Title: A History of the Nations and Empires Involved and a Study of the Events Culminating in the Great Conflict
Author: Marshall, Logan
Language: English
As this book started as an ASCII text book there are no pictures available.


*** Start of this LibraryBlog Digital Book "A History of the Nations and Empires Involved and a Study of the Events Culminating in the Great Conflict" ***


A History of The Nations and Empires Involved and a Study of the
Events Culminating in The Great Conflict

by Logan Marshall



PREFACE

When the people of the United States heard the news of the
assassination of Archduke Francis Ferdinand, heir to the throne
of Austria-Hungary, and his wife in Sarajevo, Bosnia, on June 28,
1914, it was with a feeling of great regret that another sorrow
had been added to the many already borne by the aged Emperor
Francis Joseph. That those fatal shots would echo around the
world and, flashing out suddenly like a bolt from the blue, hurl
nearly the whole of Europe within a week's time from a state of
profound peace into one of continental war, unannounced,
unexpected, unexplained, unprecedented in suddenness and
enormity, was an unimaginable possibility. And yet the ringing of
the church bells was suddenly drowned by the roar of cannon, the
voice of the dove of peace by the blare of the trump of war, and
throughout the world ran a shudder of terror at these unwonted
and ominous sounds.

But in looking back through history, tracing the course of events
during the past century, following the footsteps of men in war
and peace from that day of upheaval when medieval feudalism went
down in disarray before the arms of the people in the French
Revolution, some explanation of the Great European war of 1914
may be reached. Every event in history has its roots somewhere in
earlier history, and we need but dig deep enough to find them.

Such is the purpose of the present work. It proposes to lay down
in a series of apposite chapters the story of the past century,
beginning, in fact, rather more than a century ago with the
meteoric career of Napoleon and seeking to show to what it led,
and what effects it had upon the political evolution of mankind.
The French Revolution stood midway between two spheres of
history, the sphere of medieval barbarism and that of modern
enlightenment. It exploded like a bomb in the midst of the
self-satisfied aristocracy of the earlier social system and rent
it into the fragments which no hand could put together again. In
this sense the career of Napoleon seems providential. The era of
popular government had replaced that of autocratic and
aristocratic government in France, and the armies of Napoleon
spread these radical ideas throughout Europe until the oppressed
people of every nation began to look upward with hope and see in
the distance before them a haven of justice in the coming realm
of human rights.

It required considerable time for these new conceptions to become
thoroughly disseminated. A down-trodden people enchained by the
theory of the "divine right of kings" to autocratic rule, had to
break the fetters one by one and gradually emerge from a state of
practical serfdom to one of enlightened emancipation. There were
many setbacks, and progress was distressingly slow but
nevertheless sure.

The story of this upward progress is the history of the
nineteenth century, regarded from the special point of view of
political progress and the development of human rights. This is
definitely shown in the present work, which is a history of the
past century and of the twentieth century so far as it has gone.
Gradually the autocrat has declined in power and authority, and
the principle of popular rights has risen into view. This war
will not have been fought in vain if, as predicted, it will
result in the complete downfall of autocracy as a political
principle, and the rise of the rule of the people, so that the
civilized nations of the earth may never again be driven into a
frightful war of extermination against peaceful neighbors at the
nod of a hereditary sovereign. Logan Marshall

CONTENTS

Chapter I
All Europe Plunged into War

Dramatic Suddenness of the Outbreak - Trade and Commerce
Paralyzed - Widespread Influences - Terrible Effects of War - The
Tide of Destruction - Half Century to Pay Debts

Chapter II
Underlying Causes of the Great European War
Assassination of the Austrian Crown Prince - Austria's Motive in
Making War - Servia Accepts Austria's Demand - The Ironies of
History - What Austria Has to Gain - How the War Became
Continental - An Editorial Opinion - Is the Kaiser Responsible? -
Germany's Stake in the War - Why Russia Entered the Field -
France's Hatred of Germany - Great Britain and Italy - The Triple
Alliance and Triple Entente

Chapter III
Strength and Resources of the Warring Powers
Old and New Methods in War - Costs of Modern Warfare - Nature of
National Resources - British and American Military Systems -
Naval Strength - Resources of Austria-Hungary - Resources of
Germany - Resources of Russia - Resources of France - Resources
of Great Britain - Servia and Belgium

Chapter IV
Great Britain and the War
The Growth of German Importance - German Militarism - Great
Britain's Peace Efforts - Germany's Naval Program - German
Ambitions - Preparation for War - Effect on the Empire

Chapter V
The World's Greatest War
Wars as Mileposts - A Continent in Arms - How Canada Prepared for
War - the British Sentiment - Lord Kitchener's Career - A
Forceful Character

Chapter VI
The Earthquake of Napoleonism
Its Effect on National Conditions Finally Led to the War of 1914

Conditions in France and Germany - The Campaign in Italy - The
Victory at Marengo - Moreau at Hohenlinden - The Consul Made
Emperor - The Code Napoleon - Campaign of 1805 - Battle of
Austerlitz - The Conquest of Prussia - The Invasion of Poland -
Eylau and Friedland - Campaign of 1809 - Victory at Wagram - The
Campaign in Spain - The Invasion of Russia - A Fatal Retreat -
Dresden and Leipzig - The Hundred Days - The Congress of Vienna -
The Holy Alliance

Chapter VII
Pan-Slavism Versus Pan-Germanism
Russia's Part in the Servian Issue - Strength of the Russian Army
- The Distribution of the Slavs - Origin of Pan-Slavism - The
Czar's Proclamation - The Teutons of Europe - Intermingling of
Races - The Nations at War

Chapter VIII
The Ambition of Louis Napoleon
The Coup-d'etat of 1851 - From President to Emperor - The Empire
is Peace - War With Austria - The Austrians Advance - The Battle
of Magenta - Possession of Lombardy - French Victory at Solferino
- Treaty of Peace - Invasion of Mexico - End of Napoleon's Career

Chapter IX
Garibaldi and Italian Unity
Power of Austria Broken
The Carbonari -  Massini and Garibaldi - Cavour, the Statesman -
The Invasion of Sicily - Occupation of Naples - Victor Emmanuel
Takes Command - Watchword of the Patriots - Garibaldi Marches
Against Rome - Battle of Ironclads - Final Act of Italian Unity

Chapter X
The Expansion of Germany
Beginnings of Modern World Power
William I of Prussia - Bismarck's Early Career - The
Schleswig-Holstein Question - Conquest of the Duchies -
Bismarck's Wider Views - War Forced on Austria - The War in Italy
- Austria's Signal Defeat at Sadowa - The Treaty of Prague -
Germany after 1866

Chapter XI
The Franco-Prussian War
Birth of the German Empire and the French Republic
Causes of Hostile Relations - Discontent in France - War with
Prussia Declared - Self deception of the French - First Meeting
of the Armies - The Stronghold of Metz - Mars-la-Tour and
Gravelotte - Napoleon III at Sedan - The Emperor a Captive;
France a Republic - Bismarck Refuses Intervention - Fall of the
Fortresses - Paris is Besieged - Defiant Spirit of the French -
The Struggle Continued - Operations Before Paris - Fighting in
the South - The War at an End

Chapter XII
Bismarck and the German Empire
Building the Bulwarks of the Twentieth Century Nation
Bismarck as a Statesman - Uniting the German States - William I
Crowned at Versailles - A Significant Decade - The Problem of
Church Power - Progress of Socialism - William II and the
Resignation of Bismarck - Old Age Insurance - Political and
Industrial Conditions in Germany

Chapter XIII
Gladstone as an Apostle of Reform
Great Britain Becomes a World Power
Gladstone and Disraeli - Gladstone's Famous Budget - A Suffrage
Reform Bill - Disraeli's Reform Measure - Irish Church
Disestablishment - An Irish Land Bill - Desperate State of
Ireland - The Coercion Bill - War in Africa - Home Rule for
Ireland

Chapter XIV
The French Republic
Struggles of a New Nation
The Republic Organized - The Commune of Paris - Instability of
the Government - Thiers Proclaimed President - Punishment of the
Unsuccessful Generals - MacMahon a Royalist President - Bazaine's
Sentence and Escape - Grevy, Gambetta and Boulanger - The Panama
Canal Scandal - Despotism of the Army Leaders - The Dreyfus Case
- Church and State - The Moroccan Controversy

Chapter XV
Russia in the Field of War
The Outcome of Slavic Ambition
Siege of Sebastopol - Russia in Asia - The Russo-Japanese War
-Port Arthur Taken - The Russian Fleet Defeated

Chapter XVI
Great Britain and Her Colonies
How England Became Mistress of the Seas
Great Britain as a Colonizing Power - Colonies in the Pacific
Region - Colonization in Africa - British Colonies in Africa -
The Mahdi Rebellion in Egypt - Gordon at Khartoum - Suppression
of the Mahdi Revolt - Colonization in Asia - The British in India
- Colonies in America - Development of Canada - Progress in
Canada

Chapter XVII

The Open Door in China and Japan
Development of World Power in the East
Warlike Invasions of China - Commodore Perry and His Treaty -
Japan's Rapid Progress - Origin of the China-Japan War - The
Position of Korea - Li Hung Chang and the Empress - How Japan
Began War - The Chinese and Japanese Fleets - The Battle of the
Yalu - Capture of Wei Hai Wei - Europe Invades China - The Boxer
Outbreak - Russian Designs on Manchuria - Japan Begins War on
Russia - The Armies Meet - China Becomes a Republic

Chapter XVIII
Turkey and the Balkan States
Checking the Dominion of the Turk in Europe
The Story of Servia - Turkey in Europe - The Bulgarian Horrors -
The Defense of Plevna - The Congress of Berlin - Hostile
Sentiments in the Balkans - Incitement to War - Fighting Begins -
The Advance on Adrianople - Servian and Greek victories - The
Bulgarian Successes - Steps toward Peace - The War Resumed -
Siege of Scutari - Treaty of Peace - War Between the Allies - The
Final Settlement

Chapter XIX
Methods in Modern Warfare
Ancient and Modern Weapons - New Types of Weapons - The Iron-clad
Warship - The Balloon in War - Tennyson's Foresight - Gunning for
Airships - The Submarine - Under-water Warfare - The New Type of
Battleship - Mobilization - The Waste of War

Chapter XX
Canada's Part in the World War
New Relations Toward the Empire - Military Preparations - The
Great Camp at Valcartier - The Canadian Expeditionary Force -
Political Effect of Canada's Action on Future of the Dominion

Chapter I. ALL EUROPE PLUNGED INTO WAR
Dramatic Suddenness of the Outbreak - Trade and Commerce
Paralyzed - Widespread Influences - Terrible Effects of War - The
Tide of Destruction - Who Caused the Conflict? - Half Century to
Pay Debts

At the opening of the final week of July, 1914, the whole world -
with the exception of Mexico, in which the smouldering embers of
the revolution still burned - was in a state of profound peace.
The clattering hammers and whirling wheels of industry were
everywhere to be heard; great ships furrowed the ocean waves,
deep-laden with the world's products and carrying thousands of
travelers bent on business or enjoyment. Countless trains of
cars, drawn by smoke-belching locomotives, traversed the long
leagues of iron rails, similarly laden with passengers engaged in
peaceful errands and freight intended for peaceful purposes. All
seemed at rest so far as national hostile sentiments were
concerned. All was in motion so far as useful industries demanded
service. Europe, America, Asia, and Africa alike had settled down
as if to a long holiday from war, and the advocates of universal
peace were jubilant over the progress of their cause, holding
peace congresses and conferences at The Hague and elsewhere,
fully satisfied that the last war had been fought and that
arbitration boards would settle all future disputes among
nations, however serious.

Such occasions occur at frequent intervals in nature, in which a
deep calm, a profound peace, rests over land and sea. The winds
are hushed, the waves at rest; only the needful processes of the
universe are in action, while for the time the world forgets the
chained demons of unrest and destruction. But too quickly the
chains are loosened, the winds and waves set free; and the
hostile forces of nature rush over earth and sea, spreading
terror and devastation in their path. Such energies of hostility
are not confined to the elements. They exist in human
communities. They underlie the political conditions of the
nations, and their outbreak is at times as sudden and
unlooked-for as that of the winds and waves. Such was the state
of political affairs in Europe at the date mentioned, apparently
calm and restful, while below the surface hostile forces which
had long been fomenting unseen were ready to burst forth and
whelm the world.

DRAMATIC SUDDENNESS OF THE OUTBREAK

On the night of July 25th the people of the civilized world
settled down to restful slumbers, with no dreams of the turmoil
that was ready to burst forth. On the morning of the 26th they
rose to learn that a great war had begun, a conflict the possible
width and depth of which no man was yet able to foresee; and as
day after day passed on, each day some new nation springing into
the terrible arena until practically the whole of Europe was in
arms and the Armageddon seemed at hand, the world stood amazed
and astounded, wondering what hand had loosed so vast a
catastrophe, what deep and secret causes lay below the ostensible
causes of the war. The causes of this were largely unknown. As a
panic at times affects a vast assemblage, with no one aware of
its origin, so a wave of hostile sentiment may sweep over vast
communities until the air is full of urgent demands for war with
scarce a man knowing why.

What is already said only feebly outlines the state of
consternation into which the world was cast in that fateful week
in which the doors of the Temple of Janus, long closed, were
suddenly thrown wide open and the terrible God of War marched
forth, the whole earth trembling beneath his feet. It was the
breaking of a mighty storm in a placid sky, the fall of a meteor
which spreads terror and destruction on all sides, the explosion
of a vast bomb in a great assemblage; it was everything that can
be imagined of the sudden and overwhelming, of the amazing and
incredible.

