion than another, but at bottom the
policy itself is always the same. The May laws remain, but if they show
moderation in Rome we can administer them in a less rigorous way--a
_modus vivendi_. There are many people, however, who desire to have
peace at any price, and would even go to Canossa--to save themselves
trouble. These include, for example, the Minister of the Interior and
the Crown Prince. He wants above everything to have peace and a quiet
life, and nothing to trouble him. He will not go into battle. It is
just like the septennate with regard to the army. He wanted a permanent
grant in order to avoid fresh struggles, as he thought his turn would
come within the next few years, and he thinks so now, for the old
gentleman can hardly live to be ninety.”
At this moment the Princess entered the room and showed him a paper
that seemed to refer to to-day’s birthday celebration. She asked if
they were to illuminate. He said: “No, but it would perhaps be better
to ascertain first whether any of the other Ministers were inclined to
disobey the order,” which was probably contained in the paper. “In
that case I shall also disobey--_i.e._, disobey myself for it was I who
issued the order. I suppose the flags have been hung up, however?” The
Princess replied in the affirmative.
When she had left I remarked: “What your Serene Highness has just said
about the Crown Prince bears out the description of him which you gave
me in 1870 during the drive from Beaumont to Vendresse--a pleasant life
without much thought or care, plenty of money, and praise from the
newspapers.”
“Yes, that is his character,” he replied. “Like his grandfather
Frederick William III., whom he resembles in other respects also. Of
course you have read the Memoirs of Caroline Bauer?” “Yes,” I replied.
“And those of old Hofrath Schneider.” “Ah, quite so; he also tells
similar stories, but in his innocence does not know what injury they do
him. The old King used to drive seven times a week from the Pfaueninsel
or the palace at Potsdam to the theatre in Berlin, in order to see
worthless commonplace pieces, and afterwards to go behind the scenes
and chuck the actresses under the chin, and then drive back the long
dusty road he came. That is also the Crown Prince’s style--he wants
to amuse himself, not to govern. It may turn out badly some day when
I am too weak to do anything more, and we may lose ground again in
many ways. It is true he wishes to keep me, but I shall go. In future,
a Great Elector or a Frederick the Great, will not be required. A
Frederick William I. would suffice, or even a Frederick William II.,
for he would not have been so bad had he not been rendered effeminate
by the women.”
I said: “But you were satisfied with the article on Stosch, Serene
Highness?”
He: “Up to the present I have looked chiefly at the first one.
Moreover, anything one likes may be said about him. That is a matter
of indifference to me. He cannot come in my way. He speculates upon
the Successor, and owing to his position among the Freemasons, he has
managed to give some people the idea that he has a certain prestige
with the Crown Prince. There are some others also who dined together
recently and divided the duchies amongst themselves as at Wallenstein’s
banquet. How does that passage run? Ah, I can’t remember.” I quoted it.
“Sie theilen dort am Tische Fuerstenhuete aus. Des Eggenberg, Slawata,
Lichtenstein, des Sternbergs Gueter werden ausgeboten. Wenn er hurtig
macht, fällt auch für ihn was ab.”
The Chief smiled and said: “Friedenthal was also one of them, a vain,
intriguing fellow, whom I was glad to see go. Then Gneist--of whom I
had rather a good opinion formerly, but who lacks character, and is a
trimmer--Delbrück and Falk, and also Rickert. Falk has spoken about my
relations with him in a way that cannot be reconciled with the truth. I
have always taken his part, and acted as mediator between him and our
Most Gracious, causing myself thereby a great deal of worry. Hohenlohe
is apparently to preside over this new Ministry, in order to secure it
some prestige. He has been selected as their Chancellor.”
“And,” I said, “who has not already wished to be Chancellor? Even
Münster, the Cloud-compeller!”
“Yes,” he replied, “and others too, because it is such an easy task.
That reminds me how the Elector of Hesse sent his own doctor to
Bernburg to make inquiries as to the mental condition of the last Duke.
He reported that he had found him worse than he had expected, quite
imbecile. ‘But, good Heavens! he cannot govern in that case!’ exclaimed
the Elector. ‘Govern?’ replied the doctor, ‘Why, that will not prevent
him.’”
The Chief then came to speak of his conduct of affairs and of the
trouble and cares and dangers he had gone through, and of the opponents
who had declaimed and worked against him during the past eighteen
years. “I had frequently to apprehend danger and ill-will from several
directions at the same time, and occasionally from all quarters of
the compass.” He smiled and then continued: “That reminds me of
Gerstäcker, of whom a comic paper once gave a picture in which he was
simultaneously attacked by a boa constrictor, a lion, a crocodile and a
bear, while he was exclaiming: ‘Why, what a fine article this will make
for the _Augsburger Zeitung_!’ But seriously, I am not good enough for
this company, who know everything better, and think that a successor
would manage things so much more cleverly. But, _contenti estote_, rest
satisfied with your daily ration.”
On his referring again to Friedenthal and his disposition to
intrigue, I said: “Why, there we have three or four Jews in
combination--Friedenthal, Falk, and Rickert. In future it will be
just the same here as in England and in France--Beaconsfield and
Gambetta, with the Hebrew tail of the 1870 Government. Andrassy is also
understood to have Jewish blood in his veins.”
“No,” he replied, “they say it is gipsy blood, and he looks as if he
had that. But Rickert? Is he also one of the chosen people?”
I said: “I do not know him personally, but I have heard so, and indeed
he is believed to belong to the unbaptised variety.”
“I should really like to know that for certain,” he said. “Please make
inquiries.”
I promised to do so. He rang the bell, and asked for the Parliamentary
Almanac, and looking up Rickert’s name, found that he was described
as belonging to the Evangelical Church. His birthplace and indeed
all closer particulars were omitted, and this the Chief considered
“suspicious.” He then observed: “Friedenthal has even come forward as
a National Jew. He will not permit the _Post_ to attack Lasker or the
Jews. Treitschke wrote good articles for it, in fact the most brilliant
they had ever had. But when he began to attack Lasker, Friedenthal, who
is one of the principal shareholders, intervened with his veto.”
He then spoke once more about his future retirement, and said: “How
difficult it is to replace even Bülow! The gentlemen sit in their
comfortable embassies and will not come here to undertake the heavy
work. Hatzfeldt would do. He is intelligent and serviceable, but has
no proper income, and might be tempted to associate himself with the
financiers. It would be necessary to give him a grant. In that way the
thing could be managed. Hohenlohe also is clever, but he allows others
to use him for their own purposes. There is my eldest son, who has been
working under my guidance for seven years, and who promises well--but
that would not do, as he is only thirty.”
With these words he rose and gave me his hand. As I was leaving
he called after me: “Quite gently and diplomatically--I mean your
writing.” I had been with him over fifty minutes. In the second
antechamber I met the Privy Councillor of Embassy, Von Bülow, who had
been waiting there and who exchanged a few friendly words with me.
From what the Prince had told me of his attitude towards the Curia,
I wrote an article, which appeared in No. 13 of the _Grenzboten_,
entitled “The Conciliatory Pope.”
Towards the first week in April the newspapers began to talk of a
Chancellor crisis. After that had gone on for a few days I wrote to
the Chief (on Friday, the 9th of April) suggesting that if I could be
of use to him he should give me information in the matter. On the 11th
I received a letter from Sachse in which I was requested to visit the
Chancellor on Monday at 4 o’clock. I kept the appointment punctually,
and had to wait a quarter of an hour, as the Prince had disappeared
in the garden. At length I saw him walking in the grounds attached to
the Foreign Office. He was in plain clothes, carried a big stick in
his hand and was accompanied by his two dogs. Theiss went out to him
and informed him that I had come. In a few minutes I was summoned to
him in his study. “How are you, doctor?” he said. “Things have again
been going badly with me during the last few days. I have been worrying
over our officials--over the clownishness of Stephan--and others are
just the same. The newspapers give a false account of the origin of
the present crisis, and I would request you to rectify it. It has not
turned solely or even chiefly on the attitude of the non-Prussian
Governments in the question of taxing receipt stamps on Post Office
Orders and advances, but to fully as great an extent on the improper
behaviour of our officials. You know I have repeatedly complained
in public of Prussian Particularism in regard to the arrangements
and requirements of the Empire. During my frequent long absences one
arbitrary proceeding has followed another, so that a kind of Republic
of the Polish type has grown up, in which each departmental chief
insists not only upon having views of his own, but also upon putting
them into execution. _Vortragende Räthe_ (Councillors who have the
privilege of direct intercourse with their chief), whose views are not
in agreement with those of the heads of their department, and even
Ministers who differ from me in their opinions, endeavour to give
practical effect to their ideas, and that too as if it were a matter
of course. But it is nothing of the kind, and it is obvious that that
cannot be permitted by the head of the Government of the Emperor and
King.”
He paused and seemed to expect that I would write down what he had
said. Before I had come in he had placed a fold of blotting paper,
several sheets of foolscap, and two freshly-pointed pencils at the
side of the writing-table where I usually sat. I began by making a
note of a few of the principal points, but I now wrote down everything
he said literally, he speaking more slowly and in tolerably regular
sentences. The following, therefore, after a few introductory words
referring to what had been previously communicated, was published in
the form of an article entitled “The Cause of the Chancellor Crisis,”
in the _Grenzboten_ of the 15th of April. In this way the _Grenzboten_
had the honour of having the German Imperial Chancellor as one of its
contributors. He said or dictated:--
“So far as we know (I afterwards added: ‘and we believe ourselves to be
well informed’) there is absolutely nothing in the Chancellor crisis
that tends towards any change in the Constitution. Nothing is farther
from the Prince’s mind. He considers the Federal Constitution fully
sufficient if the rights which it accords to the individual States
are exercised with moderation. Any irregularities or stoppages of
the machinery have been due in part to the procedure of the Federal
Council, and in part to the circumstance that many Governments have
not attached sufficient value to the exercise of their right to vote.
According to the practice hitherto followed, too much importance has
been given to the committees and too little to the general meetings.
The former have discussed matters at great length, while on the other
hand, the plenary sittings have been almost exclusively devoted to
questions which had been so far settled by the committees that nothing
remained to be done beyond taking the simple decision, Yes or No. It
was, therefore, not possible for those Governments that had not been
included in the committees in question, or had found themselves in a
minority there, to secure consideration for their views at the plenary
meeting, and to bring about a timely understanding, without causing
great delay either by asking for fresh instructions or by referring
the matter back to the Committee. The balance of parties is not the
same in the committees and in the plenary Council. If the committees’
majorities carry their resolutions into effect they deprive the
unrepresented Governments of their due influence. If on the other hand,
the negotiations and discussions of these matters were transferred from
the committees to the plenary meeting the views of all parties would
receive timely consideration.
“We must here repeat what we said at the commencement” (this sentence
was mine), “namely, that during the frequent absences of the Chancellor
there has arisen among a section of the Prussian officials a condition
which borders on absolute indiscipline; and, if it be true that the
Prince has stated that he hardly ever succeeds in securing due regard
for his legitimate authority without raising the Cabinet question, it
is quite certain that a remedy is absolutely indispensable unless
the prestige of the Federal Council and of its chief is to suffer
irreparable damage. The Federal Council cannot become a public meeting,
at which each official of the Ministry may, without authority and
at his own good will and pleasure, give expression to his personal
opinions on every question, and endeavour to secure their adoption.
“If the Royal decree lays stress on the conflict of duties in which
the Imperial Chancellor may be involved under the Constitution,
that difficulty can scarcely be overcome by an alteration of the
Constitution in a manner acceptable to all concerned, but rather by
a statesmanlike and prudent exercise on the part of all concerned
of the rights bestowed by the Constitution. This does not mean that
the Chancellor would be justified in declining to co-operate in the
execution of a decision taken by the Federal Council. But assuming that
he is bound to carry out such a decision and is therefore the immediate
official representative of a decision for the consequences or the
principle of which he may find himself unable to accept responsibility,
it could hardly be contended any longer that he occupied a responsible
position, but on the contrary that the post could be filled equally
well by any subordinate official who would have simply to carry out the
instructions given to him.
“It can scarcely contribute to strengthen the constitutional
organisation of the Empire, to force the Imperial Chancellor, and
with him the three largest Federal States, into a position in which
they must appeal to the lawful privileges of the minority. For the
Chancellor, on his own initiative, to refuse to carry out a formal
decision of the Federal Council would be a course barely compatible
with the consideration which he owes in his official capacity to the
majority of the Federal Governments. A sense of official propriety
would probably lead the Chancellor in such circumstances to avoid
having to execute a resolution for which he could not accept the
responsibility, by tendering his resignation, thereby announcing
his readiness to co-operate in the selection of a successor whose
convictions should not stand in the way of the Federal resolution.