TRADE AND COMMERCE PARALYZED

For the moment the world stood still, plunged into a panic that
stopped all its activities. The stock exchanges throughout the
nations were closed, to prevent that wild and hasty action which
precipitates disaster. Throughout Europe trade, industry,
commerce all ceased, paralyzed at their sources. No ship of any
of the nations concerned except Britain dared venture from port,
lest it should fall a prey to the prowling sea dogs of war which
made all the oceans unsafe. The hosts of American tourists who
had gone abroad under the sunny skies of peace suddenly beheld
the dark clouds of war rolling overhead, blotting out the sun,
and casting their black shadows over all things fair.

What does this state of affairs, this sudden stoppage of the
wheels of industry, this unforeseen and wide spread of the
conditions of war portend? Emerson has said: "When a great
thinker comes into the world all things are at risk." There is
potency in this, and also in a variation of Emerson's text which
we shall venture to make: "When a great war comes upon the world
all things are at risk." Everything which we have looked upon as
fixed and stable quakes as if from mighty hidden forces. The
whole world stands irresolute and amazed. The steady-going habits
and occupations of peace cease or are perilously threatened, and
no one can be sure of escaping from some of the dire effects of
the catastrophe.

WIDESPREAD INFLUENCES

The conditions of production vanish, to be replaced by conditions
of destruction. That which had been growing in grace and beauty
for years is overturned and destroyed in a moment of ravage.
Changes of this kind are not confined to the countries in which
the war rages or the cities which conquering column of troops
occupy. They go beyond the borders of military activity; they
extend to far-off quarters of the earth. We quote from the New
York WORLD a vivid picture drawn at the opening of the great
European war. Its motto is "all the world is paying the cost of
the folly of Europe."

Never before was war made so swiftly wide. News of it comes from
Japan, from Porto Rico, from Africa, from places where in old
days news of hostilities might not travel for months.

"Non-combatants are in the vast majority, even in the countries
at war, but they are not immune to its blight. Austria is
isolated from the world because her ally, Germany, will take no
chances of spilling military information and will not forward
mails. If, telephoning in France, you use a single foreign word,
even an English one, your wire is cut. Hans the German waiter,
Franz the clarinettist in the little street band, is locked up as
a possible spy. There are great German business houses in London
and Paris; their condition is that of English and French business
houses in Berlin, and that is not pleasant. Great Britain
contemplates, as an act of war, the voiding of patents held by
Germans in the United Kingdom.

"Nothing is too petty, nothing too great, nothing too distant in
kind or miles from the field of war to feel its influence. The
whole world is the loser by it, whoever at the end of all the
battles may say that he has won.

DILEMMA OF THE TOURISTS

Let us consider one of the early results of the war. It vitally
affected great numbers of Americans, the army of tourists who had
made their way abroad for rest, study and recreation and whose
numbers, while unknown, were great, some estimating them at the
high total of 100,000 or more. These, scattered over all sections
of Europe, some with money in abundance, some with just enough
for a brief journey, capitalists, teachers, students, all were
caught in the sudden flurry of the war, their letters of credit
useless, transportation difficult or impossible to obtain, all
exposed to inconveniences, some to indignities, some of them on
the flimsiest pretence seized and searched as spies, the great
mass of them thrown into a state of panic that added greatly to
the unpleasantness of the situation in which they found
themselves.

While these conditions of panic gradually adjusted themselves,
the status of the tourists continued difficult and annoying. The
railroads were seized for the transportation of troops, leaving
many Americans helplessly held in far interior parts, frequently
without money or credit. One example of the difficulties
encountered will serve as an instance which might be repeated a
hundred fold.

Seven hundred Americans from Geneva were made by Swiss troops to
leave a train. Many who refused were forced off at the point or
guns. This compulsory removal took place at some distance from a
station near the border, according to Mrs. Edward Collins, of New
York, who with her three daughters was on the train. With 200
others they reached Paris and were taken aboard a French troop
train. Most of the arrivals were women; the men were left behind
because of lack of space. One hundred women refused to take the
train without their husbands; scores struck back for Geneva;
others on foot, carrying articles of baggage, started in the
direction of Paris, hoping to get trains somewhere. Just why
Swiss troops thus occupied themselves is not explained; but in
times of warlike turmoil many unexplainable things occur. Here is
an incident of a different kind, told by one of the escaping
host: "I went into the restaurant car for lunch," he said. "When
I tried to return to the car where I'd left my suitcase, hat,
cane and overcoat, I couldn't find it. Finally the conductor said
blithely, 'Oh, that car was taken off for the use of the army.'

"I was forced to continue traveling coatless, hatless and minus
my baggage until I boarded the steamer FLUSHING, when I managed
to swipe a straw hat during the course of the Channel passage
while the people were down eating in the saloon. I grabbed the
first one on the hatrack. Talk about a romantic age. Why, I
wouldn't live in any other time than now. We will be boring our
grandchildren talking about this war."

The scarcity of provisions in many localities and the withholding
of money by the banks made the situation, as regarded Americans,
especially serious. Those fortunate enough to reach port without
encountering these difficulties found the situation there equally
embarrassing. The great German and English liners, for instance,
were held up by order of the government, or feared to sail lest
they should be taken captive by hostile cruisers. Many of these
lay in port in New York, forbidden to sail for fear of capture.
These included ships of the Cunard and International Marine
lines, the north German Lloyd, the Hamburg-American, the
Russian-American, and the French lines, until this port led the
world in the congestion of great liners rendered inactive by the
war situation abroad. The few that put to sea were utterly
incapable of accommodating a tithe of the anxious and appealing
applicants. It had ceased, in the state of panic that prevailed,
to be a mere question of money. Frightened millionaires were
credited with begging for steerage berths. Everywhere was dread
and confusion, men and women being in a state of mind past the
limits of calm reasoning. Impulse is the sole ruling force where
reason has ceased to act.

Slowly the skies cleared; calmer conditions began to prevail. The
United States government sent the battleship TENNESSEE abroad
with several millions of dollars for the aid of destitute
travelers and the relief of those who could not get their letters
or credit and travelers' checks cashed. Such a measure of relief
was necessary, there being people abroad with letters of credit
for as much as $5,000 without money enough to buy a meal. One
tourist said: "I had to give a Milwaukee doctor, who had a letter
of credit for $2,500 money to get shaved." London hotels showed
much consideration for the needs of travelers without ready cash,
but on the continent there were many such who were refused hotel
accommodation.

As for those who reached New York or other American ports, many
had fled in such haste as to leave their baggage behind. Numbers
of the poorer travelers had exhausted their scanty stores of cash
in the effort to escape from Europe and reached port utterly
penniless. The case was one that called for immediate and
adequate solution and the governmental and moneyed interests on
this side did their utmost to cope with the situation. Vessels of
American register were too few to carry the host applying for
transportation, and it was finally decided to charter foreign
vessels for this purpose and thus hasten the work of moving the
multitude of appealing tourists. From 15,000 to 20,000 of these
needed immediate attention, a majority of them being destitute.

AN OCEAN INCIDENT

Men and women needed not only transportation, but money also, and
in this particular there is an interesting story to tell. The
German steamer KRONPRINZESSIN CECILIE, bound for Bremen, had
sailed from New York before the outbreak of the war, carrying
about 1,200 passengers and a precious freight of gold, valued at
$10,700,000. The value of the vessel herself added $5,000,000 to
this sum. What had become of her and her tempting cargo was for a
time unknown. There were rumors that she had been captured by a
British cruiser, but this had no better foundation than such
rumors usually have. Her captain was alert to the situation,
being informed by wireless of the sudden change from peace to
war. One such message, received from an Irish wireless station,
conveyed an order from the Bremen company for him to return with
all haste to an American port.

It was on the evening of Friday, July 31st, that this order came.
At once the vessel changed its course. One by one the ship's
lights were put out. The decks which could not be made absolutely
dark were enclosed with canvas. By midnight the ship was as dark
as the sea surrounding. On she went through Saturday and on
Sunday ran into a dense fog. Through this she rushed with
unchecked speed and in utter silence, not a toot coming from her
fog-horn. This was all very well as a measure of secrecy, but it
opened the way to serious danger through a possible collision,
and a committee of passengers was formed to request the captain
to reconsider his action. Just as the committee reached his room
the first blast of the fog-horn was heard, its welcome tone
bringing a sense of security where grave apprehension had
prevailed.

A group of financiers were on board who offered to buy the ship
and sail her under American colors. But to all such proposals
Captain Polack turned a deaf ear. He said that his duty was
spelled by his orders from Bremen to turn back and save his ship,
and these he proposed to obey. A passenger stated:

"There were seven of the crew on watch all the time, two aloft.
This enabled the captain to know of passing vessels before they
came above the horizon. We were undoubtedly in danger on Sunday
afternoon. We intercepted a wireless message in French in which
two French cruisers were exchanging data in regard to their
positions.

"The captain told me that he imagined those to be two vessels who
regularly patroled the fishing grounds in the interest of French
fisheries. If the captain of either of those vessels should have
come out of the fog and found us, his share of the prize in money
might have amounted to $4,000,000. Did privateer ever dream of
such booty!

"Early on Saturday our four great funnels were given broad black
bands in order to make us look like the Olympic, which was
supposed to be twenty-four hours ahead of us. There was a certain
grim humor in the fact that the wireless operator on the Olympic
kept calling us all Friday night. Of course we did not answer."

On Tuesday, August 4th, the great ship came within sight of land
at the little village of Bar Harbor, Mount Desert Island, off the
coast of Maine; a port scarce large enough to hold the giant
liner that had sought safety in its waters. Wireless messages
were at once flashed to all parts of the country and the news
that the endangered vessel, with its precious cargo, was safe,
was received with general relief. As regards the future movements
of the ship Captain Polack said:

"I can see no possibility of taking this ship to New York from
here with safety. To avoid foreign vessels we should have to keep
within the three-mile limit, and to accomplish this the ship
would have to be built like a canoe. We have reached an American
port in safety and that was more than I dared to hope. We have
been in almost constant danger of capture, and we can consider
ourselves extremely lucky to have come out so well.

"I know I have been criticized for making too great speed under
bad weather conditions, but I have not wilfully endangered the
lives of the passengers. I would rather have lost the whole whip
and cargo than have assumed any such risk. Of course, aside from
this consideration, my one aim has been to save my ship and my
cargo from capture.

"I have not been acting on my own initiative, but under orders
from the North German Lloyd in Bremen, and although I am an
officer in the German navy my duty has been to the steamship
line."

CLOSING THE STOCK MARKETS

We have so far dealt with only a few of the results of the war.
There were various others of great moment, to some of which a
passing allusion has been made.

On July 30th, for the first time in history, the stock markets of
the world were all closed at the same time. Heretofore when the
European markets have been closed those on this side of the ocean
remained open. The New York Exchange was the last big stock
market to announce temporary suspension of business. The New York
Cotton Exchange closed, following the announcement of the failure
of several brokerage firms. Stock Exchanges throughout the United
States followed the example set by New York. The Stock Exchanges
in London and the big provincial cities, as well as those on the
Continent, ceased business, owing to the breakdown of the credit
system, which was made complete by the postponement of the Paris
settlement.

Depositors stormed every bank in London for gold, and the runs
continued for a couple of days. In order to protect its dwindling
gold supply the Bank of England raised its discount rate to 8 per
cent. Leading bankers of London requested Premier Asquith to
suspend the bank act, and he promised to lay the matter before
the Chancellor of the Exchequer. In all the capitals of Europe
financial transactions virtually came to a standstill. The slump
in the market value of securities within the first week of the
war flurry was estimated at $2,000,000,000, and radical measures
were necessary to prevent hasty action while the condition of
panic prevailed.

This sudden stoppage of ordinary financial operations was
accompanied by a similar cessation of the industries of peace
over a wide range of territory. The artisan was forced to let
fall the tools of his trade and take up those of war. The
railroads were similarly denuded of their employees except in so
far as they were needed to convey soldiers and military supplies.
The customary uses of the railroad were largely suspended and
travel went on under great difficulties. In a measure it had
returned to the conditions existing before the invention of the
locomotive. Even horse traffic was limited by the demands of the
army for these animals, and foot travel regained some of its old
ascendency.

War makes business active in one direction and in one only, that
of army and navy supply, of the manufacture of the implements of
destruction, of vast quantities of explosives, of multitudes of
death-dealing weapons. Food supplies need to be diverted in the
same direction, the demands of the soldier being considered
first, those of the home people last, the latter being often
supplied at starvation prices. There is plenty of work to do - of
its kind. But it is of a kind that injures instead of aiding the
people of the nations.

TERRIBLE EFFECTS OF WAR

This individual source of misery and suffering in war times is
accompanied by a more direct one, that of the main purpose of war
- destruction of human life and of property that might be
utilized by an enemy, frequently of merciless brigandage and
devastation. It is horrible to think of the frightful suffering
caused by every great battle. Immediate death on the field might
reasonably be welcomed as an escape from the suffering arising
from wounds, the terrible mutilations, the injuries that rankle
throughout life, the conversion of hosts of able-bodied men into
feeble invalids, to be kept by the direct aid of their fellows or
the indirect aid of the people at large through a system of
pensions.

The physical sufferings of the soldiers from wounds and
privations are perhaps not the greatest. Side by side with them
are the mental anxieties of their families at home, their
terrible suspense, the effect upon them of tidings of the maiming
or death of those dear to them or on whose labor they immediately
depend. The harvest of misery arising from this cause it is
impossible to estimate. It is not to be seen in the open. It
dwells unseen in humble homes, in city, village, or field, borne
often uncomplainingly, but not less poignant from this cause. The
tears and terrors thus produced are beyond calculation. But while
the glories of war are celebrated with blast of trumpet and roll
of drum, the terrible accompaniment of groans of misery is too
apt to pass unheard and die away forgotten.

To turn from this roll of horrors, there are costs of war in
other directions to be considered. Those include the ravage of
cities by flame or pillage, the loss of splendid works of
architecture, the irretrievable destruction of great productions
of art, the vanishing of much on which the world had long set
store.

THE TIDE OF DESTRUCTION

Not only on land, but at sea as well, the tide of destruction
rises and swells. Huge warships, built at a cost of millions of
dollars and tenanted by hundreds of hardy sailors, are torn and
rent by shot and shell and at times sent to the bottom with all
on board by the explosion of torpedoes beneath their unprotected
lower hulls. The torpedo boat, the submarine, with other agencies
of unseen destruction, have come into play to add enormously to
the horrors of naval warfare, while the bomb-dropping airships,
letting fall its dire missiles from the sky, has come to add to
the dread terror and torment of the battle-field.

We began this chapter with a statement of the startling
suddenness of this great war, and the widespread consequences
which immediately followed. We have been led into a discussion of
its issues, of the disturbing and distracting consequences which
cannot fail to follow any great modern war between civilized
nations. We had some examples of this on a small scale in the
recent Balkan-Turkish war. But that was of minor importance and
its effects, many of them sanguinary and horrible, were mainly
confined to the region in which it occurred. But a war covering
nearly a whole continent cannot be confined and circumscribed in
its consequences. All the world must feel them in a measure -
though diminishing with distance. The vast expanse of water which
separates the United States from the European continent could not
save its citizens from feeling certain ill effects from the
struggle of war lords. America and Europe are tied together with
many cords of business and interest, and the severing or
weakening of these cannot fail to be seriously felt. Canada, at a
similar width of removal from Europe, had reason to feel it still
more seriously, from its close political relations with Great
Britain.

In these days in which we live the cost of war is a giant to be
reckoned with. With every increase in the size of cannon, the
tonnage of warships, the destructiveness of weapons and
ammunition, this element of cost grows proportionately greater
and has in our day become stupendous. Nations may spend in our
era more cold cash in a day of war than would have served for a
year in the famous days of chivalry. A study of this question was
made by army and navy experts in 1914, and they decided that the
expense to the five nations concerned in the European war would
be not less than $50,000,000 a day.

If we add to this the loss of untold numbers of young men in the
prime of life, whose labor is needed in the fields and workshops
of the nations involved, other billions of dollars must be added
to the estimate, due to the crippling of industries. There is
also the destruction of property to be considered, including the
very costly modern battleships, this also footing up into the
billions.

When it is considered that in thirteen years the cost of
maintenance of the armies and navies of the warring countries, as
well as the cost of naval construction, exceeded $20,000,000,000
some idea may be had of the expense attached to war and the
preparations of European countries for just such contingencies as
those that arose in Europe in 1914. The cost of the Panama Canal,
one of the most useful aids to the commerce of the world, was
approximately $375,000,000, but the expense of the preparations
for war in Europe during the time it took to build the canal
exceeded the cost of this gigantic undertaking nearly sixty to
one.

The money thus expended on preparation for war during the
thirteen years named would, if spent in railroad and marine
construction, have given vast commercial power to these nations.
To what extent have they been benefited by the rivalry to gain
precedence in military power? They stand on practically the same
basis now that it is all at an end. Would they not be on the same
basis if it had never begun? Aside from this is the incentive to
employ these vast armaments in the purpose for which they were
designed, the effect of creating a military spirit and developing
a military caste in each by the nations, a result very likely to
be productive of ill effects.

The total expense of maintenance of armies and navies, together
with the cost of construction in thirteen years, in Germany,
Austria, Russia, France and Great Britain, was as follows:

Naval expenditures  $5,648,525,000
Construction         2,146,765,000
Cost of armies      13,138,403,000
Total              $20,933,693,000

The wealth of the same nations in round figures is:

Great Britain  $80,000,000,000
Germany         60,500,000,000
Austria         25,000,000,000
France          65,000,000,000
Russia          40,000,000,000
Total          270,500,000,000

This enormous expense which was incurred in preparation for war
needed to be rapidly increased to meet the expenses of actual
warfare. The British House of Commons authorized war credits
amounting to $1,025,000,000, while the German Reichstag voted
$1,250,000,000. Austria and France had to set aside vast sums for
their respective war chests.

HALF CENTURY TO PAY DEBTS

In anticipation of trouble Germany in 1913 voted $250,000,000 for
extraordinary war expenses and about $100,000,000 was spent on an
aerial fleet. France spent $60,000,000 for the same purpose.

The annual cost of maintaining the great armies and navies of
Europe even on a peace basis is enormous, and it must be vastly
increased during war. The official figures for 1913-14 are:

British army   $224,300,000
British navy    224,140,000
German army     183,090,00
German navy     111,300,000
French army     191,431,580
French navy     119,571,400
Russian army    317,800,000
Russian navy    122,500,000
Austrian army    82,300,000
Austrian navy    42,000,000
Total        $1,618,432,980

It was evident that taxes to meet the extraordinary expenses of
war would have to be greatly increased in Germany and France. As
business became at a standstill throughout Europe and every port
of entry blocked, experts wondered where the money was to come
from. All agreed that, when peace should be declared and the
figures were all in, the result financially would be staggering
and that the heaviest burden it had ever borne would rest upon
Europe for fifty years to come. For when the roar of the cannon
ceases and the nations are at rest, then dawns the era of
payment, inevitable, unescapable, one in which for generations
every man and woman must share.


Chapter II. UNDERLYING CAUSES OF THE GREAT EUROPEAN WAR
Assassination of the Austrian Crown Prince - Austria's motive in
Making War - Servia Accepts Austria's Demand - The Ironies of
History - What Austria had to Gain - How the War Became
Continental - An Editorial Opinion - Is the Kaiser Responsible?
-Germany's Stake in the War - Why Russia Entered the Field -
France's Hatred of Germany - Great Britain and Italy - The Triple
Alliance and Triple Entente

What brought on the mighty war which so suddenly sprang forth?
What evident, what subtle, what deep-hidden causes led to this
sudden demolition of the temple of peace? What pride of power,
what lust of ambition, what desire of imperial dominion cast the
armed hosts of the nations into the field of conflict, on which
multitudes of innocent victims were to be sacrificed to the
insatiate hunger for blood of the modern Moloch?

Here are questions which few are capable of answering. Ostensible
answers may be given, surface causes, reasons of immediate
potency. But no one will be willing to accept these as the true
moving causes. For a continent to spring in a week's time from
complete peace into almost universal war, with all the great and
several of the small Powers involved, is not to be explained by
an apothegm or embraced within the limits of a paragraph. If not
all, certainly several of these nations had enmities to be
unchained, ambitions to be gratified, long-hidden purposes to be
put in action. They seemed to have been awaiting an opportunity,
and it came when the anger of the Servians at the seizure of
Bosnia by Austria culminated in a mad act of assassination

ASSASSINATION OF THE AUSTRIAN CROWN PRINCE

The immediate cause, so far as apparent to us, of the war in
question was the murder, on June 29, 1914, of the Austrian Crown
Prince Francis Ferdinand and his wife, while on a visit to
Sarajevo, the capital of Bosnia, the assassin being a Servian
student, supposed to have come for that purpose from Belgrade,
the Servian capital. The inspiring cause of this dastardly act
was the feeling of hostility towards Austria which was widely
entertained in Servia. Bosnia was a part of the ancient kingdom
of Servia. The bulk of its people are of Slavic origin and speak
the Servian language. Servia was eager to regain it, as a
possible outlet for a border on the Mediterranean Sea. When,
therefore, in 1908, Austria annexed Bosnia and Herzegovina, which
had been under her military control since 1878, the indignation
in Servia was great. While it had died down in a measure in the
subsequent years, the feeling of injury survived in many hearts,
and there is little reason to doubt that the assassination of
Archduke Ferdinand was a result of this pervading sentiment.

In fact, the Austrian government was satisfied that the murder
plot was hatched in Belgrade and held that Servian officials were
in some way concerned in it. The Servian press gave some warrant
for this, being openly boastful and defiant in its comments. When
the Austrian consul-general at Belgrade dropped dead in the
consulate the papers showed their satisfaction and hinted that he
had been poisoned. This attitude of the press evidently was one
of the reasons for the stringent demand made by Austria on July
23d, requiring apology and change of attitude from Servia and
asking for a reply by the hour of 6 P.M. on the 25th. The demands
were in part as follows:

1. An apology by the Servian government in its official journal
for all Pan-Servian propaganda and for the participation of
Servian army officers in it, and warning all Servians in the
future to desist from anti-Austrian demonstrations.

2. That orders to this effect should be issued to the Servian
army.

3. That Servia should dissolve all societies capable of
conducting intrigues against Austria.

4. That Servia should curb the activities of the Servian press in
regard to Austria.

5. That Austrian officials should be permitted to conduct an
inquiry in Servia independent of the Servian government into the
Sarajevo plot.

An answer to these demands was sent out at ten minutes before 6
o"clock on the 25th, in which Servia accepted all demands except
the last, which it did not deem "in accordance with international
law and good neighborly relations." It asked that this demand
should be submitted to The Hague Tribunal. The Austrian Minister
at Belgrade, Baron Giesl von Gieslingen, refused to accept this
reply and at once left the capital with the entire staff of the
legation. The die was cast, as Austria probably intended that it
should be.

AUSTRIA'S MOTIVE IN MAKING WAR

It had, in fact, become evident early in July that the military
party in Austria was seeking to manufacture a popular demand for
war, based on the assassination of the Archduke Ferdinand and his
wife. Such was the indication of the tone of the Vienna
newspapers, which appeared desirous of working up a sentiment
hostile to Servia. It may be doubted if the aged emperor was a
party to this. Probably his assent was a forced one, due to the
insistence of the war party and the public sentiment developed by
it. That the murder of the Archduke was the real cause of the
action of Austria can scarcely be accepted in view of Servia's
acceptance of Austria's rigid demands. The actual cause was
undoubtedly a deeper one, that of Austria's long-cherished
purpose of gaining a foothold on the Aegean Sea, for which the
possession of Servia was necessary as a preliminary step. A
plausible motive was needed, any pretext that would serve as a
satisfactory excuse to Europe for hostile action and that could
at the same time be utilized in developing Austrian indignation
against the Servians. Such a motive came in the act of
assassination and immediate use was made of it. The Austrian war
party contended that the deed was planned at Belgrade, that it
had been fomented by Servian officials, and that these had
supplied the murderer with explosives and aided in their transfer
into Bosnia.

What evidence Austria possessed leading to this opinion we do not
know. While it is not likely that there was any actual evidence,
the case was one that called for investigation, and Austria was
plainly within its rights in demanding such an inquiry and due
punishment of every one found to be connected with the tragic
deed. But Austria went farther than this. It was willing to
accept nothing less than a complete and humiliating submission on
the part of Servia. And the impression was widely entertained,
whether with or without cause, that in this Austria was not
acting alone but that it had the full support of Germany. That
country also may be supposed to have had its ends to gain. What
these were we shall consider later.

SERVIA ACCEPTS AUSTRIA'S DEMANDS

Imperious as had been the demand of Austria, one which would
never have been submitted to a Power of equal strength, Servia
accepted it, expressing itself as willing to comply with all the
conditions imposed except that relating to the participation of
Austrian officials in the inquiry, an explanation being asked on
this point. If this reply should be deemed inadequate, Servia
stood ready to submit the question at issue to The Hague Peace
Tribunal and to the Powers which had signed the declaration of
1909 relating to Bosnia and Herzegovina.

The subsequent action of Austria was significant. The Austrian
Minister at Belgrade, as before stated, rejected it as
unsatisfactory and immediately left the Servian capital. He
acted, in short, with a precipitancy that indicated that he was
acting under instructions. This was made very evident by what
immediately followed. When news came on July 28th that war had
been declared and active hostilities commenced, it was
accompanied by the statement that Austria would not now be
satisfied even with a full acceptance of her demands.

That the intention of this imperious demand and what quickly
followed was to force a war, no one can doubt. Servia's nearly
complete assent to the conditions imposed was declared to be not
only unsatisfactory, but also "dishonorable," a word doubtless
deliberately used. Evidently no door was to be left open for
retrogressive consideration.

THE IRONIES OF HISTORY

It is one of the ironies of history that a people who once played
a leading part in saving the Austrian capital from capture should
come to be threatened by the armies of that capital. This takes
us back to the era when Servia, a powerful empire of those days,
fell under the dominion of the conquering Turks, whose armies
further overran Hungary and besieged Vienna. Had this city been
captured, all central Europe would have lain open to the
barbarities of the Turks. In its defense the Servians played a
leading part, so great a one that we are told by a Hungarian
historian, "It was the Serb Bacich who saved Vienna." But in 1914
Servia was brought to the need of saving itself from Vienna.