Anyhow, the best solution would be not to drive things to extremities.”
At this point it seemed as if something pressing had suddenly occurred
to him. He rang the bell, and asked the Chancery attendant to call
Privy Councillor Tiedemann, whom he then requested to ascertain at
the palace what had been done in connection with the _pro memoria_,
which ought to be dealt with promptly and without delay. He was to go
immediately and make inquiries. When Tiedemann had left, he said: “The
_pro memoria_ concerns the matter on which we are engaged. But where
was I?” I read him the last sentence, and he then continued: “Oh yes!
The prevention of such crises as the present will be facilitated if
less importance is given to the discussions in Committee, and more to
those in the plenary sittings, and if the custom which has recently
arisen, for half and even more than half of the Federal Governments not
to be individually represented at these plenary sittings, is abandoned.
The practice of appointing proxies is based solely upon the rules of
procedure, and not upon the terms of the Constitution. The matter would
take a very different complexion if the decisive plenary sittings took
place only during a relatively short period within the Parliamentary
Session, instead of being spread over the greater part of the year,
according to daily requirements, as has hitherto been the case.”
He then, without giving any indication that the interview was at an
end, took up a document on which the word “Memorandum” was written,
made a few corrections in it, had Sachse called and gave him
instructions to “have that copied in the same hand.”
He then turned to me again, asked me to read over the last sentence
he had dictated, and said: “That will be enough. Do you wish to know
anything further?”
I: “What does your Serene Highness think of the result of the elections
in England?”
He: “The matter is not one of importance for us. The Russians, however,
expect a great deal from it. But the Liberals must in general follow
the same lines as Beaconsfield. That is always the case here too. If
the National Liberals were to come into office, they would find that
affairs could not be carried on as they imagine.”
I: “It is just the same with Crown Princes. They almost always hold
different views to the reigning sovereign, or act as if they did. They
are for the most part Liberal, and yet when they themselves assume
responsibility they must follow the same course as their predecessors.
I say they act in that way, as doubtless the difference is often only
apparent. It seems to me that modern Princes have no self-reliance, no
real belief in themselves, and feel dependent upon public opinion, or
the party doctrines which pass themselves off as public opinion. Our
dynasties consider it necessary to win the sympathies of all parties,
and therefore Crown Princes take credit to themselves for being of a
different political or religious opinion to the reigning sovereign,
Liberal when he is Conservative, or very advanced when he is only a
moderate Liberal. When they ascend the throne and have to assume the
responsibility of their actions, they throw their theories overboard,
if they ever seriously believed in them, and enter into the hard world
of reality where facts and not aspirations are the determining forces,
and where one is met by impossibilities which it is necessary to reckon
with or submit to.”
He listened to me attentively, and when I had finished, said: “You are
quite right. That was a very just observation. But even if the English
were to come to an understanding with the Russians, and were to be
joined by Italy, which has always been coquetting with the English
Liberals, that would not lead to any great danger, and might turn out
badly for the Italians. The closer England draws to Russia the more she
drifts away from France. A combination would then arise in the East
which would threaten French interests in that quarter, and particularly
in the Mediterranean, where they are different from those of Russia and
England. The same remark applies to England’s relations with Italy.
In certain circumstances the result might be an understanding between
France and Austria and ourselves. As yet we cannot positively say what
we should have to offer in return--certainly not Alsace-Lorraine, but
perhaps something else. Italy, however, would fare badly in the matter,
as in that case Austria and France could easily come to terms. Italy is
like the woman in the fairy tale who had caught the golden fish--what
was her name? Ilsebill--and could never catch enough. The fish may have
to go back to their old places. Naples and the States of the Church may
be restored.”
I said: “In speaking to Tiedemann your Serene Highness mentioned
a memorandum on the causes of the present crisis, which had been
submitted to the King. What is his attitude in the affair?”
He replied: “Oh, satisfactory. Only he has not yet read the _pro
memoria_, as it is too long. He laid it on one side.... And Wilmowski
interferes. He considers it his duty and his right to put a finger in
the pie, and advise him--of course against me, for he is a Liberal. So
I have had a warning conveyed to him.” He stood up and said again: “The
clownishness of Stephan, who is quite insubordinate! That comes of his
self-assurance. King Stephan _versus_ King William! (smiling)--that
will never do, and you might say as much on some opportunity.”
I promised to do so at an early date, and then left. I had been with
him for about three-quarters of an hour. In the large antechamber I
saw Bleichröder’s birthday present to the Chief--a pipe-rack in carved
oak, and seven long cherrywood pipes with painted porcelain bowls
representing game, together with two large vases containing azaleas in
blossom.
I incorporated what the Chancellor had said to me respecting the
English elections and a possible co-operation between England, Russia
and Italy, in a _Grenzboten_ article, entitled, “The New Ministry in
England.” This was commented upon in leading articles in London, Paris
and Italy.
On the 25th of April, Lowe of _The Times_ called upon me, and wished to
have the same favours as Lavino “on the same conditions.” I told him
there was no other condition than that the copy should be telegraphed
across. He said he had a special wire. I promised to consider the
matter and let him know in a fortnight, after I had consulted the
publisher, who would have to send him proofs of the articles in
advance. Abel came to me on the 1st of May with a request that I should
oblige the _Standard_ in a similar way. He received the same answer.
On the 7th of May I concluded an arrangement with Lavino,[20] who had
in the meantime received authority from London by telegraph, and thus
became an “Occasional Correspondent” for his paper.
In the meantime, I had, on the 28th of April, received the following
letter from Bucher:--
“Esteemed Friend,--Kindly commit the indiscretion of handing
the enclosed to the correspondent of the _Daily Telegraph_. You must
not tell him anything more about it than appears in the introductory
part. For your information I may tell you that the affair is a (very
full) extract from an existing despatch. He has therefore no reason
to fear a _démenti_. Perhaps it would be well if you immediately
took a copy, so that you could publish it in the _Grenzboten_ as a
retranslation directly it arrives here in English, if you are not
forestalled by other newspapers. But the _D. T._ must have priority.
“Yours, Br.”
The enclosure was the text of a despatch by the Chief in which he
stated the position of the Prussian Government in the negotiations
for the settlement of the differences with the Curia and its German
allies. Only a few sentences were omitted from the original, which was
published in full a few weeks later. Lavino translated the document
into English, and it occupied a whole column of the _Daily Telegraph_
of the 3rd of May, appearing in the _Grenzboten_ two days later. So
far as I remember it was only noticed by the German press after the
document had been published in full, some of them then remembering
that they had seen the most important parts of it in the _Grenzboten_.
I now proceeded to Leipzig, but on Thursday, the 10th of May, received
a telegram from home stating that the Chancellor wished to see me that
evening at 9.30 P.M. I therefore returned to Berlin next
morning, announced my arrival in a letter to Sachse, and was received
at 9.5 A.M. by the Chief in his study, and had an interview
with him which lasted an hour and a half.
He began: “You were on a holiday?”
“Yes, Serene Highness, I was in Leipzig for a few days, but had left
word at home to telegraph if you sent for me, and so I am here.”
He: “That was too much. I only wished to speak to you on some matters
of principle. I would commend two subjects to your consideration. First
the exceptionally outspoken and cordial pleasure which the Liberals
manifest in their papers at the circumstance that in future I shall
let internal questions alone, and restrict myself to foreign affairs.
They argue that I know nothing about internal questions, and have
accomplished nothing. On that point you might read up Hahn’s book,
in which you will find detailed particulars. Who, then, proposed the
May laws, and persuaded Falk to agree to them in spite of innumerable
judicial scruples, which he only surrendered after long hesitation? Now
they extol them as a kind of Palladium, and so does he. But he showed
by no means as much energy against the Clericals in his administrative
capacity, as he does now in his Parliamentary speeches. And who carried
through the scheme for the purchase of the railways by the State?
Surely not their Camphausen, who, on the contrary, fought against it,
and tried with all his might to create delay. And yet it has turned
out well, even now, since Maybach is making money, and will cover the
deficit for us. Moreover, the gentlemen who--as they assert--wish
to strengthen the Empire by the development of the constitutional
system, forget that I twice carried the military septennate, and thus
avoided a dangerous conflict by acting as a mediator between the Crown,
which wanted the military budget to be permanently fixed, in order
to get rid of the differences once for all, and the Reichstag, which
insisted upon its constitutional right of supply,--avoided it twice,
as the conflict which formerly threatened would now have broken out
afresh. This time it was managed by an increase of the army, which
the Crown accepted as an equivalent, and which the Liberals in the
Reichstag consented to more readily than they would have done to a
renunciation of their constitutional rights. You may then refer to the
anti-Socialist laws which I proposed, and to which the Liberals raised
all sorts of objections. But I may regard as my chief service the new
Customs policy, which I forced through in spite of Delbrück, and in
dealing with which, I was not only opposed by the free-traders in the
Reichstag, but also by the Governments that held free-trade views, and
by their Councillors. As you know, in this case the initiative has
been taken by me, and I have also done most of the work in curing this
Delbrück disease.”
I took the liberty of interrupting him with the remark: “This Bright’s
disease in the economic body of the nation.”
“Yes,” he replied, smiling, “that’s what I mean--this Bright’s disease!
In the course of years we have become more and more pulled down by
it--grown poorer and poorer--and it was time that something should be
done in the matter. But for the five milliards of 1871 we should have
been close upon bankruptcy a few years sooner. It is true people will
not see that, but the nation knows it, for it feels the consequences.
The representatives of the learned classes, the lawyers and the holders
of invested property are not conscious of it. I have repeatedly
received addresses from the lower classes, as for instance, from
Westphalian miners, congratulating and thanking me. But my opponents
will have to open their minds still further, when I come to them with
my war tariffs, which they will of course fight against, and first of
all with the tariffs against Russia. Besides, I have been the only
champion of the national interests against Hamburg Particularism in
the free harbour question. In this matter the National Liberals, and
especially the Left wing, are rather Liberal and Particularistic than
National. Lasker, Bamberger, Wolfssohn, Rickert,--also a Jew, although
baptised a Protestant--are in this matter no better than Sonnemann,
the Socialists, the Poles and the Guelphs. They are only national when
it comes to opposing the pretensions of a monarch, as for instance the
King of Bavaria. But when, as in this case, it is the Particularism
of a Social Democratic republic where the Socialists have the upper
hand at the elections--that is quite another thing. Then Particularism
must be supported, and I must be opposed. That I have always taken a
determined stand against these people is a point upon which I may well
take credit to myself in connection with internal affairs.”
He paused for a moment and then continued: “It is I and I alone
who have taken up the struggle against the Centre party and its
wire-pullers, and gone through with it in spite of all the intrigues of
the Court. If a few paragraphs in the Ecclesiastical Bills should be
thought to give evidence of yielding, that is a mere optical delusion.
We make no terms with Rome, and will not go to Canossa, but we shall
endeavour to restore peace independently between ourselves and our
Prussian Catholics. It is better that Bishops should return accompanied
by triumphal processions than with wailings and complaints. In that
way they recognise that something has been conceded to them--a great
deal if they like to put it so. But if they do not then manage to get
on with us, why, we have the discretionary powers in our hands and can
remove them once more, or render them harmless in some other way. They
do not, however, understand that at the Dönhofplatz, nor do the Free
Conservatives either. That is the reason why I do not go there, as I
do not care to speak to deaf ears. It may yet come to my being obliged
to retire without the King’s permission. And then--a Bavarian painter,
Lenbach, made a good remark recently: ‘To deliver a good speech there,
is like letting off fireworks before the blind.’ Their policy is party
policy. Bennigsen and Miquel called on me a few days ago and wanted
to talk me into abandoning the Bill, but allowed themselves to be
persuaded by my arguments. A meeting of the party was held the same
evening and there they returned to their former position. You must,
however, say nothing about this in the press--as to our attitude
towards the Bill and the parties, that is only for your private
information. They must not think that we wish to influence them, and
if you were to say anything on the subject it would be immediately
regarded as a communiqué. Of course you are aware that Windthorst
recently described you as the leading official mouthpiece. We shall
first see what they make of the Bill. Perhaps that will suffice for us,
perhaps not.”