WHAT AUSTRIA HAD TO GAIN

If it be asked what Austria had to gain by this act; what was her
aim in forcing war upon a far weaker state; the answer is at
hand. The Balkan States, of which Servia is a prominent member,
lie in a direct line between Europe and the Orient. A great power
occupying the whole of the Balkan peninsula would possess
political advantages far beyond those enjoyed by Austria-Hungary.
It would be in a position giving it great influence over, if not
strategic control of, the Suez Canal, the commerce of the
Mediterranean, and a considerable all-rail route between Central
Europe and the far East. Salonika, on the AEgean Sea, now in
Greek territory, is one of the finest harbors on the
Mediterranean Sea. A railway through Servia now connects this
port with Austria and Germany. In addition to this railway it is
not unlikely that a canal may in the near future connect the
Danube with the harbor of Salonika. If this project should be
carried out, the commerce of the Danube and its tributary streams
and canals, even that of central and western Germany, would be
able to reach the Mediterranean without passing through the
perilous Iron Gates of the Danube or being subjected to the
delays and dangers incident to the long passage through the Black
Sea and the Grecian Archipelago.

We can see in all this a powerful motive for Austria to seek to
gain possession of Servia, as a step towards possible future
control of the whole Balkan peninsula. The commercial and
manufacturing interests of Austria-Hungary were growing, and
mastership of such a route to the Mediterranean would mean
immense advantage to this ambitious empire. Possession of
northern Italy once gave her the advantage of an important outlet
to the Mediterranean. This, through events that will be spoken of
in later chapters, was lost to her. She apparently then sought to
reach it by a more direct and open road, that leading through
Salonika.

Such seem the reasons most likely to have been active in the
Austrian assault upon Servia. The murder of an Austrian archduke
by an insignificant assassin gave no sufficient warrant for the
act. The whole movement of events indicates that Austria was not
seeking retribution for a crime but seizing upon a pretext for a
predetermined purpose and couching her demands upon Servia in
terms which no self-respecting nation could accept without
protest. Servia was to be put in a position from which she could
not escape and every door of retreat against the arbitrament of
war was closed against her.

But in this retrospect we are dealing with Austria and Servia
alone. What brought Germany, what brought France, what brought
practically the whole of Europe into the struggle? What caused it
to grow with startling suddenness from a minor into a major
conflict, from a contest between a bulldog and a terrier into a
battle between lions? What were the unseen and unnoted conditions
that, within little more than a week's time, induced all the
leading nations of Europe to cast down the gage of battle and
spring full-armed into the arena, bent upon a struggle which
threatened to surpass any that the world had ever seen? Certainly
no trifling causes were here involved. Only great and
far-reaching causes could have brought about such a catastrophe.
All Europe appeared to be sitting, unknowingly or knowingly, upon
a powder barrel which only needed some inconsequent hand to apply
the match. It seems incredible that the mere pulling of a trigger
by a Servian student and the slaughter of an archduke in the
Bosnian capital could in a month's time have plunged all Europe
into war. From small causes great events may rise. Certainly that
with which we are here dealing strikingly illustrates this homely
apothegm.

HOW THE WAR BECAME CONTINENTAL

We cannot hope to point out the varied causes which were at work
in this vast event. Very possibly the leading ones are unknown to
us. Yet some of the important ones are evident and may be made
evident, and to these we must restrict ourselves.

Allusion has already been made to the general belief that the
Emperor of Germany was deeply concerned in it, and that Austria
would not have acted as it did without assurance of support, in
fact without direct instigation, from some strong allied Power,
and this Power is adjudged alike by public and private opinion to
have been Germany, acting in the person of its ambitious war
lord, the dominating Kaiser.

It may be stated that all the Powers concerned have sought to
disclaim responsibility. Thus Servia called the world to witness
that her answer to Austria was the limit of submission and
conciliation. Austria, through her ambassador to the United
States, solemnly declared that her assault upon Servia was a
measure of "self-defense." Russia explained her action as
"benevolent intervention," and expressed "a humble hope in
omnipotent providence" that her hosts would be triumphant.
Germany charged France with perfidious attack upon the unarmed
border of the fatherland, and proclaimed a holy war for "the
security of her territory." France and England, Belgium and Italy
deplored the conflict and protested that they were innocent of
offense. So far as all this is concerned the facts are generally
held to point to Germany as the chief instigator of the war.

Russia, indeed, had made threatening movements toward Austria as
a warning to her to desist from her threatened invasion of
Servia. Great Britain proposed mediation. Germany made no
movement in the direction of preventing the war, but directed its
attention to Russia, warning it to stop mobilization within
twenty-four hours, and immediately afterward beginning a similar
movement of mobilization in its own territory. On August 1st
Germany declared war against Russia, the first step towards
making the contest a continental one. On the 2d, when France
began mobilization, German forces moved against Russia and France
simultaneously and invaded the neutral states of Luxembourg and
Belgium. It was her persistence in the latter movement that
brought Great Britain into the contest, as this country was
pledged to support Belgian neutrality. On August 4th, Great
Britain sent an ultimatum to Germany to withdraw from the neutral
territory which her troops had entered and demanded an answer by
midnight. Germany declined to answer satisfactorily and at 11
o'clock war was declared by Great Britain.

AN EDITORIAL OPINION

As regards the significance of these movements, in which Germany
hurled declarations of war in rapid succession to east and west,
and forced the issue of a continental war upon nations which had
taken no decisive step, it may suffice to quote an editorial
summing up of the situation as regards Germany, from the
Philadelphia North American of August 7th:

"From these facts there is no escape. Leaving aside all questions
of justice or political expediency, the aggressor throughout has
been Germany. Austria's fury over the assassination of the heir
to the throne was natural. But Servia tendered full reparation.

So keen and conservative an authority as Rear Admiral Mahan
declares that 'the aggressive insolence' of Austria's ultimatum
'and Sevia's concession of all demands except those too
humiliating for national self-respect' show that behind Austria's
assault was the instigation of Berlin. He adds:

"Knowing how the matter would be viewed in Russia, it is
incredible that Austria would have ventured on the ultimatum
unless assured beforehand of the consent of Germany. The
inference is irresistible that it was the pretext for a war
already determined upon as soon as plausible occasion offered.'

"Circumstantial evidence, at least, places responsibility for the
flinging of the first firebrand upon the government of the
Kaiser. Now, who added fuel to the flames, until the great
conflagration was under way?

"The next move was the Czar's. 'Fraternal sentiments of the
Russian people for the Slavs in Servia,' he says, led him to
order partial mobilization, following Austria's invasion of
Servia. Instantly Germany protested, and within forty-eight hours
sent an ultimatum demanding that Russia cease her preparations.
On the following day Germany began mobilizing, and twenty-four
hours later declared war on Russia. Mobilization in France,
necessitated by these events, was anticipated by Germany, which
simultaneously flung forces into Russia, France, Luxembourg and
Belgium.

"It was Germany's historic policy of "blood and iron" that fired
Austria to attempt the crushing of Servia. It was Germany that
hurled an ultimatum, swiftly followed by an army, at Russia. It
was Germany that struck first at the French frontier. It was
Germany that trampled upon solemn treaty engagements by invading
the neutral states of Luxembourg and Belgium. And it was Germany
that, in answer to England's demand that the neutrality of
Belgium be protected, declared war against Great Britain.

"Regardless, therefore, of questions of right and wrong, it is
undeniable that in each succeeding crisis Germany has taken the
aggressive. In so doing she has been inspired by a supreme
confidence in her military might. But she has less reason to be
proud of her diplomacy. The splendid audacity of her moves cannot
obscure the fact that in making the case upon which she will be
judged she has been outmaneuvered by the deliberation of Russia,
the forbearance of France and the patience of Great Britain. She
has assumed the role of international autocrat, while giving her
foes the advantage of prosecuting a patriotic war of defense.

"Particularly is this true touching the violation of neutral
territory. For nearly half a century the duchy of Luxembourg has
been considered a 'perpetually neutral state,' under solemn
guarantee of Austria, Great Britain, Germany and Russia. Since
1830, when Belgium seceded from the Netherlands, it, too, has
been held 'an independent and perpetually neutral state,' that
status being solemnly declared in a convention signed hy Great
Britain, France, Russia, Austria and Prussia. Yet the first war
move of Germany was to overrun these countries, seize their
railroads, bombard their cities and lay waste their territories.

"For forty years Germany has been the exemplar of a progressive
civilization. In spite of her adherence to inflated militarism,
she has put the whole world in her debt by her inspiring
industrial and scientific achievements. Her people have taught
mankind lessons of incalculable value, and her sons have enriched
far distant lands with their genius. Not the least of the
catastrophes inflicted by this inhuman war is that an unbridled
autocracy has brought against the great German empire an
indictment for arrogant assault upon the peace of nations and the
security of human institutions."

IS THE KAISER RESPONSIBLE?

How much reliance is to be placed on the foregoing newspaper
opinion, and on the prevailing sentiment holding Kaiser Wilhelm
responsible for flinging the war bomb that disrupted the ranks of
peace, no one can say. Every one naturally looked for the
fomenter of this frightful international conflict and was
disposed to place the blame on the basis of rumor and personal
feeling. On the other hand each nation concerned has vigorously
disclaimed responsibility for the cataclysm. Austria - very
meekly - claimed that Servia precipitated the conflict. Germany
blamed it upon Russia and France, the former from Slavic race
sentiment, the latter from enmity that had existed since the loss
of Alsace and Lorraine in 1870. They, on the contrary, laid all
the blame upon Germany. In the case of England alone we have a
clear vista. The obligation of the island kingdom to maintain the
neutral position of Belgium and the utter disregard of this
neutrality by Germany forced her to take part and throw her
armies into the field for the preservation of her international
obligations.

Many opinions were extant, many views advanced. One of these,
from Robert C. Long, a war correspondent of note, laid the total
responsibility upon Austria, which, he said, plunged Europe into
war in disregard of the Kaiser, who vigorously sought to prevent
the outbreak, even threatening his ally in his efforts to
preserve peace. In his view, "All the blood-guiltiness in this
war will rest upon two Powers, Austria and Russia. It rests on
Austria for her undue harshness to Servia and on Russia for its
dishonesty in secretly mobilizing its entire army at a time when
it was imploring the Kaiser to intervene for peace, and when the
Kaiser was working for peace with every prospect of success."

We have quoted one editorial opinion holding Germany wholly
responsible. Here is another, from the New York TIMES, which,
with a fair degree of justice, distributes the responsibility
among all the warring nations of Europe:

"Germany is not responsible; Russia is not responsible, or
Austria, or France, or England. The pillars of civilization are
undermined and human aspirations bludgeoned down by no Power, but
by all Powers; by no autocrats, but by all autocrats; not because
this one or that has erred or dared or dreamed or swaggered, but
because all, in a mad stampede for armament, trade and territory,
have sowed swords and guns, nourished harvests of death-dealing
crops, made ready the way.

"For what reason other than war have billions in bonds and taxes
been clamped on the backs of all Europe? None sought to evade
war; each sought to be prepared to triumph when it came. At most
some chancelleries whispered for delay, postponement; they knew
the clash to be inevitable; if not today, tomorrow. Avoid war!
What else have they lived for, what else prepared for, what else
have they inculcated in the mind of youth than the sureness of
the conflict and the great glory of offering themselves to this
Moloch in sacrifice?

"No Power involved can cover up the stain. It is indelible, the
sin of all Europe. It could have been prevented by common
agreement. There was no wish to prevent it. Munition
manufacturers were not alone in urging the race to destruction,
physical and financial. The leaders were for it. It was policy. A
boiling pot will boil, a nurtured seed will grow. There was no
escape from the avowed goal. A slow drift to the inevitable, a
thunderbolt forged, the awful push toward the vortex! What men
and nations want they get."

GERMANY'S STAKE IN THE WAR

What had Germany to gain in the war in the instigation of which
she is charged with being so deeply involved? Territorial
aggrandizement may have been one of her purposes. Belgium and
Holland lay between her and the open Atlantic, and the possession
of these countries, with their splendid ports, would pay her well
for a reasonable degree of risk and cost. The invasion of Belgium
as her first move in the war game may have had an ulterior
purpose in the acquisition of that country, one likely to be as
distasteful to France as the taking over of Alsace-Lorraine.
Perhaps the neutral position taken by Holland, with her seeming
inclination in favor of Germany, may have had more than racial
relations behind it. Considerations of ultimate safety from
annexation may have had its share in this attitude of neutrality.

The general impression has been that Germany went to war with the
purpose of establishing beyond question her political and
military supremacy on the European continent. Military despotism
in Germany was the decisive factor in making inevitable the
general war. The Emperor of Germany stood as the incarnation and
exponent of the Prussian policy of military autocracy. He had
ruled all German States in unwavering obedience to the militarist
maxim: "In times of peace prepare for war." He had used to the
full his autocratic power in building up the German Empire and in
making it not only a marvel of industrial efficiency, but also a
stupendous military machine. In this effort he had burdened the
people of Germany with an ever-increasing war budget. The limit
in this direction was reached with the war budget of the year
1912 when the revenues of the princes and of all citizens of
wealth were specially taxed. No new sources of revenue remained.
A crisis had come.

That crisis, as sometimes claimed, was not any menace from
Britain or any fear of the British power. It was rather the very
real and very rapidly rising menace of the new great Slav power
on Germany's border, including, as it did, the Russian Empire and
the entire line of Slav countries that encircled Germanic Austria
from the Adriatic to Bohemia. These Slav peoples are separated
from the governing Teutonic race in the Austrian Empire by the
gulfs of blood, language, and religion. And in Europe the Slav
population very largely outnumbers the Teuton population and is
growing much more rapidly.