He again made a short pause, and afterwards continued: “And now as
to the second subject which you might treat. I should like to have a
sketch of the Centre party, showing that we should gain little from its
dissolution or reorganisation. The Conservatives would not be largely
reinforced thereby--that is through concessions on the part of the
Government with regard to the ecclesiastical laws.” He was silent for a
moment, and then, turning from this train of thought, he said:
“You know how Russia would never willingly permit us to grow too strong
as against France, lest the value of her own friendship and possible
assistance should be reduced. Her notion is that we should remain
dependent upon her, and under an obligation to render her equivalent
services. It is just the same with the Liberals, including the Right
wing. They think of themselves and of their party, first of all, and
want the Government to regard them as a power whose good will has its
price. They really look upon themselves as outsiders, and--so far as
the Government is concerned--as an opposition which must be won over
by concessions, and whose support must be duly appreciated and paid
for at the highest possible rate, and as promptly as may be. I must
always be made to feel that they are indispensable, in order that I may
be obliged to come to terms with them. For that reason the Government
must not be too strong, must have no secure majority, and therefore in
their hearts they are pleased at the existence of the Centre party.
Its numerical strength suits their views, however little they may have
in common with them as Ultramontanes. The Government should constantly
feel its weakness in presence of this opposition of 95 or 100 members,
and bear in mind the possibility of the Liberals refusing their
support. They, the Liberals, must be reckoned and negotiated with, and
their good will must be purchased. That is a party policy, and not one
which keeps in view the welfare of the State.”
He then returned to the Centre party, and explained to me that only
about one-third of its members could be won over by concessions on
the part of the Government to oppose the pretensions of the Curia and
to reinforce the supporters of the Ministry. “These are the Bavarian
nobles,” he continued, “and the South German nobles in general, as
well as those of Silesia. Not the Westphalians. The latter were never
reconciled to Prussian rule, and have always opposed the Government,
even before the Empire came into existence--even when the Pope himself
seemed to be quite satisfied with Prussia--I mean Pius IX., who said
that the Catholic Church was better off in Prussia than anywhere
else. The Westphalian nobles are sulking like the Guelphs out of
sheer Particularism. They cannot forget the old episcopal _régime_
and the advantages,--the fleshpots of Egypt--which they lost when it
disappeared. It is different again with another group of the Centre
party, with the Rhenish members, for example. They are, in the first
place, Liberal or Democratic Catholics, and only in a secondary sense
Ultramontane, Catholic Progressists, anti-Imperialists. Most of them
would not have got in on their Liberal programme. They were returned
to Parliament because they had promised to support the demands of the
Bishops and the Pope. They, like the Particularists of the Centre,
could not be won over by any concessions, however great, as they are
really Progressists, or little less.”
I was now about to leave, but he made a motion as if he wished me to
remain, rang the bell, and ordered a bottle of seltzer water. On this
being brought in by the attendant, he pointed to it and to a full
bottle of cognac which stood on the table, saying, “Now, old Yankee,
is that to your taste? Brandy and water. Help yourself! It is very
good cognac, or, at least, I have been told so. It is a present, and
may have cost twenty to thirty francs a bottle. I have some, however,
which is still better, although it only costs a thousand francs the
hectolitre.”
Whilst I inquired as to his own health and whether he intended to go to
Gastein this summer, and learnt in reply that his health was tolerable
but that he slept badly and felt fatigued, he had brought a large box
of cigarettes from which he asked me to help myself, at the same time
taking one himself, and remarking that he no longer found any real
enjoyment in smoking. It was the same with riding for the last year
and a half. He had to give it up, as it brought on a pain in the back.
I asked him whether he had received the book on the Jews which I had
handed to the Chancery attendant for him about a week before. “What
book?” he asked. _Israel and the Gentiles_, I replied. No, he had not.
I explained that I had sent a letter with it saying that it was written
by me, and that a glance at the preface might perhaps induce his Serene
Highness to look it through more carefully at Varzin or Friedrichsruh.
He remembered the letter, looked for the book on the writing-table
and the shelves near it, and said at last “Probably I have taken it
upstairs to read in bed, or Tiedemann has taken it.”
I then turned the conversation upon Lenbach, and remarked that the
picture representing the Chief in profile looking upwards was to my
mind the best portrait of him which I had seen.
He replied: “He has painted a whole crowd of them. The one you mean
came about in this way. I was looking up at a flight of birds in
Friedrichsruh. ‘Hold hard,’ Lenbach exclaimed, ‘that’s good. Please
stand still and I will sketch it in at once.’”
I then mentioned the photograph of the other portrait in which the
hair of his eyebrows was twisted upwards and he had a romantically
curled moustache, observing that I did not quite like it, as it was not
natural.
“No,” he said, “it is natural. It grows in that way until I shorten it
with the scissors.”
We then spoke of the enterprising Thorndike Rice, an American, who
published the New York monthly, _The North American Review_, I having
asked the Prince whether he had read Blowitz’s account of Rice’s
alleged visit and request. A few weeks previously Rice paid me several
visits, and after having first ordered an article on Bismarck,
introduced a further request by saying “You must not be offended, but
you know that we Yankees are bold enough when we have something in
view.” He then asked whether I could not procure for him an article
by Bismarck himself to be published in his periodical. He was quite
prepared to pay £500, half of it in advance, if I could manage that.
I said that it was “utterly impossible,” even if he were to give me
£1000, and explained the reasons. He then suggested that I should write
the article, to which the Prince need only put his name. Of course, I
also declined that proposal. He then contented himself with my promise
to write the article in question, and send it after him to Paris, and
to let him have further contributions later on. In about three weeks he
received the Bismarck article, which appeared in the July and August
numbers of his review under the title “Prince Bismarck as a friend of
America, and as a Statesman. By Moritz Busch.” I was paid at the rate
of 500 marks a sheet, an enormous sum according to German ideas, and
had moreover the honour of figuring with Gladstone as a contributor to
the American _Revue des Deux Mondes_. From a message sent by Blowitz
to _The Times_ it would appear that Rice, after his last visit to me,
called at the Chief’s to request him to contribute to his periodical,
and, of course, there also received a negative answer.
“The account is correct,” the Chief replied; “but he only spoke to my
son, through whom I informed him that I was too much occupied to be
able to gratify my strong taste for journalism, and to earn the large
sum of money which he had offered me.”
I then gave him an account of my conversations with Mr. Rice, and
afterwards asked him once more about Gastein. No, he replied, he must
rest himself, and wished to be quite alone away from everybody. He then
came to speak of his household, which costs him a great deal of money.
A successor could not make both ends meet if he were not also assisted
by a grant, the salary as Imperial Chancellor not being sufficient.
I said I had always been under the impression that he drew a salary
merely as Prussian Minister.
“It is the other way about,” he answered. “As Imperial Chancellor I
receive 18,000 thalers; as Premier and Minister for Foreign Affairs I
get nothing, and my expenses now come to 60,000 thalers a year. In this
house alone the lighting costs me 2,000 extra. It is most unpractically
built, full of dark passages and back-stairs, and it is only the
offices down stairs that I do not need to light myself. They have also
increased the inhabited house tax, the rent being reckoned at 5,000
thalers, which I consider unfair, although it is better than the other
house, the poor accommodation of which you know.” After I had made
a few remarks in reply, we both rose, an example which was followed
by his dog. This animal at first seemed to entertain evil intentions
respecting my coat or throat, but had grown quiet on his master
ordering him to lie down, when he crouched under the table and put his
head between my knees. The Prince told him to jump on the sofa, from
which he fetched a piece of wood. The Chief then took it from him and
pitched it into the niche between the two windows, the dog springing
after it. It is a savage animal which has already severely bitten and
torn the clothes of people well known in the house such as Chancery
attendants. In spite of the chastisement inflicted upon him with the
heavy leather whip that lies on the table, he has not considered the
error of his ways nor assumed politer manners. He appeared to take a
liking to me, however, and I had also later on occasion to congratulate
myself on his good will.
CHAPTER VIII
THE ARTICLE “THE GOVERNMENT AND THE ITALIAN BISHOPS”--LOTHAR BUCHER
ON HOHENLOHE, RADOWITZ AND THE TWO BÜLOWS--THE CHIEF WISHES TO
BE REPRESENTED IN THE “DAILY TELEGRAPH” AS A LEGITIMIST, THOUGH
THE FACT MUST BE REGRETTED--COURT INTRIGUES AND THE REQUEST TO
BE RELEASED FROM OFFICE--BUCHER ON THE SECESSIONISTS, AND THE
FUTURE MINISTERS--THE CHIEF ON THE MEANS OF SECURING THE FUTURE
OF THE WORKING MAN--THE OPPOSITION TO THIS REFORM--THE JEWS--THE
DEFECTION OF THE CONSERVATIVES AND NATIONAL LIBERALS--THE KING THE
SOLE MEMBER OF HIS PARTY--THE “GRENZBOTEN” REGARDED AS AN OFFICIAL
GAZETTE--THE DEBATE IN THE UPPER CHAMBER ON THE REMISSION OF TAXES,
AND A “GRENZBOTEN” ARTICLE ON THAT SUBJECT BY THE CHIEF--THE
BERLINERS IN PARLIAMENT--THE CHANCELLOR UPON THE JEWS ONCE MORE.
I was in rather frequent intercourse with Bucher during the summer
and autumn of 1880. On the 3rd of June he sent me the material for an
article on the attitude of the Curia towards the Italian Government,
which appeared in No. 24 of the _Grenzboten_, under the title “The
Government and the Bishops in Italy.” It concluded with the following
words: “It will be seen from the foregoing that the Pope (Leo’s
predecessor being also understood here) uses his discretionary power
in Italy in a less uncompromising fashion than he does in Germany, a
circumstance which we should keep in mind in the next phase of the
struggle between the Curia and the Prussian Government.” On the 14th
of June, in the course of a conversation with me at his house, Bucher
described several members of our diplomatic service. Hohenlohe, he
said, was a gentleman, and amiable, but was only of moderate ability,
and had in particular a weak memory. Besides, he had too great an
interest in matters other than politics, such as smart company, racing,
&c. Radowitz was talented, and well informed on Eastern affairs, but
he was an ambitious self-seeker and very pretentious, and maintained
relations with Court circles hostile to the Chief. On the other hand he
praised my namesake Busch very highly, as being not only intelligent
and well informed but also of straightforward character. Bülow, the
Councillor of Embassy, he described as an intriguing egotist, whose
true character the Chancellor recently discovered. He considered the
Chief had done the other Bülow, the deceased Secretary of State,
too much honour in describing him to me as exceptionally able and
loyal. He was a diligent and clever master of routine, somewhat like
Abeken. His illness had certainly not arisen through vexation at the
King’s self-will, his backbone was too flexible for that. Both before
and after this visit Bucher sent me various particulars respecting
Parliamentary and non-Parliamentary Jews, whom he--like myself and
other honest Germans--abominated most heartily, whether they belonged
to the baptised variety or not.
On the 28th of October he came to my lodgings and dictated to me--on
the instructions which he had received by letter from the Chief--the
following message for the _Daily Telegraph_:--
“A critical situation has arisen here. It is a question whether
the Imperial Chancellor will remain in office or not. The affair
is connected with the appointment of the Secretary of State in the
Foreign Office. The difficulties appear to be of a personal and not
of an official character. The leader of the opposition at Court is
said to be General Count Goltz, brother of the former Ambassador
in Paris, who appears to seek in another quarter the laurels which
he failed to win upon the battle-field; while von Radowitz, who is
now conducting the business of the Paris Embassy, is understood to
be the candidate for the post of Secretary of State. It would be an
extraordinary circumstance, which might have incalculable consequences
if the Chancellor, at the moment when he seems to possess exceptional
authority in European affairs, were forced to retire from office
through a Court intrigue. I should regard the news as highly improbable
if the source of my information were less trustworthy, and if it were
not confirmed by what is known of the principal personages of the
drama. Previous experience has shown that no other difficulties cause
the Chancellor to display such a morbid sensibility as the favour
manifested by the Court to certain intrigues, which are now directed
against him personally. This feature in his character was also evident
during the Kulturkampf, at the time of the trials for libel, and on his
tendering his resignation in 1877. It is impossible not to recognise in
this an element of weakness, due to the traditions of his early life
and to his attitude towards the monarchy, an element which partakes of
‘Carlism’ (exaggerated loyalty), rather than of statesmanship. (Here
the eyes of the two Augurs met, and exchanged a significant smile.) We
regret being forced to acknowledge that his devotion to his Fatherland
and his people is subordinated to the service of his King (the two
Augurs grinned again); and that even at the present day the greatness
of the task imposed upon him has not emancipated him from the pressure
of Court and dynastic influences. Had he been a Hanoverian or Bavarian
it is probable that owing to his attachment to the dynasty he would
have remained an inveterate Particularist. We should greatly regret,
not only on political grounds, but also in his own interest, to see him
at this time of day stumble over obstacles which are trivial enough,
though, we are sorry to say, he regards them as insurmountable.”
That was obviously not written by Bucher. The latter, however, added
that the old Emperor imagines he might personally intervene in the
Eastern question, and has already despatched telegrams behind the
Chief’s back. We have now achieved some success at Constantinople,
and the Prince wanted to recall Hatzfeldt, so that he might leave his
post with credit on being transferred to the Foreign Office. Later on
things would go wrong again, and the responsibility for that would fall
chiefly upon Hatzfeldt as the _doyen_ of the ambassadors. The Emperor,
however, allowed himself to be persuaded by Goltz that everything would
go on quite as satisfactorily as at present, and he therefore preferred
to leave Hatzfeldt permanently at Constantinople. The article was to be
published in the _Daily Telegraph_, not in the _Standard_, as in the
latter Radowitz might be able to interfere through his agents. Bucher
remarked that the term “Carlism” came from the Chief himself.
I wrote as follows to the _Daily Telegraph_:--
“Dear Sir,--The enclosed article comes from the very best
source, and, indeed, in great part literally--a circumstance which I
beg of you to keep secret. Kindly publish it as early as possible, and
without any alteration or addition--including the apparent reflection
upon the Prince, which is made for a special purpose. I expect this
message will cause a great and general sensation. Perhaps you will be
good enough to telegraph to me immediately on receipt that you will
publish it in full. The words ‘Request granted’ will be sufficient.”
The manuscript, which was sent off on Thursday evening, had not
appeared in the number of the paper which reached me on Tuesday. I had,
however, on Monday received the desired telegram, promising that it
should appear. On Wednesday, the 3rd of November, I took this telegram
to Bucher and explained to him how I had impressed upon the editor the
necessity of a speedy publication of the article without alteration.
At Bucher’s request I left him this telegram, in order that he should
send it to the Chief. I ascertained from him that the crisis had in
the meantime been solved. The Chancellor had submitted a long report
of seventeen pages to the King; and the old gentleman, who was then
shooting at Ludwigslust, had telegraphed to him: “Have read your
explanation and agree with you. R(adowitz) should go to A(thens).”
Bucher added: “I expect he will arrive here to-day. He has written
to Styrum that he must have more than the ordinary salary there. In
Paris he had certain allowances in addition to his salary as envoy. The
Audit Office does not consider this correct, but the amount will be
covered out of the Guelph fund. As nothing has come of the Secretary
of State idea, he would prefer to go direct to Constantinople.” I also
ascertained that Hatzfeldt had now been definitely selected for the
post of Secretary of State, and Busch for that of Under Secretary, the
latter with a salary of 6,000 thalers a year. All in all Bucher has
only 3,700. Finally Bucher suggested that, when I was next writing on
friction, I should bring in the passage from “Richard II.” (Act I.,
scene 3), where Gaunt, in reply to the King’s exclamation, “Why, uncle,
thou hast many years to live!” says:--
“But not a minute, King, that thou canst give:
Shorten my days thou canst with sullen sorrow,
And pluck nights from me, but not lend a morrow:
Thou canst help time to furrow me with age,
But stop no wrinkle in his pilgrimage:
Thy word is current with him for my death;
But dead, thy kingdom cannot buy my breath.”
At length, on the 4th of November, I received the _Daily Telegraph_
of the 2nd, containing the article, which I took to Bucher, who
immediately forwarded it to the Chief. He said that the latter would
probably make use of it in the German press. It would be better,
however, for me not to telegraph to him on the subject, as all
telegrams are sent to the Secretary of State.
On the 6th of November Bucher sent me the _Daily Telegraph_ article
which had been returned to him from Friedrichsruh, accompanied by a
letter from Count Herbert Bismarck, in which he said, _inter alia_: “My
father has read it with great pleasure and hopes it will have a good
effect.”
On the previous day Bucher sent me Major Knorr’s book _The
Polish Insurrections since 1830_ (_Die polnischen Aufstände seit
1830_--Berlin, 1880), with the following instruction, which doubtless
came from the Chief: “The material respecting the priests to be
utilised. Reference to be made to France and Belgium. Say nothing about
Germany.” I wrote a lengthy article on the subject which was published
in No. 24 of the _Grenzboten_ under the title “The Ultramontane Clergy
and their Hostility to the State.”
On the 18th of January, 1881, I wrote to the Chief reminding him of my
readiness to place myself at his disposal in case he wished to have
any matter of importance discussed in the German or English press, and
requesting information. On the 20th I received the following answer
from the Imperial Chancellerie: “The Imperial Chancellor begs Dr.
Moritz Busch to do him the honour to call upon him to-morrow, Friday,
at 1 o’clock.”
I went to the Chancellor’s palace at the appointed time, and I remained
with him for an hour and a half. The Prince sat at his writing-table
with his face towards the door, and looked particularly well and
hearty. He said: “So you have come for material, but there is not much
to give you. One thing occurs to me, however. I should be very thankful
to you if you would discuss my working-class insurance scheme in a
friendly spirit. The Liberals do not show much disposition to take it
up and their newspapers attack my proposals. The Government should
not interfere in such matters--_laisser aller_. The question must be
raised, however, and the present proposal is only the beginning. I have
more in view. I grant that there may be room for improvement in many
respects, and that some portions of the scheme are perhaps unpractical
and should therefore be dropped. But a beginning must be made with
the task of reconciling the labouring classes with the State. Whoever
has a pension assured to him for his old age is much more contented
and easier to manage than the man who has no such prospect. Compare a
servant in a private house and one attached to a Government office or
to the Court; the latter, because he looks forward to a pension, will
put up with a great deal more and show much more zeal than the former.
In France all sensible members of the poorer classes, when they are
in a position to lay by anything, make a provision for the future by
investing in securities. Something of the kind should be arranged for
our workers. People call this State Socialism, and having done so think
they have disposed of the question. It may be State Socialism, but
it is necessary. What then are the present provisions for municipal
assistance to the poor? Municipal Socialism?”
He paused for a moment, and then continued: “Large sums of money would
be required for carrying such schemes into execution, at least a
hundred million marks, or more probably two hundred. But I should not
be frightened by even three hundred millions. Means must be provided to
enable the State to act generously towards the poor. The contentment
of the disinherited, of all those who have no possessions, is not too
dearly purchased even at a very high figure. They must learn that the
State benefits them also, that it not only demands, but also bestows.
If the question is taken up by the State, which does not want to make
any profit, or to secure dividends, the thing can be done.”
He reflected again for a few seconds, and then said: “The tobacco
monopoly might be applied in that way. The monopoly would thus permit
of the creation of an entailed estate for the poor. You need not
emphasise that point however. The monopoly is only a last resource,
the highest trump. You might say it would be possible to relieve the
poor of their anxiety for the future, and to provide them with a small
inheritance by taxing luxuries such as tobacco, beer, and brandy. The
English, the Americans, and even the Russians have no monopoly, and
yet they raise large sums through a heavy tax upon these articles of
luxury. We, as the country which is most lightly taxed in this respect,
can bear a considerable increase, and if the sums thus acquired are
used for securing the future of our working population, uncertainty as
to which is the chief cause of their hatred to the State, we thereby
at the same time secure our own future, and that is a good investment
for our money. We should thus avert a revolution, which might break
out fifty or perhaps ten years hence, and which, even if it were
only successful for a few months, would swallow up very much larger
sums, both directly and indirectly, through disturbance of trade,
than our preventive measures would cost. The Liberals recognise the
reasonableness of the proposals--in their hearts; but they grudge
the credit of them to the man who initiated them, and would like to
take up the question themselves, and so win popularity. They will,
perhaps, try to bury the scheme in Committee, as they have done other
Bills. Something must, however, be done speedily, and possibly they
may approve of the general lines of the scheme, as they are already
thinking of the elections. The worst of the lot are the Progressists
and the Free-traders--the one party wants to manage things its own
way, and the other is opposed to all State control, and wishes to let
everything take its own course.”
“Yes,” I said, “certainly, the Free-traders, the Secessionists, and the
Jews are the worst. Bamberger[21] and Rickert.”
“Yes, the Jews,” he replied. “Bamberger has again told a mass of lies
in his book--that I broke with the National Liberals and turned towards
reaction. Yet while I have been Minister I have never belonged to
any party, either Liberal or Conservative. My party consisted solely
of the King and myself, and my only aims were the restoration and
aggrandisement of the German Empire, and the defence of monarchical
authority. That should also be emphasised and further developed on
some occasion. The Conservatives, in so far as they were in favour of
reaction, were always opposed to me, because I would not consent to
it. You remember the attacks of the _Kreuzzeitung_ at the time of the
Inspection of Schools Bill, afterwards during the great libel cases.”
“Diest-Daber and Co.,” I said.
“There they completely renounced me, and attacked me in every possible
way because I would not join them in their reactionary programme. It
was just the same in 1877 with the National Liberals. When Bennigsen
failed to form a Ministry because he put forward demands that I perhaps
could have agreed to, but to which the King would not consent, they
left me in the lurch, and their newspapers preached a crusade against
me. In the same way they entirely misrepresented the publication of
the Bülow letters, making all kinds of unfounded insinuations, as, for
instance, that they were directed against Bitter, whom I had not in my
mind at all.”
Returning again to the Jewish members of Parliament, he exclaimed:
“Yes, Bamberger, Lasker, and Rickert--self-seeking fellows!”
I remarked: “I suppose Lasker is now only working on the quiet, in
their conventicles. He has discovered that he is no longer as important
as he was. The great man has failed at three elections, on the first
two occasions in large Jewish towns, Breslau and Frankfurt, and then at
Magdeburg.”
He replied: “Yes, but I draw a distinction between Jew and Jew.
Those who have become rich are not dangerous. They will not put up
barricades, and they pay their taxes punctually. It is the enterprising
ones who have nothing, particularly those on the press. But after all,
it is the Christians and not the Jews who are the worst.”
I: “It is true that Rickert pretends he is not a Jew, but I should say
that he is one all the same. The ‘Parliamentary Almanac’ describes him
as an Evangelical.”
He: “Look up some of the older years, and there you will find that
they give no particulars of his place of birth or religion. I asked
Bleichröder, who told me that ---- (I could not catch the name) was not
a Jew, but that Rickert probably was.”
I: “Anyhow, his style of argument is sufficiently Hebraic.”
He (after a pause): “You have managed to give the _Grenzboten_ such
a character that it is regarded much as the Official Gazette. Hänel
asserts in the _Kieler Zeitung_ that it is out-and-out official, and
that you only say what I think and wish.”
I: “I have never boasted of it anywhere. It doubtless arises from the
fact that some of your expressions and your style, which is different
from that of others, are met with now and again in the articles. Nor
is this at all welcome to me; for although I have influence upon them
and can sometimes prevent the insertion of political articles that are
submitted to me, articles do sometimes get published in it which are
not to my liking. What did your Serene Highness think of Lindenau’s
article?[22] I believe he told the truth. He asserts that Friesen was
instructed from Dresden before the outbreak of the war with France to
use his influence chiefly for the maintenance of peace, and probably
he (Lindenau) was the Councillor entrusted with the delivery of that
message.”
“Yes,” replied the Chief, “Saxony is worse than Bavaria.”
“With the latter,” I remarked, “a letter from you was all that was
needed to get King Lewis on to the right track.”
He smiled and said: “But in Saxony things will be awkward when once
Prince George, with his Ultramontane crew, comes to the throne.”[23]
“He!” I exclaimed. “In Leipzig we have always looked at it in this
way. Should there be another great war with France or any other Power
in which we were to lose one or two important battles, and should the
people in Dresden then go over to the enemy, we should then hope to
see what was not possible in 1866 forthwith take place and the country
annexed--a fate from which the tutelary genius of the dynasty who sits
in a cherry stone in the Gruene Gewölbe at Dresden would hardly be able
to save them.”
“Yes, in such circumstances it would doubtless come to that,” he
replied.
I then said: “Might I ask how things are going with regard to foreign
affairs? What are our present relations with France?”
“Oh, quite good!” he said. “They desire peace, and so do we. And we
oblige them in many ways--but not on the Rhine--that is not possible.
We were on good terms with England, too, under Beaconsfield; but
Professor Gladstone perpetrates one piece of stupidity after another.
He has alienated the Turks; he commits follies in Afghanistan and at
the Cape, and he does not know how to manage Ireland. There is nothing
to be done with him.”
He then asked how I was getting on, and I inquired how he was. I said
he looked better than I had seen him for a long time past.