Recent events, especially in the Balkan wars, had made it plain,
not to the German Emperor alone, but to all the world, that the
growth into an organized power of more than two hundred millions
of Slav peoples along nearly three thousand miles of
international frontier was a menace to the preservation of Teuton
supremacy in Europe. That Teuton supremacy was based on the
sword. The German Emperor's appeal was to "My sword." But when
the new sword of the united Slav power was allowed to be
unsheathed, German supremacy was threatened on its own ground and
by the weapon of its own choosing.

However all this be, and it must be admitted that it is to a
degree speculative, there were in 1914 conditions existing that
appeared to render the time a suitable one for the seemingly
inevitable continental war. Revelations pointing to defects in
the French army, deficiencies of equipment and weaknesses in
artillery, had been made in the French Parliament. The debate
that occurred was fully dwelt upon in the German papers. And on
July 16th the organ of Berlin radicalism, the VOSSICHE ZEITUNG,
published a leading article to show that Russia was not prepared
for war, and never had been. As for France, it said: "A Gallic
cock with a lame wing is not the ideal set up by the Russians.
And when the Russian eagle boasts of being in the best of health
who is to believe him? Why should the French place greater
confidence in the inveterate Russian disorganization than in
their own defective organization?"

As regards the Kaiser's own estimate of his preparedness for war,
and the views of national polity he entertained, we shall let him
speak for himself in the following extracts from former
utterances:

"We will be everywhere victorious even if we are surrounded by
enemies on all sides and even if we have to fight superior
numbers, for our most powerful ally is God above, who, since the
time of the Great Elector and Great King, has always been on our
side." - At Berlin, March 29, 1901.

"I vowed never to strike for world mastery. The world empire that
I then dreamed of was to create for the German empire on all
sides the most absolute confidence as a quiet, honest and
peaceable neighbor. I have vowed that if ever the time came when
history should speak of a German world power or a Hohenzollern
world power this should not be based on conquest, but come
through a mutual striving of nations after a common purpose.

"After much has been done internally in a military way, the next
thing must be the arming ourselves at sea. Every German
battleship is a new guarantee for the peace of the world. We are
the salt of the earth, but must prove worthy of being so.
Therefore, our youth must learn to deny what is not good for
them.

"With all my heart I hope that golden peace will continue to be
present with us." - At Bremen, March 22, 1905.

"My final and last care is for my fighting forces on land and
sea. May God grant that war may not come, but should the cloud
descend, I am firmly convinced that the army will acquit itself
as it did so nobly thirty-five years ago." - At Berlin, February
25, 1906.

In the early days of the reign of William II war was prominent in
his utterances. He was the War Lord in full feather, and the
world at that time looked with dread upon this new and somewhat
blatant apostle of militarism. Yet year after year passed until
the toll of almost three decades was achieved, without his
drawing the sword, and the world began to regard him as an
apostle of peace, a wise and capable ruler who could gain his
ends without the shedding of blood. What are we to believe now?
Had he been wearing a mast for all these years, biding his time,
hiding from view a deeply cherished purpose? Or did he really
believe that a mission awaited him, that regeneration of the
world through the sanguinary path of the battle-field was his
duty, and that by the aid of a successful war he could inaugurate
a safer and sounder era of peace?

We throw out these ideas as suggestions only. What the Kaiser
purposed, what deep-laid schemes of international policy he
entertained, will, perhaps, never be known. But if he was really
responsible for the great war, as he was so widely accused of
being, the responsibility he assumed was an awful one. If he was
not responsible, as he declared and as some who claim to have
been behind the scenes maintain, the world will be ready to
absolve him when his innocence has been made evident.

WHY RUSSIA ENTERED THE FIELD

In this survey of the causes of the great war under consideration
the position of Russia comes next. That country was the first to
follow Austria and begin the threatening work of mobilization.
Germany's first open participation consisted in a warming to
Russia that this work must cease. Only when her warning was
disregarded did Germany begin mobilization and declare war. All
this was the work of a very few days, but in this era of active
military preparedness it needs only days, only hours in some
instances, to change from a state of peace into a state of war
and hurl great armed hosts against the borders of hostile
nations.

The general impression was that it was the Slavic race sentiment
that inspired Russia's quick action. Servia, a country of Slavs,
brothers in race to a large section of the people of Russia, was
threatened with national annihilation and her great kinsman
sprang to her rescue, determined that she should not be absorbed
by her land-hungry neighbor. This seemed to many a sufficient
cause for Russia's action. Not many years before, when Austria
annexed her wards, Bosnia and Herzegovina, both Slavic countries,
Russia protested against the act. She would doubtless have done
more than protest but for her financial and military weakness
arising from the then recent Russo-Japanese War. In 1914 she was
much stronger in both these elements of national power and lost
not a day in preparing to march to Servia's aid.

But was this the whole, or indeed the chief, moving impulse in
Russia's action? Was she so eager an advocate of Pan-Slavism as
such a fact would indicate? Had she not some other purpose in
view, some fish of her own to fry, some object of moment to
obtain? Many thought so. They were not willing to credit the
Russian bear with an act of pure international benevolence. Wars
of pure charity are rarely among the virtuous acts of nations. As
it had been suggested that Germany saw in the war a possible
opportunity to gain a frontier on the Atlantic, so it was hinted
that Russia had in mind a similar frontier on the Mediterranean.
Time and again she had sought to wring Constantinople from the
hands of the Turks. In 1877 she was on the point of achieving
this purpose when she was halted and turned back by the Congress
of Berlin and the bellicose attitude of the nations that stood
behind it.

Here was another and seemingly a much better opportunity. The
Balkan War had almost accomplished the conquest of the great
Turkish capital and left Turkey in a state of serious weakness.
If Europe should be thrown into the throes of a general war, in
which every nation would have its own interests to care for,
Russia's opportunity to seize upon the prize for which she had so
long sought was an excellent one, there being no one in a
position to say her nay. To Russia the possession of
Constantinople was like the possession of a new world, and this
may well have been her secret motive in springing without
hesitation into the war. Her long-sought prize hung temptingly
within reach of her hand, the European counterpart of the "Monroe
Doctrine" could not now be evoked to stay her grasp, and it seems
highly probable that in this may have lain the chief cause of
Russia's participation in the war.

FRANCE'S HATRED OF GERMANY

The Republic of France was less hasty than Russia and Germany in
issuing a declaration of war. Yet there, too, the order of
mobilization was quickly issued and French troops were on the
march toward the German border before Germany had taken a similar
step. France had not forgotten her humiliation in 1870. So far
was she from forgetting it that she cherished a vivid
recollection of what she had lost and an equally vivid enmity
towards Germany in consequence. Enmity is hardly the word. Hatred
better fits the feeling entertained. And this was kept vitally
alive by the fact that Alsace and Lorraine, two of her former
provinces, still possessing a considerable French population,
were now held as part of the dominions of her enemy. The sore
rankled and hope of retribution lay deep in the heart of the
French. Here seemed an opportunity to achieve this long-cherished
purpose, and we may reasonably believe that the possibility of
regaining this lost territory made France eager to take part in
the coming war. She had been despoiled by Germany, a valued
portion of her territory had been wrested from her grasp, a
promising chance of regaining it lay before her. She had the men;
she had the arms; she had a military organization vastly superior
to that of 1870; she had the memory of her former triumphs over
the now allied nations of Austria and Germany; she had her
obligations to aid Russia as a further inducement. The causes of
her taking part in the war are patent, especially in view of the
fact that in a very brief interval after her declaration her
troops had crossed the border and were marching gaily into
Alsace, winning battles and occupying towns as they advanced.

GREAT BRITAIN AND ITALY

We have suggested that in the case alike of Austria, Russia,
Germany and France the hope of gaining valuable acquisitions of
territory was entertained. In the case of France, enmity to
Germany was an added motive, the territory she sought being land
of which she had been formerly despoiled. These purposes of
changing the map of Europe did not apply to or influence Great
Britain. That country had no territory to gain and no great
military organization to exercise. She possessed the most
powerful navy of any country in the world, but she was moved by
no desire of showing her strength upon the sea. There was no
reason, so far as any special advantage to herself was concerned,
for her taking part in the war, and her first step was a generous
effort to mediate between the Powers in arms.

Only when Belgium - a small nation that was in a sense under the
guardianship of Great Britain, so far as its nationality and
neutrality were concerned - was invaded by Germany without
warning, did Britain feel it incumbent upon her to come to its
aid. This may not have been entirely an act of benevolence. There
was a probability that Germany, once in control of Belgium, could
not readily let go. She might add it to her empire, a fact likely
to seriously affect British sea-power. However this be, Great
Britain lost no time after the invasion in becoming a party to
the continental war, sending her fleet abroad and enlisting
troops for service in the aid of her allies. France and Belgium.

Italy, a member of the Triple Alliance, the other members of
which were Germany and Austria, was the only one of the great
Powers that held aloof. She had absolutely nothing to gain by
taking part in the war, while her late large expenses in the
conquest of Tripoli had seriously depleted her war chest. As
regards her alliance with Germany and Austria, it put her under
no obligation to come to their aid in an offensive war. Her
obligation was restricted to aid in case they were attacked, and
she justly held that no such condition existed. As a result,
Germany and Austria found themselves at war with the three
powerful members of the Triple Entente, while Italy, the third
member of the Triple Alliance, declined to draw the sword.

The defection of Italy was a serious loss to the power of the
allies, so much so that Emperor William threatened her with war
if she failed to fulfil her assumed obligations. This threat
Italy quietly ignored. She gave indications, in fact, that her
sympathies were with the opposite party. Thus Germany and Austria
found themselves pitted against three great Powers and a possible
fourth, with the addition of the two small nations of Servia and
Belgium. And the latter were not to be despised as of negligible
importance. Servia quickly showed an ability to check the forward
movements of Austria, while Belgium, without aid, long held a
powerful German army at bay, defending the city and fortresses of
Liege with a boldness and success that called forth the admiring
acclamations of the world.

THE TRIPLE ALLIANCE AND TRIPLE ENTENTE

This review of causes and motives may be supplemented by a brief
statement of what is meant by the Triple Alliance and Triple
Entente, terms which come into common prominence in discussing
European politics. They indicate the division of Europe, so far
as its greater Powers are concerned, into two fully or partially
allied bodies, the former consisting of Germany, Austria and
Italy, the latter of Great Britain, France and Russia. These
organizations are of comparatively recent date. The Alliance
began in 1879 in a compact between Germany and Austria, a Dual
Alliance, which was converted into a Triple one in 1883, Italy
then, through the influence of Bismarck, joining the alliance. In
this compact Austria and Germany pledged themselves to mutual
assistance if attacked by Russia; Italy and Germany to the same
if attacked by France.

The Triple Entente - or Understanding - arose from a Dual
Alliance between France and Russia, formed in 1887, an informal
understanding between Britain and France in 1904 and a similar
understanding between Britain and Russia in 1907. Its purpose, as
formed by Edward VII, was to balance the Triple Alliance and thus
convert Europe into two great military camps. When organized
there seemed little probability of its being called into activity
for many years.


Chapter III. STRENGTH AND RESOURCES OF THE WARRING POWERS
Old and New Methods in War - Costs of Modern Warfare - Nature of
National Resources - British and American Military Systems -
Naval Strength - Resources of Austria-Hungary - Resources of
Germany - Resources of Russia - Resources of France - Resources
of Great Britain - Servia and Belgium

Within the whole history of mankind the nations of the earth had
never been so thoroughly equipped for the art of warfare as they
were in 1914. While the arts of construction have enormously
developed, those of destruction have fully kept pace with them;
and the horrors of war have enormously increased side by side
with the benignities of peace. It is interesting to trace the
history of warfare from this point of view. Beginning with the
club and hammer of the stone age, advancing through the bow and
arrow and the sling-shot of later times, this art, even in the
great days of ancient civilization, the eras of Greece and Rome,
had advanced little beyond the sword and spear, crude weapons of
destruction as regarded in our times. They have in great part
been set aside as symbols of military dignity, emblems of the
"pomp and circumstance of glorious war."

Descending through the Middle Ages we find the sword and spear
still holding sway, with the bow as an important accessory for
the use of the common soldier. As for the knight, he became an
iron-clad champion, so incased in steel that he could fight
effectively only on horseback, becoming largely helpless on foot.
At length, the greatest stage in the history of war, the notable
invention of gunpowder was achieved, and an enormous
transformation took place in the whole terrible art. The musket,
the rifle, the pistol, the cannon were one by one evolved, to
develop in the nineteenth century into the breech-loader, the
machine gun, the bomb, and the multitude of devices fitted to
bring about death and destruction by wholesale, instead of by the
retail methods of older days.

At sea, the sailing vessel, with her far-flung white wings and
rows of puny guns, has given way to the steel-clad battleship
with her fewer but enormously larger cannons, capable of flinging
huge masses of iron many miles through the air and with a
precision of aim that seems incredible for such great distances.

We must add to this the torpedo boat, a tiny craft with a weapon
capable of sinking the most costly and stupendous of battleships,
and the submarine, fitted to creep unseen under blockading
fleets, and deal destruction with nothing to show the hand that
dealt the deadly blow. Even the broad expanse of the air has been
made a field of warlike activity, with scouting airships flying
above contending armies and signaling their most secret movements
to the forces below.