“Yes,” he said; “I am really very well just at present, except that I
have attacks of neuralgia which frequently deprive me of my rest--a
nervous face-ache, toothache, and such things. I have not smoked for
the last fortnight.”
I then took leave of him, and immediately wrote the first of the two
articles he desired, which appeared in the _Grenzboten_, No. 5, of
1881, under the title “Working-class Insurance Bill.” I then proceeded
with the second article, “The Imperial Chancellor and the Parties,”
a proof of which I sent to the Chief for correction on the 17th of
February. He returned it to me two hours later, after he had struck out
certain passages and rewritten others. Tiedemann, who brought it, was
at the same time instructed by the Chief to say that as the article
might just then be misunderstood by the National Liberals, it should be
held over for a week or a fortnight; he would himself again discuss the
matter with me personally, when there might perhaps be some additions
to make.
At 2.30 P.M. on the 19th of February I received a hasty
summons from Sachse to call upon the Prince. I accordingly presented
myself before him at 4 o’clock. He was in uniform, and seemed as if
he intended to go out. He shook hands, and said: “Nothing can be done
with the article on the National Liberals which we recently discussed,
owing to a necessary change of front towards the party attacked in
it.[24] The article was good, but we will not print it. You are now
regarded as official. But there is another matter I should like to have
discussed, that is to say, the debate on the remission of taxes in the
Upper Chamber, and the unsuitable constitution of the latter. There
are too many Berliners in it, and too many high officials, retired and
otherwise.”
He then took up a list of members, and read: “Ex-Minister Bernuth--it
is true he held office in Hanover, not here; the two Camphausens, the
one with the handle to his name and the other without; Friedenthal,
Patow, Lippe, Manteuffel, Rabe, Rittberg--I cannot rightly remember
whether he was a Minister; then Sulzer, Under Secretary of State,
seventeen or eighteen Actual, and Privy Councillors and other high
officials; together with some sixty-nine or seventy members who were
nominated owing to special Royal favour. I have jotted down something
on that head--let Rantzau give it to you, and use it, but not
literally, otherwise my style may be recognised. Turn it into your
own style.” I promised to do so; and then expressed the pleasure I
felt at his obtaining such a large majority and routing Camphausen so
thoroughly in the debate.
He smiled and said: “You should have seen him and his whole crowd--the
sour faces they made. And Camphausen, who kept me waiting for seven
years, because he was unable to manage anything except with the
milliards which remained in his hands after paying the cost of the
war--there was still a surplus of a few hundred millions which he did
not know how to invest. When a couple of millions were mentioned at a
meeting of the Cabinet he merely smiled. When a hundred millions were
spoken of, however, he laughed so heartily that you could see the two
teeth in his mouth. The ‘man of milliards,’ he was so lazy that I had
to beg and pray him to draft the Fiscal Reforms Bill; and he never
produced it until just at the end, and then it was not fit for use!”
I reminded him that I had already mentioned this in the _Grenzboten_ as
long ago as 1877 (in one of the friction articles).
“Ah!” he said, “have that reprinted. It will be useful as confirming
what I have said to him. It is true that at length he produced
something and wanted to proceed with his unworkable tobacco tax, and
to take some steps in the railway question. But he stumbled over
Bamberger, instead of treating him with contempt. Camphausen was the
leader of the storming party in the Upper House. He had worked up the
whole affair, joining with other archplotters and rabid free-traders.
But I must go. Speak to Rantzau, and he will give you the notes. But
you must not show them to any one.”
He rang the bell, and Count Rantzau brought the paper. He said it
was written very illegibly and with many abbreviations; he would,
therefore, like to read it over with me upstairs. The Chancellor
remarked, smiling: “Never mind if it is rather illegible. If the doctor
cannot quite decipher it he will not be able to reproduce it word for
word.”
I was, however, able to make it out at home, although with some
trouble, and then based the following article upon it, which appeared
in No. 9 of the _Grenzboten_, under the title of “The Upper Chamber.”
The portions within brackets are by me as also the first paragraph,
the remainder is the Chief’s, in great part the form as well as the
substance. The alterations are very slight, and such as are usually
made in correcting dictation. The article ran as follows:--
“(Public attention has been once more attracted to the Upper House
of the Prussian Diet, whose proceedings usually excite very little
interest, by the three days’ debate on the question of taxation that
took place in that Chamber last week, when the Opposition, organised
and led by the Ex-Minister Camphausen, was finally defeated, after its
leader had been roughly handled by the Chancellor. The occasion affords
an opportunity for casting a glance at the constitution of this body,
and indicating the changes which should, in our opinion, be made in its
composition, and in its treatment by the Government.)
“A strange impression is made by the circumstance that the Upper House,
which should be a factor in the Prussian Legislature of equal authority
with the Lower House, has again this session been summoned as usual
to hurriedly consider, under great pressure of time, questions of the
utmost importance, including the Settlement Bill in addition to the
most essential of all, namely, the Budget. The discussion of the Budget
is the only opportunity which the Upper House has for expressing,
like the Lower House, its views on important political affairs. It
is true that, under the Constitution, it has a more restricted share
in the settlement of its details than the other Chamber. But it is
precisely the general character of its right of intervention respecting
the Budget which shows that, under the Constitution, the Upper House
is expected to discuss, not the individual items, but the general
political significance of the whole Budget under its various heads,
thus giving public expression to the views on State affairs prevailing
in the classes represented by that body. Not a single complaint has yet
been heard from members of the Upper House that, owing to the manner
in which business has been conducted up to the present, the influence
which they are entitled to exercise upon the policy of the Government
has been unduly restricted. Nowhere in the Upper House does any one
seem to have been struck with the fact that, while the discussion of
the Budget occupies many weeks in the Lower House, it is disposed
of in a few hours in the other half of the Legislature, although
time had previously been found to devote three whole sittings to the
comparatively subordinate question of the remission of taxes.
“The astonishment aroused by the character of the attack made upon
the Government on this occasion is considerably increased when it is
remembered how little time was left to the House for the consideration
of the important measures mentioned above. The real explanation of
this opposition is unquestionably to be sought in the restlessness and
desire for occupation of ex-officials of high rank who have obtained
seats in the Upper House. Former Ministers who, like von Bernuth,
Count Lippe, Friedenthal and Camphausen, voluntarily retired from
office, are disposed, on the one hand, to continue their accustomed
Ministerial activity in a Parliamentary form, and, on the other, to
give vent to their ill-humour at not having been again entrusted with
a Ministerial or other appointment. It would require an exceptional
degree of magnanimity on their part to regard entirely without jealousy
the success of those who now hold the posts which they formerly filled,
to say nothing of promoting that success. Indeed it is only human,
natural, and customary that all higher patriotic considerations should
fail to enable persons of merely average character to overcome the
temptation to represent their own retirement as an irretrievable loss
to the machinery of government.
“(As already stated at the commencement) the plan of campaign in
the Upper House against Prince Bismarck’s Bill for the Remission
of Taxation was drawn up by Herr Camphausen, and the same former
colleague of the Chancellor had prepared the principal operations
by bringing his influence to bear upon the members in Committee.
The intention obviously was to bring once more to the front the
well-nigh forgotten friends of the somnolent old Liberal party,
through whom Herr Camphausen had acquired a certain importance, and
to recall their services. This could only be done by making the task
of the present Government as difficult as possible, and by drawing
disparaging comparisons between the present and former administrations,
the Government now in office being represented as unequal to the
performance of the duties entrusted to it....
“Count Lippe was the first to yield to the temptation of venting his
anger against the Government to which he formerly belonged, doing so
in the most violent, bitter and rancorous terms. He was followed in
a similar strain by the ex-Minister of Finance, Von Bodelschwingh, a
gentleman who has secured himself a place in the memory of the public
by his statement at the outbreak of the war with Austria that there
was only enough money in hand to provide for the pay of the army to
the end of the following week. A similar line was followed by the
ex-Premier Manteuffel, while former Under-Secretaries of State tried to
make clear to the Government, by the vehemence of their attack, that
their qualifications for still higher functions had not been properly
recognised. This traditional method has been most deplorably revived
by the Ministers Camphausen and Friedenthal, although both voluntarily
withdrew from the present Cabinet at a difficult juncture, the latter
leaving to others the further execution of the work which he had
himself commenced, as well as the responsibility for its success.
“Such behaviour invites severe censure (but the public may be left to
stigmatise such methods according to their deserts), for it is not
generally regarded as the sign of a noble nature to wilfully obstruct
those who have to perform a difficult task, to which the authors of
such obstruction felt themselves unequal.
“The minority of thirty-nine members of the Upper Chamber in the
division on the Remission of Taxes, setting aside a few irascible
old gentlemen who always vote against every proposal, was composed
of Reactionaries of the extreme Right like Count Lippe, Count Brühl,
Baron von Tettau, Herr von Rochow, and Herr von Oldenburg; infatuated
Progressists like Herr von Forckenbeck and Herr Forchhammer; and
then, as already stated, malcontent officials of high rank and their
abettors, and finally a number of fanatical Free-traders (led by
the Burgomasters), who from their doctrinaire standpoint consider
themselves bound to oppose what they regard as a Protectionist
Government.
“The minority is therefore a conglomerate of heterogeneous elements.
They are united solely by their hostility to the Prince[25] and his
policy, a hostility which arises from the most various motives. The
strongest and most emphatic expression was given to this feeling by
those members of the Upper House whose appointment and position in the
House are due to the exceptional confidence reposed in them by the
sovereign. Strange to say, they imagine that they can most fittingly
justify this confidence by putting as many difficulties as possible in
the way of the Government of the King to whom they owe their seats.
“That an Opposition of this kind, which from its very nature was bound
to be ineffectual, was allowed to monopolise three whole days out of
the only week remaining for the discussion of the important questions
already mentioned, shows a degree of consideration on the part of
the majority which illustrates one of the causes of the inadequate
practical co-operation of that body in our political life. In the
short interval thus left, the House had to dispose of the Budget and
the Settlement Bill. In our opinion, however, the Upper House is not
to blame for the fact that it must remain inactive up to the two last
weeks of the session, while the other House is engaged in often lively
debates, or at least we must not seek for the origin of the evil there
alone. That many members of the Upper House display but slight interest
in the affairs of the State is doubtless an important contributory
cause. We consider, however, that the Government is chiefly to blame,
inasmuch as it not only submits first to the Lower House all financial
bills, but also all other important and interesting proposals and
measures. The Constitution provides that this shall be done in the case
of financial bills, but not in other cases.
“To quote an instance in support of what we have just said, we do
not know (and cannot even imagine) what considerations induced the
Government to lay all bills relating to questions of organisation,
those dealing with the whole Monarchy as well as those affecting
individual provinces, regularly and exclusively before the Lower House,
which either left them lying in their Committees or did not allow them
to reach the Upper Chamber before the last week of the session. (...)
Are we to explain this by assuming that the Government is afraid of the
Lower House, but not of the Upper House?
“We are of opinion that such a method is neither very dignified nor
very practical. Indeed, one can scarcely describe this course as a
method, since that term is usually applied to a form of activity which
has something more in view than an easy and comfortable provision for
the individual requirements of the administration. We cannot help
fearing that succeeding Governments will have to suffer for the mistake
committed by that now in office, which amounts to little less than
reducing the Upper House to a cipher.
“The lack of interest in public affairs which is characteristic of
most members of the Upper House is unquestionably due in part to the
unsuitable conditions which governed the foundation and development of
that body. As a consequence most members of the House have no active
connection with the public life of the country, and are never in
close sympathy with it. There are politicians who still remember the
energetic and effective part which was taken in State affairs by the
old First Chamber, which has now been replaced by the Upper House, and
the corresponding interest thus aroused among the public of that day
by its debates, which were really of greater importance, and showed
greater intellectual capacity than the proceedings in the Lower House.
Whoever remembers this cannot see without regret how little of that
importance and influence now remains to the Upper House in its present
form.
“This defect does not lie solely in the inadequacy of the ties which
connect the Upper House since its extension with the country at large,
for even in its present shape and composition the Prussian Senate
would still enjoy greater consideration if the Government would only
give it more importance. As it is, the Government contributes by
the arrangements which it makes for conducting the business of the
Legislature, as well as by the selection of members, to restrict the
share taken by the Upper House in the work of legislation, and to
render that restriction permanent. Under this system, the preliminary
discussions in the Committees and current affairs are for the most
part dealt with by members who reside in the capital, the majority
of whom are retired officials, more or less dissatisfied on account
of their retirement. We believe we do not over-estimate when we
reckon that these Berlin members, together with a few representatives
of the larger towns, make up the necessary quorum of sixty. The
representatives of the great landowning classes in the provinces, who
were intended to exercise the chief influence in this Assembly, put
in an appearance only on the rarest occasions when a formal vote has
hastily to be taken on the results of the session’s labours. This is
decidedly a drawback.
“The first question of many of those who come to Berlin for this
purpose usually is, ‘When shall we get home again?’ On the discussion
of the Protection of Game Bill, a measure of the highest importance to
the landed proprietors in particular, and which threatened them with
intolerable vexations, there were, if we are not mistaken, only some
eighty members of the Upper House present, and of these hardly twenty
belonged to the class of provincial landowners whose interests were
threatened by this measure.
“(We must now conclude by pointing the moral of these considerations.)
If the Government wishes to carry on an effective policy, and not
merely to administer separate departments, it must recognise the
necessity of trying whether a better treatment of the Upper House,
putting it on a more equal footing with the Lower House, would not
induce its members to take a more active and regular part in the work
of the Diet. Business cannot continue to be thus conducted if the
desired regeneration of the House is to be brought about. For who can
offer any sound and convincing objection to the excuse which might be
alleged by the majority of the 133 members of the Upper House who,
out of a total of 300, attended the last division, for not having put
in an appearance until the last fortnight of the session? That excuse
might have been framed as follows: ‘What should we have done here had
we come earlier? Perhaps wait at the door of the Lower House until the
gentlemen there were pleased to send us up their leavings? Or wait
until the Ministers found time to attend to us? We could do that quite
as well at home.’
“In our opinion it will not be easy to refute the criticisms directed
on such grounds against the attitude hitherto adopted by the Government
towards the Upper House (and this leads us back to our demand that a
remedy should be found for the evil, and that speedily).”
On the 27th of April, 1881, I reminded the Chief of my readiness to
be of use in case he should have anything for me to do after the
reassembly of the Reichstag.
On the same day I paid Bucher a visit at his lodgings. He told me that
the “Foreign Office Ring,” of which the ambitious and intriguing Bülow
had been the leading spirit, was broken up. Bülow would be removed,
getting some small post as envoy at Weimar or Stuttgart. Tiedemann was
also nearing the end of his tether, and would doubtless have been set
aside before now if his pretensions had not been extravagant; he wanted
the post of _Oberpräsident_ at any cost, while the utmost that could be
done for him was to make him a _Regierungspräsident_. The Prince was
aware of these pretensions and had made some ironical remarks on the
subject. Lindau, who looks after press matters and has now the rank
of _Vortragender Rath_, does not do much, as he has had “no regular
training.” He, Bucher, has therefore often to do the newspaper work.
Among other things he has, upon instructions and information conveyed
to him by the Chief, written several long articles for the _Deutsche
revue über das gesammte National Leben der Gegenwart_ (edited by R.
Fleischer, and published by O. Fanke in Berlin), which he gave me. One,
entitled “Power without Responsibility,” a proof of which was given
to me, was intended for the May number, and was principally devoted
to a discussion of the recent policy of Gladstone and Gambetta. The
other, entitled “Prince Bismarck in the Ministry of State,” published
in the April number of the sixth year, contained some interesting
matter respecting the retirement of Count Eulenburg, the Minister
of the Interior, which was not due solely to the conflict that took
place between himself and the Chief in the Upper House on the 19th of
February.
On the 3rd of May I received from the Imperial Chancellerie an answer
to my note of the 27th of April, in the form of an invitation to pay
the Prince a visit next day. In the antechamber I met Bucher, who had
been called to him before me, and who remained with him for about a
quarter of an hour. On receiving me afterwards the Prince said: “You
want fodder, but I have none at present. I was thinking in the garden
of what to tell you, but found there was nothing to say. Of course I
could talk to you about the speech I am going to make in the Reichstag
one of these days, but then people would say: ‘He has been reading the
_Grenzboten_ to some purpose.’ All the same one might deal once more
with what I recently said respecting the municipality of Berlin and the
Progressist clique, and about the inhabited house tax and valuation.
Also as to the removal of the Reichstag, which it is not absolutely
necessary should meet in Berlin. They object to my regarding myself
as the champion of the lesser folk, of the poor. I have, they say, no
right and no need to do so, although recently people have again died
of starvation here. The speech on the inhabited house tax defended the
interests of this class of the population, and also that of fair play.
The Progressist party and the Manchester clique, the representatives
of the ruthless money-bags, have always been unjust to the poor, and
have invariably done everything in their power to prevent the State
from protecting them. _Laissez faire_, the largest possible measure
of self-government, unlimited opportunities for the great capitalists
to swallow up the small business men, and for the exploitation of the
ignorant and inexperienced by the clever and cunning. The State should
merely act as policemen, chiefly for the protection of the exploiters.”
He reflected for a moment, and then continued: “I am not against a
considerable degree of municipal self-government as opposed to State
administration. It has its good points, but also its disadvantages.
If it does not always display as great a sense of justice as State
officials do, that is only human nature, which is imperfect. People
will always be disposed to favour relatives, customers, friends and
members of their own party, even when they intend to act impartially;
in these circumstances men and things look different to what they
really are. It is therefore quite conceivable that in making valuations
a shopkeeper will, in spite of himself, apply a different measure
to his customers and to others, and if to this be added party and
religious rancour it is scarcely possible to prevent injustice. That
may lead to very serious evils in a large town where one party has
got hold of the administration, particularly as party spirit does not
as a rule restrict itself to unfair valuations, but also disposes of
municipal offices and work. Municipal self-government must therefore
be restricted, and the State must protect those who do not belong to
the party in power from the arbitrary and unfair treatment with which
they are constantly threatened by the municipal administration elected,
and continually influenced by that party. It was therefore a mistake
on the part of Eulenburg--I mean the late one--to give the Berlin
Corporation such wide powers. He was really a Conservative, but wished
to make himself popular, and you will see from the newspapers that he
has succeeded in doing so. Moreover, he was a friend of Forckenbeck’s,
and that also will have influenced him in making concessions to the
Progressist clique. This did not concern Berlin alone. In general
we held different views on the district and provincial regulations.
I wanted to have them reconsidered and partially altered, as they
contained some dangerous concessions. Eulenburg, however, was in a
hurry, and wanted to finish the general outlines, which were to apply
to all the provinces. I should have refused my signature if the draft
had been submitted to me. The King was also displeased with these
concessions, which affected his prerogatives and whittled down the
authority of the State. Thus, for example, on the occasion of the
recent solemn re-entry of the King (on his return to Berlin after his
recovery from the effects of the Nobiling outrage), the municipal
authorities made arrangements without previously consulting Madai, to
ascertain what was thought on the subject by the King, whose ideas were
quite different. That also accounts to some extent for Eulenburg’s
retirement. He took advantage of the incident in the Upper House to
withdraw from a position which had become untenable. The democratic
clique which rules Berlin noisily enforced the rights granted to them,
and acted as if they could do whatever they liked. Even the streets,
since they have become the property of the town, must serve their
purposes to the disadvantage of many people, as, for instance, with
regard to the tramways. Since the rights of the State over the streets
of the city have been transferred to the municipality, one may say that
the mediæval ‘right of convoy and escort’ has practically been revived.
But when the railway had to be carried across the Jerusalemstrasse,
Maybach showed them once more what was what.”
He was silent for a moment and then observed: “I therefore will not
have the State made omnipotent, but on the other hand I will not
permit its disintegration, its division into communal republics
after the style of Richter and Virchow. We have seen in Paris what
such self-government leads to. At present an attempt of the kind is
again being made. Just read the speeches which Andrieux, the Prefect
of Police, has delivered in the Chamber and before his electors at
Arbresle. That shows that men of sense and character are not in favour
of unrestricted self-government, even in Republican towns. You will
find it in the last numbers of the French newspapers. There are many
good points in it which are also applicable to our own circumstances.
“And then as to the rumours about the Reichstag and its removal from
Berlin, a great deal more might be said. Say that it was no mere
threat, but an idea that is seriously entertained. It has many things
to recommend it. The Emperor can summon the Reichstag wherever he
chooses, as the Constitution has made no provision respecting the
place where it is to meet. The old Emperors of Germany had no imperial
capital; they assembled the representatives of the Empire, the Princes
and Estates, wherever it was most convenient to them, sometimes in
the north and sometimes in the south and west. In case of danger from
the west at the present day, Berlin or Breslau would be a convenient
place for the sittings of the Reichstag, while disturbances in the
east would render a Bavarian, Rhenish or Hessian town, such, for
instance, as Cologne, Nuremberg, Augsburg or Cassel, more desirable.
In certain circumstances there would also be no objection to Hamburg
or Hanover. The members of the Reichstag would be heartily welcomed
in all these places, while they would have the further advantage of a
change of air. Moreover, they would as a whole come into contact with
other sections of the population, other people, and other conditions,
and would be subjected to other influences than those which they have
hitherto experienced. It would be as great a mistake to confound the
Berliner with the German as it would be to confound the Parisians with
the French people--in both countries they represent quite a different
people. There are also other important considerations in favour of
this plan. The independence of the members and liberty of speech is
better guaranteed in towns of medium size than in a great city with
over a million inhabitants. That was proved in 1848, when the Radicals
and Democrats, who now style themselves the Progressist party, had
seized power. The mob threatened, and indeed besieged, those members
of Parliament whose attitude they disapproved of. An Auerswald or a
Lichnowski[26] might well be done to death here, and indeed with still
greater ease. Away from the capital the members of the Reichstag need
have no fear of the scandal-mongering press of Berlin. How many of them
have the courage to despise that journalistic rabble? In revolutionary
times how many of them would have the courage to hold their ground
against intimidation and threats directed against their life and
honour? Such times may possibly return. In smaller towns it is much
easier to protect them than here, where, in future, the Progressists,
the Jacobins and the Socialists will enter into a close alliance, with
the object of promoting the democratic aims which they have in common.
Their fellows in Paris concluded such an alliance in 1871. But if
these parties were to come to an understanding in Berlin, the friends
of order and of monarchical institutions would find themselves in a
minority, and could not enforce their views, even if all the shades of
opinion into which they are divided were to unite. That has been also
recognised elsewhere. In the United States, Congress does not meet
in New York, Philadelphia, St. Louis or Chicago, but in Washington,
a town of medium size, which is usually very quiet. The Legislative
Assemblies of the different States also meet in towns of medium size,
or, indeed, sometimes in quite small places. There were good reasons
for the continuance of the French Chambers at Versailles, and it will
be almost a miracle if they do not one day have cause to regret their
return to Paris. Even the removal of Parliament from Berlin to Potsdam
would offer a certain guarantee against the disadvantages and dangers
which I have described. Finally if the Reichstag were not domiciled in
Berlin, it would not have such an enormous crowd of Berliners among its
members.”
He rang the bell and asked for the Parliamentary Guide, and then went
through the alphabetical list of members, from Bamberger, Benda,
Bernuth and Beseler to Weber and Wehrenpfenig, in order to find out the
Berliners, I writing down the names as he gave them to me. “Now count
them,” he said. “How many are there?” There were forty-six. “You must
not mention their names, however, as there are a number of good friends
of ours, and strong monarchists among them.”
He then spoke more slowly, as if dictating, at the same time walking
up and down the room. I wrote down what he said. “The number of
those who regularly attend is close on two hundred, and of these the
forty-six Berliners are probably always present. We thus arrive at this
monstrous condition of affairs that this city Berlin has no less than
a fifth, indeed nearly a fourth, of the entire effective representation
of Germany, including Alsace-Lorraine; and even in the largest
attendance--which may be put at about 310--the Berliners form 15 per
cent. of the whole. There is one Berliner for every million inhabitants
of the German Empire, and if the sense of intolerable boredom created
among many members by the infliction of speeches from Messrs. Richter
and Lasker, lasting often more than two hours, continues to increase
at the same rate as it has done recently, it may be taken for granted
that in future Berliners will form one-fifth of the representatives
of the Empire who are in regular attendance. They are always in their
places, and when the democrats among them find themselves supported by
an equal number of their fellows from the Provinces they have almost a
certain majority on the average attendance of 200 members. Moreover,
there is in this city a considerable number who make a business of
their Parliamentary activity, combining it with the editorship of
newspapers. Both occupations dovetail into each other, and help to
give the industrially unproductive classes, the _fruges consumere nati_,
preponderance in the law makers’ establishment. With the assistance of
the officials who live on their salaries in Berlin and elsewhere, and
for whom the Parliamentary Session is a pleasant holiday in comparison
to their other work--.” He did not complete the sentence, but smiled,
and said: “When they are here they are just like youngsters who are
glad not to have to go to school, and who hang their heads when they
are obliged to return there after the holidays. Here in the Reichstag,
and in the Lower House of the Diet, there is no strict discipline,
no stern masters, no subordination and no reprimands. They are the
representatives of the popular will, can enjoy the sense of their own
importance, and win admiration by their speeches. All these together
make exactly that kind of a majority which should not exist. That must
be done away with. The German people has a right to demand that the
Reichstag should not be Berlinised.”