OLD AND NEW METHODS IN WAR

In regard to loss of life on the battle-field, it may be said
that many of the wars of ancient times surpassed the bloodiest of
those of modern days, despite the enormously more destructive
weapons and implements now employed. When men fought hand to
hand, and no idea of quarter for the defeated existed, entire
armies were at times slaughtered on the field. In our days, when
the idea of mercy for the vanquished prevails, this wholesale
slaughter of beaten hosts has ceased, and the death list of the
battle-field has been largely reduced by caution on the part of
the fighters. With the feeling that a dead soldier is utterly
useless, and a wounded one often worse than useless, as
constituting an impediment, every means of saving life is
utilized. Soldiers now fight miles apart. Prostrate, hidden,
taking advantage of every opportunity of protection, every
natural advantage or artificial device, vast quantities of
ammunition are wasted on the empty air, every ball that finds its
quarry in human flesh being mayhap but one in hundreds that go
astray. In the old-time wars actual hand-to-hand fighting took
place. Almost every stroke told, every thrusting blade was
directly parried or came back stained with blood. In modern wars
fighting of this kind has ceased. A battle has become a matter of
machinery. The strong arm and stalwart heart are replaced by the
bullet-flinging machine, and it is a rare event for a man to know
to whose hand he owes wound or death. Such, at least, was largely
the case in the war between Russia and Japan in 1905. But in
recent battles we read of hordes of soldiers charging up to  the
muzzles of machine guns, and being mowed down like ripened wheat.

COSTS OF MODERN WARFARE

But while loss of human life in war has not greatly increased, in
other directions the cost of warfare has enormously grown. In the
past, little special preparation was needed by the fighter.
Armies could be recruited off-hand from city or farm and do
valiant duty in the field, with simple and cheap weapons. In our
days years of preliminary preparation are deemed necessary and
the costs of war go on during times of profound peace, millions
of men who could be used effectively in the peaceful industries
spending the best years of their lives in learning the most
effective methods of destroying their fellow men.

This is only one phase of the element of cost. Great workshops
are devoted to the preparation of military material, of
absolutely no use to mankind except as instruments of
destruction. The costs of war, even in times of peace, are thus
very large. But they increase in an enormous proportion after war
has actually begun, millions of dollars being needed where tens
formerly sufficed, and national bankruptcy threatening the nation
that keeps its armies long in the field. The American Civil War,
fought half a century ago, was a costly procedure for the
American people. If it had been fought five or ten years ago its
cost would have been increased five-fold, so great has been the
progress in this terrible art in the interval.

NATURE OF NATIONAL RESOURCES

It is our purpose in the present chapter to take up the subject
of this cost and review the condition and resources of the
several nations which were involved in the dread internecine
struggle of 1914, the frightful conflict of nations that moved
like a great panorama before our eyes. These resources are of two
kinds. One of them consists in the material wealth of the nations
concerned, the product of the fields and factories, the mineral
treasures beneath the soil, the results of trade and commercial
activity and the conditions of national finance, including the
extent of available revenue and the indebtedness which hangs over
each nation, much of it a heritage from former wars which have
left little beyond this aggravating record of their existence. It
is one which adds something to the cost of every particle of food
consumed by the people, every shred of clothing worn by them.
Additions to this incubus of debt little disturb the rules when
blithely or bitterly engaging in new wars, but every such
addition adds to the burdens of taxation laid on the shoulders of
the groaning citizens, and is sure to deepen the harvest of
retribution when the time for it arrives.

A second of these resources is that of preparation for war in
time of peace, the training of the able-bodied citizens in the
military art, until practically the entire nation becomes
converted into a vast army, its members, after their term of
compulsory service, engaging in ordinary labors in times of
peace, yet liable to be called into the field whenever the war
lords desire, to face the death-belching field piece and machine
gun in a sanguinary service in which they have little or no
personal concern. This preparedness, with the knowledge of the
duties of a soldier which it involves, is a valuable war resource
to any nation that is saddled with such a system of universal
military training. And few nations of Europe and the East are now
without it. Great Britain is the chief one in Europe, while in
America the United States is a notable example of a nation that
has adopted the opposite policy, that of keeping its population
at peaceful labor, steadily adding to its resources, during the
whole time in which peace prevails, and trusting to the courage
and mental resources of its citizens to teach them quickly the
art of fighting when, if ever, the occasion shall arrive.

It must be admitted that the European system of militarism is
likely to be of great advantage in the early days of a war, in
which large bodies of trained soldiers can be hurled with
destructive force against hastily gathered militia. The
distinction between trained and untrained soldiers, however,
rapidly disappears in a war of long continuance. Experience in
the field is a lesson far superior to any gained in mock warfare,
and the taking part in a few battles will teach the art of
warfare to an extent surpassing that of years of marching and
counter-marching upon the training field.

BRITISH AND AMERICAN MILITARY SYSTEMS

Britain and the United States, the only two of the greater
nations that have adopted the policy here considered, are not
trusting completely to chance. Each of them has a body of regular
troops, fitted for police duty in time of peace and for field
duty in time of war, and serving as a nucleus fitted to give a
degree of coherence to raw militia when the sword is drawn.
Subsidiary to these are bodies of volunteer troops, training as a
recreation rather than as an occupation, yet constituting a
valuable auxiliary to the regular forces. This system possesses
the advantage of maintaining no soldiers except those kept in
constant and needful duty, all the remaining population staying
at their regular labors and adding very materially every year to
the resources of the nation, while saving the great sums expended
without adequate return in the process of keeping up the system
of militarism.

What is above said refers only to the human element in the
system. In addition is the necessity of preparing and keeping in
store large quantities or war material - cannons, rifles,
ammunition, etc. - the building of inland forts and coast and
harbor fortifications, for ready and immediate use in time of
war. In this all the nations are alike actively engaged, the
United States and Britain as well as those of the European
continent, and none of them are likely to be caught amiss in this
particular. Cannon and gunpowder eat no food and call for no pay
or pension, and once got ready can wait with little loss of
efficiency. They may, indeed, become antiquated through new
invention and development, and need to be kept up to date in this
particular. But otherwise they can be readily kept in store and
each nation may with comparative ease maintain itself on a level
with others as regards its supply of material of war.

NAVAL STRENGTH

In one field of war-preparation little of the distinction
indicated exists. This is that of ocean warfare, in which rivalry
between the great Powers goes on without restriction - at least
between the distinctively maritime nations. In this field of
effort, the building of gigantic battleships and minor war
vessels, Britain has kept itself in advance of all others, as a
nation in which the sea is likely to be the chief field of
warlike activity. Beginning with a predominance in war ships, it
has steadily retained it, adding new and constantly greater war
ships to its fleet with a feverish activity, under the idea that
here is its true field of defense. It has sought vigorously to
keep itself on a level in this particular with any two of its
rivals in sea power. While it has not quite succeeded in this,
the United States and Germany pushing it closely, it is well in
the lead as compared with any single Power, and to keep this lead
it is straining every nerve and fiber of its national capacity.

RESOURCES OF AUSTRIA-HUNGARY

Coming now to a statement of the strength and resources of the
chief Powers concerned in the present war, Austria-Hungary, as
the originator of the outbreak, stands first. It is scarcely
necessary to repeat that its severe demands upon Servia, arising
from the murder of the Archduke Ferdinand and its refusal to
accept Servia's almost complete acceptance of its terms, led to
an immediate declaration of war upon the small offending state,
the war fever thus started quickly extending from side to side of
the continent. Therefore in considering the existing conditions
of the various countries involved, those of Austria-Hungary
properly come first, the others following in due succession.

Austria-Hungary is a dual kingdom, each partner to the union
having its separate national organization and legislative body.
While both are under the rule of one monarch, Francis Joseph
being at once the Emperor of Austria and the King of Hungary,
their union is not a very intimate one. There is large racial
distinction between the two countries, and Hungary cherishes a
strong feeling of animosity to Austria, the outcome of acts of
tyranny and barbarity not far in the past.

The two countries closely approach each other in area, Austria
having 115,903 and Hungary 125,039 square miles; making a total
of 240,942. The populations also do not vary largely, the total
being estimated at about 50,000,000. Of these the Slavs number
more than 24,000,000, approaching one half the total , while of
Germans there are but 11,500,000, little more than half of the
Slavic population. The Magyars, or Hungarians, a people of
eastern origin, and the main element of Hungarian population,
number about 8,750,000. In addition there are several millions of
Roumanian and Italic stock, and a considerable number of Jews and
Gypsies. The inclusion of this heterogeneous population into one
kingdom dates far back in medieval history, and it was not until
1867, as a consequence of a vigorous Hungarian demand, that
Austria and Hungary became divided into separate nations, the
remnant of their former close union remaining in their being
ruled by one monarch, the venerable Francis Joseph, who is still
upon the throne. This division quickly followed the war between
Prussia and Austria in 1866, and was one of the results of the
defeat of Austria in that war.

Austria is a hilly or mountainous country, its plains occupying
only about one fifth of the total territory. The most extensive
tracts of low or flat land occur in Hungary, Galicia and
Slavonia, the great Hungarian plain having an area of 36,000
square miles. Much of this is highly fertile, and Hungary is the
great granary of the country. Austria-Hungary is well watered by
the Danube and its tributaries and has a small extent of
sea-coast on the Adriatic, its principal ports being Trieste,
Pola and Fiume. Its railways are about 30,000 miles in length. In
consequence of its interior position its largest trade is with
Germany, through which empire there is also an extensive transit
commerce. Its mountainous character makes it rich in minerals,
the chief of these being coal, iron, and salt.

Bosnia and Herzegovina, formerly part of Turkey in Europe, were
put under the military occupation and administrative rule of
Austria after the Russo-Turkish war of 1877-8, and in 1908 were
fully annexed by Austria, an act of spoliation which had its
ultimate result in the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand in
1914, and may thus be considered the instigating agency in the
1914 war.

The finances of Austria-Hungary may be briefly given. Austria has
an annual revenue of $636,909,000; Hungary of $410,068,000; their
expenditure equaling these sums. The debt of Austria is stated at
$1,433,511,000; of Hungary, $1,257,810,000; and of the joint
states at $1,050,000,000. Military service is obligatory on all
over twenty years of age who are capable of bearing arms, the
total terms of service being twelve years, of which three are
passed in the line, seven in the reserve, and two in the
Landwehr. The army is estimated to number 390,000 on the peace
footing and over 2,000,000 on the war footing. Its navy numbers
four modern and nine older battleships, with twelve cruisers and
a number of smaller craft.

RESOURCES OF GERMANY

Germany, in the census of 1910, was credited with a population of
64,925,993. This is in great part composed of Teutons, or men of
German race, its people being far less heterogeneous than those
of Austria, though it includes several millions of Slavs,
Lithuanians, Poles and others. It has an area of 208,738 square
miles. It is mountainous in the south and center, but in the
north there is a wide plain extending to the German Ocean and the
Baltic Sea, and forming part of the great watershed which
stretches across Europe. Its soil, except in the more rugged and
mountainous districts, is prolific, being well watered and
bearing abundant crops of the ordinary cereals. Potatoes, hemp,
and flax are very abundant crops and the sugar beet is
extensively cultivated. The forests are of great extent and
value, and are carefully conserved to yield a large production
without over cutting. Among domestic animals, the cattle, sheep
and swine of certain districts have long been famous.

The minerals are numerous and some of them of much value, those
of chief importance being coal, iron, zinc, lead and salt. While
much attention is given to mining and agriculture, the
manufacturing industries are especially important. Linens and
other textiles are widely produced and iron manufacture is
largely carried on. The Krupp iron works at Essen are of
world-wide fame, and the cannon made there are used in the forts
of many distant nations.

These are a few only of the large variety of manufactures, a
market for which is found in all parts of the world, the commerce
of Germany being widely extended. In short, the empire has come
into very active rivalry with Great Britain in the development of
commerce, and to its progress in this direction it owes much of
its flourishing condition. Hamburg is by far the most important
seaport, Bremen, Stettin, Danzig and others also being thriving
ports. The total length of railway is over 40,000 miles.

The annual revenue of the German Empire is nearly $900,000,000;
that of its component states, $1,500,000,000; that of the states
at $3,735,000,000. The revenue is derived chiefly from customs
duties, excise duties on beet-root sugar, salt, tobacco and malt
and contributions from the several states.

Germany is the foster home of modern militarism and is held to
have the most complete army system in the world. Every man
capable of bearing arms must begin his military training on the
1st of January of the year in which he reaches the age of twenty,
and continue it to the end of his forty-second year, unless
released from this duty by the competent authorities, either
altogether or for times of peace.

Seven years of this time must be spent in the army or fleet;
three of them in active service, four in the reserve. Seven more
years are passed in the Landwehr, the members of which may be
called out only twice for training. The remaining time is passed
in the Landsturm, which is called out only in case of invasion of
the empire. The total peace strength of the army is given at
870,000; of the reserves at 4,430,000; the total being 5,300,000.

The navel force of Germany is very powerful, though considerably
less than that of Great Britain. It comprises 19 of the enormous
modern battleships, 7 cruiser battleships, and 20 of older type;
9 first-class and 45 second and third-class cruisers, and
numerous smaller warships, including 47 torpedo boats, 141
destroyers and 60 submarines.

RESOURCES OF RUSSIA

Russia, the third of the three nations to which the war was most
immediately due, is the most extensive consolidated empire in the
world, its total area being estimated at 8,647,657 square miles,
of which 1,852,524 are in Europe, the remainder in Asia. The
population is given at about 160,000,000, of which 130,000,000
are in Europe.

Agriculture is the chief pursuit of this great population, though
manufactures are largely developing. The forests, immense in
extent, cover forty-two per cent of the area and contain timber
in enormous quantities. While a large part of the area is level
ground, there is much elevated territory, and the mineral wealth
is very important. It includes gold, silver, platinum, iron,
copper, coal and salt, all of large occurrence. Of the people,
over 1,800,000 are employed in manufacture, and the annual value
of the commerce amounts to $1,300,000,000. The length of railway
is about 50,000 miles.

Russia is heavily in debt, Germany being its largest creditor.
The total debt is stated at $4,553,000,000, its revenue
$1,674,000,000. The liability to military service covers all
able-bodied men between the ages of twenty and forty-two years.
Five years must be passed in active service, the remainder in the
various reserves. On a peace footing the army is 1,290,000
strong; its war strength is 5,500,000. The territor8al service is
capable of supplying about 3,000,000 more, making a possible
total of 7,500,000. As regards the navy, it was greatly reduced
in strength in the war with Japan and has not yet fully
recovered. The empire now possesses nine modern battleships, four
cruiser battleships, and eight of old type. There are also
cruisers and other vessels, including 23 torpedo boats, 105
destroyers, and 48 submarines.

RESOURCES OF FRANCE

France, the one large Power in Europe in which the people have
created a republic and have got rid of the FACT of a king, as
illustrated in the other continental Powers, - and in addition to
the mountain realm of Switzerland, in which the people govern
themselves through their representatives, - has taken up the
dogma of militarism in common with its neighbors and constitutes
the fourth of the Powers in which this system has been carried to
its ultimate conclusion of a world-wide war.

France had a startling object lesson in 1870. It had, under
Napoleon III, been imitating Prussia in its military
establishment, and its government officials coincided with the
emperor in the theory that its army was in a splendid state of
preparation. Marshal Leboeuf lightly declared that "everything
was ready, more than ready, and not a gaiter button missing," and
it was with a light-hearted confidence that the Emperor Napoleon
declared war against Prussia, the insensate multitude filling
Paris with their futile war cry of "On to Berlin."

This is not the place to deal with this subject, but it may be
said that France quickly learned that nothing was ready and the
nation went down in the most sudden and awful disaster of modern
times. A lesson had been taught, one not easy to forget. The
Republic succeeded the Empire, and has since been working on the
theory that war with its old enemy might at any time become
imminent and no negligence in the matter of preparation could be
permitted. As a consequence, France went into the war of 1914 in
a state of fitness greatly superior to that of 1870, and Germany
found France waiting on its border line, alert and able, ready
alike for offense or defense.

What are the natural conditions, the strength and resources, of
this great republic? France has an area of 207,054 square miles,
almost the same as that of the German Empire. If its numerous
colonies be added, its total area is over 4,000,000 square miles.
But this vast colonial expanse is of no special advantage to it
in a European war. Its population is 39,601,509; if Algeria, its
most available colony, be added, it is about 45,000,000, a total
20,000,000 less than the population of Germany.

Its soil is highly fitted for agricultural use, about mine tenths
of it being productive and more than half of it under the plow,
the cereals forming the bulk of its products. Its wheat crop is
large and oats, rye and barley are also of value, though the
raising of the domestic animals is of less importance than in the
surrounding countries. The growth of the vine is one of its most
important branches of agriculture, and in good years France
produces about half of the total wine yield of the world. In
mineral wealth it stands at a somewhat low level, its yield of
coal, iron, etc. being of minor importance.

France enjoys a large and valuable commerce and active
manufacturing industries, products of a more or less artistic
character being especially attended to. Of the textile fabrics,
those of silk goods are much the most important, this industry
employing about 2,000,000 persons and yielding more than a fourth
in value of the whole manufactured products of France. Other
products are carpets, tapestry, fine muslins, lace and cotton
goods. Products of different character are numerous and their
value large. The fisheries of France are also of much importance.
Its commerce, while large, is very considerably less than that of
Great Britain and Germany, France being especially a
self-centered country, largely using what it makes.

There is abundant provision for internal trade and travel, there
being 30,000 miles of railway, 3,000 miles or canal, and 5,500
miles of navigable rivers. The annual revenue approaches
$1,000,000,000, and the public debt in 1914 was at the large
total of over $6,200,000,000. This is much the largest debt of
any nation in the world, the debt of Russia, which comes next in
amount, being about $l,l700,000,000 less. It is largely due to
the cost of the war of 1870 and the subsequent large payment to
Germany. Yet the French people carry it without feeling seriously
overburdened.

Coming now to the French military system, it rivals that of
Germany in efficiency. The law requires the compulsory military
service of every French citizen who is not unfit for such
service. They have to serve in the regular army for three years,
in the regular reserves for six years, in the territorial army
for six years, and finally in the reserves of this army for ten
years. This gives France a peace strength of 720,000 and a total
war strength of 4,000,000. The navy is manned partly by
conscription, partly by voluntary enlistment, the naval forces
comprising about 60,000 officers and men.

The naval strength of the republic embraces 17 modern
battleships, 25 of older type, 18 first-class, 13 second and
third-class cruisers, 173 torpedo boats, 87 destroyers, and 90
submarines. There is another element of modern military strength
of growing importance and sure to be of large use in the war
under review. This is that of the airship. In 1914 France stood
at the head in this particular, its aeroplanes, built or under
construction, numbering 550. Germany had 375, Russia 315, Italy
270, Austria 220, Britain 180 and Belgium 150. In dirigible
balloons Germany stood first, with 50. France had 30, Russia 15,
Austria 10 and Britain 7. These air-soaring implements of war
came into play early in the conflict and Tennyson's vision of
"battles in the blue" was realized in attacks of aeroplanes upon
dirigibles, with death to the crews of each.

RESOURCES OF GREAT BRITAIN.

Great Britain, the remaining party to the five-fold war of great
European Powers, is an island country of considerably smaller
area than those so far named. Including Ireland it has an area of
121,391 square miles, about equal to that of the American State
of New Mexico and not half the size of the Canadian province of
Saskatchewan. Its population, however, surpasses that of France,
amounting to 45,221,615. If the outlying dominions of Great
Britain be added it becomes the greatest empire in the world's
history, its colonial dominions being estimated at over
13,000,000 square miles, and the total population of kingdom and
colonies at 435,000,000, the greatest population of any country
in the world. And Britain differs from France in the fact that
much of this outlying population is available for war purposes in
case of peril to the liberties of the mother country. At the
outbreak of the war of 1914 the loyal Dominion of Canada sprang
at once into the field, mobilized its forces, and offered the
mother land material aid in men and gifts of varied nature.

The same sense of loyalty was shown in Australia and South Africa
and in others of the British oversea dominions, while India added
an important contingent to the army and much other aid.

As for the immediate kingdom, it is not of high value in
agricultural wealth, being at present divided up to a
considerable extent into large unproductive estates, and it is
quite unable to feed its teeming population, depending for this
on its large commerce in food products. Its annual imports amount
to about $3,000,000,000, its exports to $2,250,000,000.

Commercially and industrially alike Great Britain stands at the
head of all European nations. Its abundant mineral wealth,
especially in coal and iron, has stimulated manufactures to the
highest degree, while its insular character and numerous seaports
have had a similar stimulating effect upon commerce. Its revenue,
aside from that of the colonies, amounts to about $920,000,000
annually, and its public debt reaches a total of $3,485,000,000.

The British government depends largely for safety from invasion
upon its insular position and its enormously developed navy, and
has not felt it necessary to enter upon the frenzy of military
preparation which pervades the continental nations. No British
citizen is obliged to bear arms except for the defense of his
country, but all able-bodied men are liable to militia service,
the militia being raised, when required, by ballot. Enlistment
among the regulars is either for twelve years' army service, or
for seven years' army service and five years' reserve service.
The peace strength of the army is estimated at about 255,000 men,
the reserves at 475,000; making a total of 730,000.

It is in its navy that Great Britain's chief warlike strength
exists, the naval force being much greater than that of any other
nation. It possesses in all 29 modern battleships, many of them
of the great dreadnaught and super-dreadnaught type. In addition
it has 10 cruiser battleships, and 38 older battleships, most of
the latter likely to be of little service for warlike duty. There
are also 45 first-class, and 70 second and third-class cruisers,
58 torpedo boats, 212 destroyers and 85 submarines, the whole
forming a total navel strength approaching that of any two of the
other Powers.

SERVIA AND BELGIUM

As regards the remaining nations engaged in the war, Servia, in
which the contest began, has an area of 18,782 square miles, a
population of 4,000,000, and a standing army of 240,000, a number
seemingly very inadequate to face the enormously greater power of
Austria-Hungary. But the men had become practically all soldiers,
very many of them tried veterans of the recent Balkan War; their
country is mountainous and admirably fitted for defensive
warfare, and their power of resistance to invasion was quickly
shown to be great.

Belgium, the other early seat of the war, is still smaller in
area, having but 11,366 square miles. But it is very densely
populated, possessing 7,432,784 inhabitants. Its army proved
brave and capable, its fortifications modern and well adapted to
defense, and small as was its field force it held back the far
more numerous German invaders until France and Great Britain had
their troops in position for available defense. This small
intermediate kingdom therefore played a very important part in
the outset of the war.

If one judges by the figures given of the available military
strength of the nations involved, the huge host said to have
followed Xerxes to the invasion of Greece could easily be far
surpassed in modern warfare. The fact is, however, that these
huge figures greatly exceed the numbers that could, except in the
most extreme exigency, be available for use in the field, and for
real active service we should be obliged to greatly reduce these
paper estimates. It must be taken into account that the fields
and factories of the nations cannot be too greatly denuded of
their trained workers. It was a shrewd saying of Napoleon
Bonaparte that "An army marches on its stomach," and the
important duty of keeping the stomach adequately filled can not
be overlooked.

In actual war also there is an enormous exhaustion of military
material, which must be constantly replaced, and this in turn
demands the services of great numbers of trained artisans. The
question of finance also cannot be overlooked. It needs vast sums
of money to keep a modern army in the field, this increasing
rapidly as the forces grow in numbers, and no national treasure
chest is inexhaustible. Tax as they may, the war lords cannot
squeeze out of their people more blood than flows in their veins,
and exhaustion of the war-chest may prove even more disastrous
than exhaustion of the regiments. For these reasons a limit to
the size of armies is inevitable and in any great war this
limitation must quickly make itself apparent.


Chapter IV. GREAT BRITAIN AND THE WAR
The Growth of German Importance - German Militarism - Great
Britain's Peace Efforts - Germany's Naval Program - German
Ambitions - Preparation for War - Effect on the Empire

The influence of the European War permeated everything from and
through the nation to the individual, from trade and commerce and
world-finance to the cost of food and the price of labor. The
whole world, civilized and uncivilized, was drawn into this
whirlpool of disaster - the majority of the population of the
earth was actually at war. Was it possible that such a vast
conflict - so far reaching in its racial and national elements,
so bitter in its old and new animosities, so great in its
territorial area, so tremendous in the numbers of men in arms -
could come, as some commentators say, like a thief in the night
or have fallen upon the world like a bolt from the blue!  All
available information of an exact character, all the preparation
of the preceding few years, all the inner statecraft of the world
as revealed in policy and action, prove the fallacy of this
supposition.

THE GROWTH OF GERMAN IMPORTANCE

As a matter of fact one nation had been for nearly half a century
the pivot upon which European hopes and fears have turned in the
matter of peace and war, of military and naval preparation, of
diplomatic interchange. During this period Germany rose to a
foremost place amongst the nations of Europe, to the first place
in strength of military power and organized fighting force, to
the second place in naval strength and commercial progress. The
growth itself was a legitimate one in the main; and, given the
character of its people and their cultivated convictions as to
inherent greatness, was inevitable. For other nations the vital
question asked in diplomacy and answered in their military or
naval preparations was equally inevitable: How would Germany use
this power, against whom was it aimed, for what specific purpose
was it being organized with such capable precision, such splendid
skill?

GERMAN MILITARISM

Great Britain, meanwhile, had devoted her main attention to the
trade and diplomacy and little wars associated with the
maintenance of a world-empire and, in self-defense, had
cultivated friendships with Russia and France and the United
States and Japan as this German power began to come closer and
touch the most vital British interests. France naturally
strengthened itself as its historic enemy grew in power; Russia
improved her military position after the Japanese was as she was
bound to do; Germany appeared to set the pace upon sea and land
with an aggressive diplomacy in Morocco and in China, at Paris
and at St. Petersburg, which was bound to cause trouble and to
promote what is commonly called militarism. The vast ambitions
and persistent policy of the German ruler and his people, the
unsatisfied characteristics of German diplomacy, the militant
ideals and military preparations and naval expansion of Germany
between 1900 and 1914 became the dominant consideration in the
chancelleries of Europe. Armies and navies, wars in the Balkans
or struggles for colonial spheres of influence, financial
reserves and naval construction and volunteer forces - all came
to be measured against current developments in this center of
European gravity.