He then reflected for a while and said: “Foreign affairs? There is also
not much to write about on that subject at present.”
I suggested: “Tunis? I have written a long article on this subject
for the _Grenzboten_, but it is for the most part geographical and
historical, and contains very little politics.”
He promptly exclaimed: “That’s dangerous! Please let it be! It is
better not to touch it. You know people think when you write anything
that it has been inspired by me.”
I explained to him that I had only dealt with facts and suppositions,
and that the article hinted that he regarded the French enterprise with
sincere good will, and would be pleased if they were satisfied.
He replied: “Ah, that is all right. You have put it very well. You
might also say that we should be pleased to see those neglected
districts that had formerly been fertile and well cultivated come
into the hands of a great civilised people who would restore them to
civilisation. But do not show too much good will, or the French will
take offence at us for giving them permission to undertake hostilities.
Say nothing about England and Italy. It is in our interest if they
should fall out with the French, and when the latter are busy in Tunis
they cease to think of the Rhine frontier. But all that must not be as
much as insinuated--write something about Russia in preference. There
the peasants must be converted into private owners of their lands,
of personal and hereditable property. Now when the land is held in
common by the entire village, and is divided up from time to time, the
drone and the drunkard have the same right as the diligent labourer
who does not spend his time in the public-house. This common ownership
must cease. Those, however, who desire to bring about revolution and
to set the peasantry against the Emperor fight tooth and nail for
the retention of this communism, as if it were a palladium. It is
said to be a genuinely national and primitive Russian institution. In
doing so, however, the gentlemen manifest gross ignorance. The common
ownership of the land was formerly a traditional custom here, except
in a few districts, as, for instance, in parts of Westphalia up to the
Stein-Hardenberg legislation. A similar custom prevailed in France up
to the First Revolution. The Russians, however, have probably received
it from us, from the Germanic Rurik, as they afterwards received other
European institutions.”
At this juncture von Bötticher, the Minister, was announced; and the
Prince took leave of me with the words, “I must break off here, as
I cannot keep him waiting. Auf Wiedersehen. But be very careful in
dealing with Tunis.” I had been with him over half an hour.
The Chancellor’s suggestions with respect to the Tunisian question
and Russia were incorporated in the articles on those subjects. The
communication he made to me at the interview on the 4th of May was
embodied, for the most part literally, in an article entitled “Prince
Bismarck and Berlin,” in No. 20 of the _Grenzboten_, of which I sent
him a copy after publication. I enclosed at the same time an extract
from a leading article of the _Daily Telegraph_ eulogising the recently
deceased Count Harry Arnim, and asserting among other things that in
1870, when he was envoy to the Curia, he had a plan which, if carried
into effect, would have entirely averted the struggle between Prussia
and the Vatican. This magnificent idea was that Prussia should persuade
her bishops to found a German National Church, and in alliance with
them fight the Pope. The _Berliner Tageblatt_ put somewhat similar
stories and views on the market. I therefore asked the Prince whether
these statements should not be refuted. The letter and enclosure was
despatched on the evening of the 22nd of May, and on the evening of
the 24th the letter was returned to me, accompanied by a few lines
from Tiedemann, in which he said, _inter alia_: “His Serene Highness
said he would have been better pleased if the article ‘Prince Bismarck
and Berlin’ had been submitted to him before publication, as several
passages must cause offence in the most exalted regions. With reference
to the article in the _Daily Telegraph_, the Prince said it did not
appear to him to be worth while to refute it.”
It would appear, however, that the Chancellor ultimately came to
think that after all the articles in the _Daily Telegraph_ called for
a correction, as a few days, after the receipt by me of Tiedemann’s
letter the _Norddeutsche Allgemeine Zeitung_ published the following
communication, evidently inspired, which was afterwards copied by the
other newspapers:--
“Certainly such a development (as that which Count Arnim is alleged
to have proposed) would have been desirable from the point of view
of the State. Its only defect was that not a single bishop, not even
the most moderate, was disposed to listen to such an appeal from the
State to enter upon a conflict with the Pope. Even the bishops of those
nations whose national sentiment is much more highly developed, such
as the French, English, and Slav, have rejected all such temptations
_a limine_. But the idea of the Government putting itself at the head
of the Prussian bishops, or being supported by Ledochowski, Melchers,
and Martin in the creation of a German National Church against the will
of the Pope is so utterly puerile that it could certainly never have
occurred to a man of such intelligence as Count Harry Arnim. He was too
well acquainted with the bishops, some of whom were like wax in the
hands of the Pope, while the rest were Jesuits, or waverers, for him to
have ever believed for a moment that they could be induced to storm the
Papal stronghold. So far as we are aware he never entertained such an
idea, and never gave expression to it.”
On Sunday, the 26th of June, at 1.30 P.M., the Prince sent a
message requesting me to call upon him at 4 o’clock. He was in plain
clothes, and looked very poorly, with dark lines under his eyes. He
had allowed his beard to grow, as he usually does when his nervous
affection is exceptionally tormenting. He asked how I was getting on. I
answered: “Well, Serene Highness; but it is not necessary to ask you,
as one knows from the newspapers that your health has of late been very
indifferent.”
“Yes,” he replied, “very bad. Weakness and oppression, and pains all
over, in the body, chest, and face. Up to my sixty-sixth year I had
good teeth, but now they all pain me, tugging and tearing above and
below and all round.” He drew his hand down one cheek and then up the
other. “But that comes from the great excitement, which is due this
time, not to political affairs, but to other matters of which we will
not speak,” (he doubtless referred to certain family affairs ... of
which some hints had appeared in the newspapers) “and one must keep
on working all the same--incessantly. The King is pitiless. He knows
how I am, and yet every day he sends me notes that must be answered. I
have had this illness already several times; first, in St. Petersburg,
when I heard that they were thinking of committing the blunder of
mobilising in favour of Austria in the Italian question, in which case
Austria would have left them in the lurch; then before and after the
war in 1866 at Putbus; again at Versailles; and in ’74, on the occasion
of the libels (Diest-Dabers), when I was deserted by old friends,
and when the Minister of the Household subscribed for ten copies of
the _Reichsglocke_; and in 1877 when Augusta’s _entourage_ intrigued
against me. But what I would like you to do is this. The Progressist
party now speak as if they had done everything, and as if we had to
thank them for the unification of Germany and the foundation of the
Empire. I should like to have a historic survey prepared which would
show that, on the contrary, they have used every possible means to
defeat that end. As long ago as 1848 and the following year they so far
injured the good position held by Prussia, that as a result we had the
miserable Manteuffel _régime_ (_die elende Manteuffelei_), Olmütz, and
afterwards to the Canossa days in Paris, where our plenipotentiary was
obliged to wait for hours in the antechamber before he was admitted,
and where Prussia was altogether left out of account. Then under
the Ministers of the new era when they, with their dogmatism and
their opposition to the reorganisation of the army, brought on the
appointment of a Bismarck Ministry. At that time they were in favour of
a mere militia, although they entertained far-reaching schemes against
the Confederation and Austria--or rather, great aspirations. They
expected no doubt to blow them down with their unwholesome breath as
the walls of Jericho were brought down by the blast of the trumpet.
That is not mine--the breath--but Shakespeare’s.”
“Julius Cæsar?” I suggested.
“No,” he replied, “Coriolanus” (Act iv. scene 6). “Menenius, the
breath of the garlic eaters which ‘made the air unwholesome’ as they
threw their greasy caps in the air and shouted for the banishment
of Coriolanus. And then their attitude towards me. They always
wished me ill, wished me even to the scaffold. Their one desire
always was to upset the Ministry, and take its place. In the course
which they pursued they never took the condition of Germany into
consideration--that is to say, they often alluded to it in their
speeches, but never seriously thought of it. And their action was
always directed towards promoting the objects of our opponents abroad.
They were in favour of Austria, when I was against her, and _vice
versâ_. They worked into the hands of France, like Mayer and Sonnemann,
who held similar views, and who could scarcely be regarded as anything
else than French officials. They would not have an army or a fleet, or
a strong Prussia, and only wanted to establish democratic rule. They
fought against my plans in the Schleswig-Holstein question--‘not a
Groschen to the Ministry’--although I have reason to be particularly
proud of my share in it, seeing that it was a drama of intrigue, equal
to Scribe’s ‘_Le Verre d’Eau_.’ For the sake of the Augustenburger’s
rights, as they said, Schleswig-Holstein should be formed into a
new minor State, which would have voted against Prussia at every
opportunity. Kiel is still one of their chief strongholds, from which
the movement is directed.”
“Yes, Hänel,” I said, “Ex-Minister of Justice to Duke Frederick, who
wished to come to an arrangement with Napoleon against Prussia.
I am pretty well acquainted with the condition of affairs at that
period. When I was disclosing the Kiel intrigues in the _Preussische
Jahrbücher_ I explained the situation to a company, consisting of
members of the Progressist party gathered at Mommsen’s, who was at that
time beginning to entertain more sensible ideas on the subject. All I
could say, however, was perfectly idle. They held to their standpoint
that it was unjust.”
“Mommsen?” said the Chief. “He has always proved himself a greenhorn
when he mixed in politics, and most of all at the present time.”
“One of those awfully clever Professors who know everything better than
every one else,” I remarked.
“They were also opposed to the acquisition of Lauenburg,” continued the
Chancellor, “and when the war with Austria was imminent they desired to
‘rid Prussia of the itch to be a great Power,’ and organised popular
meetings all over the country at which resolutions were passed against
‘a fratricidal war.’ It is an unquestionable fact that at that time
they traitorously hoped and prayed that the enemy might be victorious.
Their ideas were most clearly represented by that member of Parliament
who afterwards conducted an anti-Prussian agitation in the Vienna
press--What’s his name?--the man with the broad, smooth face?”
“Frese,” I suggested.
“Yes, that’s the man I mean” he replied, “They afterwards said, ‘If
we had only known that!’ But that was merely a lying excuse. What
they desired was not unity but freedom, as it was understood by their
party, and radical rule. After 1866 and 1870 they were always the
friends or enemies of every foreign Power according to the side which
I took against it or for it. In all great questions the position they
adopted was determined by their hatred of me. They urged that peace
was threatened by the disfavour with which the Powers regarded the
latest reorganisation of Germany, and yet in dealing with the military
question they endeavoured, in combination with the Centre party, to
weaken rather than to strengthen our power of resistance. They opposed
the consolidation of the Empire in every way. First, they were against
Russia, particularly in 1863; then, when our relations with that
country became less satisfactory, they took up the Russian side; and
when we were once more on a better footing with St. Petersburg they
again turned against Russia. They opposed the Socialists at first, but
when the Anti-Socialist laws came up for discussion they assisted them.
Finally, when I came forward with State Socialism they fought it tooth
and nail, because it is a weapon against the revolution which they
desire. What they require is discontent. That is their element, and
the means by which they promote their ends. They sacrifice everything
to that. It was the case in the question of customs and taxation, and
with regard to the more lenient application of the May Laws which they
also opposed in the commencement, as well as in the Hamburg affair in
which they were thorough Particularists, as they had formerly been in
the Schleswig-Holstein question. It was the same in the purchase of
the railways by the State, which has given exceptionally good results
and with which the public is perfectly satisfied. Throughout the whole
history of the Empire the Progressist party has been the _advocatus
diaboli_. Happily however they were invariably mere firework devils,”
he added, smiling.
“Bellows,” (_Püstriche_) I said, “as Mephisto called them, when he
assembled the devils with straight and crooked horns over to the grave
of Dr. Faust.”
“Yes,” he replied, “they can only lie like the Father of Lies. But they
will not succeed in the long run. Here in Germany lies have a short
life, and the Germans do not allow themselves to be taken in for any
length of time, as other nations such as the French are apt to do, who
attach too much importance to fine speeches.”
I then inquired how he expected the next elections to turn out. He
said: “The moderate parties will be weakened, while the Progressists
will probably increase their numbers, the Conservatives, however, doing
the same. This time, however, we will not stand by and see our plans
wrecked. We shall dissolve if we cannot carry our State Socialism--our
practical Christianity! At present it is not worth while for the sake
of three months.”
“Practical Christianity?” I asked. “Did I rightly understand your
Serene Highness?”
“Certainly,” he replied. “Compassion, a helping hand in distress.
The State which can raise money with the least trouble must take the
matter in hand. Not as alms, but as a right to maintenance, where not
the readiness but the power to work fails. Why should only those who
have in battle become incapable of earning a livelihood be entitled to
a pension, and not also the rank and file of the army of labour? This
question will force its way; it has a future. It is possible that our
policy may be reversed at some future time when I am dead; but State
Socialism will make its way. Whoever takes up this idea again will come
to power. And we have the means, as, for instance, out of a heavier
tobacco tax. That reminds me. My son had recently to deliver a speech
against the Progressists before some association, and I advised him to
introduce the phrase, ‘The voting cattle from the Richter stables, with
the Progressist winkers’ (Das Stimmvieh aus den Richterschen Ställen
mit dem Fortschrittsbrete vor dem Kopfe), but he considered it too
strong.”
We then spoke about the _Deutsches Tageblatt_, which he had taken up
while he was speaking. He said it was well edited. I observed that
the publisher, whose acquaintance I had made at the last book fair in
Leipzig, had told me that he had nearly 8,000 subscribers. The Chief
said: “10,000, I am told.” I observed: “It is now stated that the
_National Zeitung_, that dreary organ of the Secessionists, Bamberger
& Co., has hardly 7,000 subscribers still left.” “That was always
a Jewish sheet,” he replied. “The proprietor and editor are both
Semites.” “And inflated pedagogues,” I took the liberty of adding.
This led the conversation to the Jews, and their connection with
the Progressist party. He said he was surprised at their being so
hostile to him, and so ungrateful, as after all they owed to him the
political position which they held in the Empire. “At least through my
signature,” he continued. “They ought to be satisfied with me, but they
will one day force me to defend myself against them.”
“As you did against the Ultramontanes,” I said. “In that case, Serene
Highness, you would become more popular even than you now are, as you
would have with you not merely the sixty or the hundred thousand who
signed the petition, but the millions who loathe the Jews and their
politics.”
FOOTNOTES
[1] These articles formed the basis of the book _Der Parlamentarismus
wie er ist_, a second edition of which appeared in 1881; while others
were utilised for a second volume, _Bilder aus der Fremde, für die
Heimath gezeichnet_ (“Pictures from Abroad painted for those at Home”).
[2] He was subsequently Ambassador to the Italian Court.
[3] In the late autumn of 1878 I found the library of the Foreign
Office installed here.
[4] Editor of the _North German Gazette_.
[5] It may here be mentioned, for the benefit of the uninitiated
in these matters, that the family in question is related to the
Hohenzollerns through the marriage of Prince Anton Heinrich Radziwill
in 1796 to Friederike Dorothée Louise, daughter of Prince Ferdinand of
Prussia.
[6] Meding, a born Prussian, had originally been in the Prussian
service, but subsequently went over into the Hanoverian service and was
employed by King George, whose confidence he won by the violence of
his anti-Prussian sentiments in connection with the official press....
After the war of 1866 he accompanied the ex-King of Hanover to Vienna,
and then acted until 1870 as a Guelph agent in Paris. He then made
his peace with the Prussian Government and received a pension.... He
published, under the pseudonym of George Samarow, several so-called
historical romances....
[7] Under this system the Ministers are on a footing of equality, and
independent of each other.
[8] Compare with entry for the 8th of November, 1872.
[9] Brother of the dramatist and critic, afterwards Councillor of
Embassy in Berlin.
[10] A reference to the drum which Ziska, the Hussite commander,
ordered his followers to make of his skin, so that he might still
terrify the enemy after his death.
[11] So I understood him to say, but it must have been very much more.
See later.
[12] I should not be disposed to take the responsibility for this
80,000 without good evidence in support of the statement.
[13] The _Bonbonnière_ was a nickname for the Opposition, composed of
the favourites of the Empress Augusta.
[14] Olbrich’s, a Berlin beerhouse, where the editors of the
_Reichsglocke_ and their distinguished patrons were accustomed to meet
for the purpose of preparing their articles against Bismarck.
[15] An error on the part of the Chief, as I subsequently learned. The
offence in question was not the libelling of Ministers, but insults to
the Consistory.
[16] A newspaper edited by Joachim Gehlsen, a decayed journalist, in
co-operation with certain distinguished reactionaries. Its main object
was to lampoon and calumniate the Imperial Chancellor.
[17] Karlsruhe is laid out somewhat in the form of a fan, the streets
radiating from the “handle,” which is occupied by the palace.
[18] When I mentioned this to Bucher he said: “Well, that is not quite
the case. Recently, when he wished to resign, he said to me that if I
did not like to remain on I should come to him at Varzin; he had some
important matters to dictate to me concerning the past from notes which
he had taken down.”
[19] The passage in question has now been corrected in accordance with
the above statement.
[20] Then Correspondent of the _Daily Telegraph_ in Berlin, now _The
Times_ Correspondent in Vienna.
[21] _Bangbersché_, the French pronunciation of Bamberger. The latter
formerly resided in Paris.
[22] This article, which was written by Von Lindenau, a rather
eccentric gentleman formerly in the service of Saxony as Councillor of
Embassy, was published in No. 48 of the _Grenzboten_ of 1880, and dealt
with the attitude of Saxony immediately before the war with France.
[23] So it appeared to many persons at that time. But _tempora
mutantur_; and to-day, thank Heaven, all anxiety on that point has
vanished.
[24] This doubtless referred to the intention to which the Chancellor
gave public expression a few weeks later in his appeal to Herr von
Bennigsen.
[25] How widespread this feeling is, may be gathered from the attitude
of the _Post_, which has published sweet-sour articles on the
subject.--This remark was added at the request of the Chief, which was
communicated to me by Count Rantzau on the 21st of February. The Prince
at the same time wished to have Friedenthal mentioned as “a future
minister,” and as responsible for the attitude adopted by the _Post_.
Rantzau and Holstein, however, advised against this, as Friedenthal had
no longer any influence on the paper.
[26] General Auerswald and Prince Lichnowski lost their lives in the
disturbances at Frankfurt in 1848.
END OF VOL. II.
RICHARD CLAY AND SONS, LIMITED, LONDON AND BUNGAY.
Transcriber's Notes
The following changes have been made to the text as printed. In
cases of doubt, recourse has been had to the original German work
(_Tagebuchblätter_).
1. Obvious typographical errors have been corrected.
2. Errors in use of quote marks and other punctuation have been
corrected.
3. In cases of inconsistent spelling of German and French names, the
spelling used in the original language has been preferred. Examples
include changing "Frankfort" to "Frankfurt", "Mayence" to "Mainz",
"Rheims" to "Reims", "Delbruck" to "Delbrück". However, where the
English text is consistent in spelling, that spelling has been retained
("Cologne", "Munich").
4. Where a word is used repeatedly in the same way, hyphenation has
been made consistent, preferring the form most often used in the
printed work, or failing that the more usual form in general use at the
time of publication.
5. Page 85: "making capital out it" has been changed to "making capital
out of it".
6. Page 89: "at the same recommending" has been changed to "at the same
time recommending".
7. Page 165: "sacrificed the Greek element to the slaves." has been
changed to "sacrificed the Greek element to the Slavic.".
8. Page 177: "pan-Krutowski" has been changed to "Pan Krutowski".
9. Page 253: "They are diary entries ..." has been changed to "There
are diary entries ...".
10. Page 274: "Bucher went on say" has been changed to "Bucher went on
to say".
*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK BISMARCK: SOME SECRET PAGES OF
HIS HISTORY, VOLUME II (OF 3) ***
Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions will
be renamed.
Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright
law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works,
so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the
United States without permission and without paying copyright
royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part
of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG™
concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark,
and may not be used if you charge for an eBook, except by following
the terms of the trademark license, including paying royalties for use
of the Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything for
copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is very
easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as creation
of derivative works, reports, performances and research. Project
Gutenberg eBooks may be modified and printed and given away--you may
do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks not protected
by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the trademark
license, especially commercial redistribution.
START: FULL LICENSE
THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK
To protect the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the free
distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work
(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase “Project
Gutenberg”), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full
Project Gutenberg™ License available with this file or online at
www.gutenberg.org/license.
Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works
1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg™
electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to
and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all
the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or
destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in your
possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a
Project Gutenberg™ electronic work and you do not agree to be bound
by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the
person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph
1.E.8.
1.B. “Project Gutenberg” is a registered trademark. It may only be
used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who
agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few
things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg™ electronic works
even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See
paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works if you follow the terms of this
agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg™
electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.
1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (“the
Foundation” or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection
of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works. Nearly all the individual
works in the collection are in the public domain in the United
States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the
United States and you are located in the United States, we do not
claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing,
displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as
all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope
that you will support the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting
free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg™
works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the
Project Gutenberg™ name associated with the work. You can easily
comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the
same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg™ License when
you share it without charge with others.
1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are
in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States,
check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this
agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing,
distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any
other Project Gutenberg™ work. The Foundation makes no
representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any
country other than the United States.
1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:
1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other
immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg™ License must appear
prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg™ work (any work
on which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” appears, or with which the
phrase “Project Gutenberg” is associated) is accessed, displayed,
performed, viewed, copied or distributed:
This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and
most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no
restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it
under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this
eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the
United States, you will have to check the laws of the country where
you are located before using this eBook.
1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is
derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not
contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the
copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in
the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are
redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase “Project
Gutenberg” associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply
either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or
obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg™
trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is posted
with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any
additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms
will be linked to the Project Gutenberg™ License for all works
posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the
beginning of this work.
1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg™
License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg™.
1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
Gutenberg™ License.
1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including
any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access
to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg™ work in a format
other than “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other format used in the official
version posted on the official Project Gutenberg™ website
(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense
to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means
of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original “Plain
Vanilla ASCII” or other form. Any alternate format must include the
full Project Gutenberg™ License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.
1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg™ works
unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
access to or distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works
provided that:
• You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
the use of Project Gutenberg™ works calculated using the method
you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed
to the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark, but he has
agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid
within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are
legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty
payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in
Section 4, “Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation.”
• You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg™
License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all
copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue
all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg™
works.
• You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of
any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of
receipt of the work.
• You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
distribution of Project Gutenberg™ works.
1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project
Gutenberg™ electronic work or group of works on different terms than
are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing
from the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of
the Project Gutenberg™ trademark. Contact the Foundation as set
forth in Section 3 below.
1.F.
1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread
works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project
Gutenberg™ collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg™
electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may
contain “Defects,” such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate
or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other
intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or
other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or
cannot be read by your equipment.
1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the “Right
of Replacement or Refund” described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
Gutenberg™ trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
Gutenberg™ electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all
liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR
INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
DAMAGE.
1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a
defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can
receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you
received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium
with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you
with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in
lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person
or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second
opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If
the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing
without further opportunities to fix the problem.
1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you “AS-IS”, WITH NO
OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT
LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.
1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of
damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement
violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the
agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or
limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or
unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the
remaining provisions.
1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
providing copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in
accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the
production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg™
electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses,
including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of
the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this
or any Project Gutenberg™ work, (b) alteration, modification, or
additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg™ work, and (c) any
Defect you cause.
Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg™
Project Gutenberg™ is synonymous with the free distribution of
electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of
computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It
exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations
from people in all walks of life.
Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg™'s
goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg™ collection will
remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure
and permanent future for Project Gutenberg™ and future
generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see
Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at
www.gutenberg.org
Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation
The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit
501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification
number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by
U.S. federal laws and your state's laws.
The Foundation's business office is located at 809 North 1500 West,
Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up
to date contact information can be found at the Foundation's website
and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact
Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation
Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without
widespread public support and donations to carry out its mission of
increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
freely distributed in machine-readable form accessible by the widest
array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations
($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt
status with the IRS.
The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up
with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations
where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND
DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular
state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate
While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
approach us with offers to donate.
International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.
Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation
methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other
ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To
donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate
Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg™ electronic works
Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project
Gutenberg™ concept of a library of electronic works that could be
freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and
distributed Project Gutenberg™ eBooks with only a loose network of
volunteer support.
Project Gutenberg™ eBooks are often created from several printed
editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in
the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not
necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper
edition.
Most people start at our website which has the main PG search
facility: www.gutenberg.org
This website includes information about Project Gutenberg™,
including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.