GREAT BRITAIN'S PEACE EFFORTS

Great Britain tried to hold aloof from this international
rivalry, this preparation for a war which her people and leaders
hoped against hope would be averted. Royal visits of a pacific
character were exchanged, parties of Great Britain's business men
visited Berlin, while leaders such as King Edward and Lord
Haldane exercised all their ability in striving for some mutual
ground of friendly action. Lovers of peace wrote many volumes and
filled many newspapers with articles on the beneficence of that
policy and the terrors of militarism - books and articles which
were never seen in Germany except by those who regarded them as
so many confessions of national weakness. Between 1904 and 1908
Grear Britain actually reduced her naval expenditures and limited
her construction of battleships in the hope that Germany would
follow the lead, pleaded at two Hague Conferences for
international reduction of armaments, kept away from all increase
in her own almost ridiculous military establishment, urged upon
two occasions (in 1912-1913) a naval holiday in construction. The
following figures from Brassey's authoritative NAVAL ANNUAL shows
that her naval expenditure upon new ships in 1913 was actually
less than in 1904, that Germany's was nearly three times greater,
that France and Russia and Italy had doubled theirs:
---------------------------------------------------------
Great Britain/Germany/France/Russia/Italy/Austro-Hungary
----------------------------------------------------------
1904 (in British pounds)
----------------------------------------------------------
13,508,176/4,275,489/4,370,102/4,480,188/1,121,753/1,329,590
----------------------------------------------------------
1908
----------------------------------------------------------
8,660,202/7,795,499/4,193,544/2,703,721/1,866,158/716,662
----------------------------------------------------------
1911
----------------------------------------------------------
17,566,877/11,710,859/5,876,659/3,240,394/2,677,302/3,125,000
----------------------------------------------------------
1912
----------------------------------------------------------
17,271,527/11,491,157/6,997,552/7,904,094/2,500,000/3,620,881
----------------------------------------------------------
1913
----------------------------------------------------------
13,276,400/11,176,407/7,595,010/10,953,616/2,800,000/3,280,473
-------------------------------------------------------------

GERMANY'S NAVAL PROBLEM

Between 1909 and 1914 British leaders became convinced, as France
and Russia and other countries had long been certain, that
Germany meant war as soon as she was ready; that her policy was
to take the two border enemies, or rivals, first with a great
war-machine which would give them no chance for preparation or
success, to dictate a peace which would give her control of the
sea-coasts and channel touching Britain, to make that country the
seat of war preparations, naval uncertainty, perhaps financial
difficulty and commercial injury, to prepare at leisure for the
war which would conquer England and acquire her colonies. In the
first-named year British statesmen of both parties told an amazed
Parliament and country that German naval construction of big
ships was approaching the British standard, that the cherished
policy of a British navy equal to those of any two other nations
was absolutely gone, that England would be lucky if, in a few
years, she held a 60 per cent superiority over that of Germany
alone, that the latter country's naval construction was clearly
aimed at Britain and could be for no other than a hostile
purpose. British ships had already been recalled from the Seven
Seas to hold the North Sea against the growing naval power of a
nation which had 5,000,000 soldiers behind its ships as compared
with England's 250,000 men scattered over the world. From that
date in 1909 all who shared in the statecraft of the British
Empire understood the issue to be a real one - with France and
Russia as allies or without them.

What was back of this situation? Germany was already dominant in
Continental Europe. It had compelled Russia to submit when
Austria in 1908 annexed the Slav states of Bosnia and Herzegovina
and defied Servia to interfere or its proud patron at St.
Petersburg to prevent the humiliation; it had brought France to
her knees over the Morocco incident and the Delcasse resignation,
and would have done so again in 1911 if Great Britain had not
ranged herself behind the French republic; it held the issues of
peace and war between the great Powers during the Balkan
struggles of 1912 and 1913 and prevented Servia from winning its
legitimate fruits of victory or Montenegro from holding what it
had won; it had watched with delight the defeat of unorganized
Russia at the hands of Japan and saw what its writers described
as a decadent British Empire holding in feeble hands a quarter of
the earth in fee, with revolt coming in Ireland, rebellion
seething in India, dissatisfaction in South Africa, separation
upon the horizon in Canada and Australia. Here lay the secret of
German naval policy, of German hopes that Britain would remain
out of the inevitable struggle with France and Russia, of German
ambitions for a world-empire.

GERMAN AMBITIONS

The German nation had not up to the passing of Bismarck been the
enemy of the British people and until its belated entrance upon
the field of world politics and expansion the people had not even
been rivals. In the long series of European wars between 1688 and
1815, the German states were allies and friends of England. After
that, Prussia, and then the German Empire, became gradually a
great national force in the world and its spirit of unity, pride
of power, energy in trade, skill and success in industry, vigor
of development in tariffs, progress in military power and naval
construction were, from the standpoint of its own people,
altogether admirable. Following the Franco-Prussian War it had
steadily attained a position of European supremacy. Then came the
increase of population and trade, the desire for colonies, the
restriction of emigration to foreign countries.

It was a natural though difficult ambition. The marriage of Queen
Wilhelmina, and later the birth of a heir, averted any immediate
probability of acquiring Holland and, with it, the Dutch colonial
possessions, except by means of force. The assertion of the
United States' Monroe Doctrine checked German efforts which had
been directed to South America and concentrated in Brazil, where
100,000 Germans had settled and where trade relations had become
very close. British diplomacy of a trade, as well as political
character, in Persia, prevented certain railway schemes from
being carried out, which would have given Germany a dominating
influence in Asia Minor and on the Persian Gulf. Although the
partition of Africa gave the German Empire nearly one million
square miles and an obvious opening for colonization and power,
the inexperience and ineptitude of German officials in Colonial
government, the dislike, also, of Germans for emigration and the
fact that the movement of settlers abroad steadily decreased in
late years, tended to prevent, on the Continent, an expansion
which would have been assured under British colonization and
business effort.

At the same time the acquisition of these and other regions such
as Samoa was significant. Prior to 1870 Germany was a
geographical expression which meant a loose combination of States
with sometimes clashing interests, and incoherent expression, and
varied patriotism. German trade was then small, the industries
too poor to compete with those of Britain, while its people
possessed not an acre of soil beyond their European boundaries.
Since then it had become a closely-united people with an army of
over five million men - admittedly the best-trained troops in the
world; with a trade totalling $4,400,000,000 and competing in
Britain's home market, taking away her contracts in India and
some of the colonies, beating her in many foreign fields; with an
industrial production which included great steel works such as
Krupps, ship-building yards said to be of greater productive
power than those of Britain, factories of well-kept character
operating at high pressure with workmen trained in the best
technical system of the world today; with other productive
conditions aided by high protective duties and with exports
totalling (1910) $2,020,000,000 and imports of $2,380,000,000;
with Savings Bank deposits in 1911 totalling $4,500,000.0000 as
against a British total of $1,135,000,000.

Couple these conditions with Colonial ambitions dwarfed, or
unsuccessful in comparison with British success; continental
power as supreme, by virtue of military strength, as Napoleon's
was one hundred years before by the force of genius, but
hampered, as was his, by the power of Britain on the seas; a
productive force of industry increasing out of all proportion to
home requirements, competing with British commerce in every
corner of the world and threatened by a possible but finally
postponed combination of British countries in a system of
inter-Empire tariffs; a population of 64,000,000, increasing at
the rate of one million a year and having no suitable opening for
emigration or settlement within its own territories; and we have
conditions which explained and emphasized German naval
construction. Both German ambition and German naval construction
were therefore easily comprehensible.

Nor was the ambition for sea-power concealed. The first large
naval program was passed by the Reichstag in 1898 and fixed the
naval estimate up to 1903, when the total expenditure was to be
$45,000,000 - in 1906 the naval expenditure was over $60,000,000.
The second Naval Bill was passed in 1900 during the Boer War, and
the preamble to this Act stated that its object was to give
Germany "a fleet of such strength that even for the mightiest
Naval Power, a war with her would involve such risks as to
endanger its own supremacy." Other Acts were passed in 1906 and
1908, and for the years 1908 to 1917 arrangements were made for a
total expenditure of $1,035,000,000 - this including a portion of
the "accelerated program" and the Special Dreadnought
construction which caused the memorable debate in the British
Commons in 1909.

The Law of 1912 - passing the Reichstag on May 21st of that year
- provided for an addition to the program of three battleships,
three large cruisers and three small ones. During the years 1898
-1904 Grear Britain launched 26 battleships to Germany's 14, with
27 armored cruisers, 17 protected cruisers and 55 destroyers to
Germany's 5, 16 and 35 respectively, or a total of 125 to 70. In
1905-11 Great Britain launched 20 battleships to Germany's 15,
with 13 armored cruisers, 10 protected cruisers and 80 destroyers
to Germany's 6, 16 and 70 respectively, or a total of 123 to 107.
Excluding destroyers Great Britain launched 70 sea-going warships
in the first period to Germany's 25 and in the second period 43
to 37.

PREPARATION FOR WAR

Meanwhile German preparations for war went on apace in every
direction. Following up the war teachings of Nietzsche and
Treitschke and others, General Von Bernhardi issued book after
book defining in clear language the alleged national beneficence,
biological desirability and inevitability of war, which, when it
came, would be "fought to conquer for Germany the rank of a
world-power;" the universities and schools and press teemed with
militarist ideals and practices; the army charges rose to
$250,000,000 and the trained soldiers available at the beginning
of 1910 were alleged to have 6,000 field-guns; Colonel Gaedke,
the German naval expert, stated on February 24th of that year
that the German government was building a fleet of 58 battleships
and that "the time is gradually approaching when the German fleet
will be superior to all the fleets of the world, with the single
exception of the English fleet," and that in the past twelve
years Germany had spent on new ships alone 63,200,000 pounds, or
$316,000,000, while between then and 1914 she would spend
57,500,000 pounds more, or $287,500,000.

The annual report of the German Navy League in 1910 showed a
total of 1,031,339 members as against an estimated membership in
Britain's League of 20,000. Professor T. Schieman of the
University of Berlin, in the New York MCCLURE'S MAGAZINE for May
of that year, clearly stated that Germany would not submit in
future to British naval supremacy or to any limitation of
armaments. During this period, also, Heligoland, the island
handed over by Britain in 1890 in exchange for certain East
African rights, became the key and center of the whole German
coast defense system against England. Cuxhaven, Borkum, Emden,
Wilhelmshaven - with twice as many Dreadnought docks as
Portsmouth - Wangeroog, Bremerhaven, Geestemunde, etc., were
magnificently fortified and guarded. Whether dictated by
diplomatic considerations and affected latterly by the
British-French alliance or influenced by Colonial and naval and
commercial ambitions, there could be no doubt as to the danger of
the situation at the beginning of 1914. In a book entitled
"England and Germany," published during 1912, Mr. A. J. Balfour,
the British conservative leader, replied to various German
contributors and gave the British view of the situation:

It must be remembered in the first place that we are a commercial
nation, and war, whatever its issue, is ruinous to commerce and
to the credit on which commerce depends. It must be remembered in
the second place that we are a political nation, and unprovoked
war (by us) would shatter in a day the most powerful Government
and the most united party. It must be remembered in the third
place that we are an insular nation, wholly dependent upon
sea-borne supplies, possessing no considerable army, either for
home defense or foreign service, and compelled therefore to play
for very unequal stakes should Germany be our opponent in the
hazardous game of war. It is this last consideration which I
should earnestly ask enlightened Germans to weigh well if they
would understand the British point of view. It can be made clear
in a very few sentences. There are two ways in which a hostile
country can be crushed. It can be conquered or it can be starved.
If Germany were supreme in our home waters she could apply both
methods to Britain. Were Britain ten times Mistress in the North
Sea she could apply neither method to Germany. Without a superior
fleet Britain would no longer count as a Power. Without any fleet
at all Germany would remain the greatest power in Europe.

The Balkan wars proved and strengthened the power of Germany in
diplomacy and in the Eastern Question, while it showed that a
deadly struggle between nations might spring to an issue in a few
days and a million armed men leap into war at a word. The
enormous German special taxation of $250,000,000 authorized in
the first part of 1913 for an additional military establishment
of 4,000 officers, 15,000 non-commissioned officers and 117,000
men indicated the basic strength of the people's military
feeling, and ensured the still greater predominance of its army.

EFFECT ON THE EMPIRE

When war broke out on August 1, 1914, between the five greater
Powers of Europe - Great Britain, Russia and France, on the one
side and Germany and Austria on the other - the issue was at once
brought home to about 450 millions of people in America, Asia and
Africa who were connected with these nations by ties of
allegiance or government, by racial association, or historic
conquest. Of these peoples and lands by far the greater
proportion were in the British Empire and included India, Burmah,
South Africa, Australia, Canada and a multitude of smaller states
and countries. Not the least remarkable of the events which
ensued in the succeeding early weeks of the great War was the
extraordinary way in which this vast and complex Empire found
itself as a unit in fighting force, a unit in sentiment, a unit
in co-operative action. Irish sedition, whether "loyal or
disloyal," Protestant or Catholic, largely vanished like the
shadow of an evil dream; Indian talk of civil war and trouble
disappeared; South African threats of rebellion took form in a
feeble effort which melted away under the pressure of a Boer
statesman and leader - General Botha; the idea that Colonial
Dominions were seeking separation and would now find it proved as
evanescent as a light mist before the sun. The following table
indicates the nature of the resources of opposing nations and the
character of their Colonial sources of support:

Wealth/Population/Total Army/Navy/Population of Colonies
---------------------------------------------------------
Great Britain
$80,000,000,000/45,000,000/800,000/681/368,000,000
----------------------------------------------------
France
65,000,000,000/39,000,000/2,100,000/382/41,000,000
----------------------------------------------------
Russia
40,000,000,000/171,000,000/8,000,000/249/5,000,000
----------------------------------------------------
Germany
60,000,000,000/65,000,000/5,000,000/354/12,000,000
----------------------------------------------------
Austria
25,000,000,000/49,000,000/2,200,000/155/15,000,000
----------------------------------------------------

It was a curious characteristic of the press comments and
magazine articles and book studies of the War during these months
that while varied fighting was going on in the various Colonies
of these Powers and in the case of Great Britain, notably,
countries like Canada, Australia, New Zealand and India were
pouring out men and gifts to aid the Empire, statistical
calculations usually rated Great Britain as not an Empire but
simply a nation with the wealth and population of its two little
islands in the North Sea.

Properly the $80,000,000,000 of estimated British wealth should
have e included the thousands of millions of treasure in India
and Egypt, the gold mines and diamond resources of South Africa,
the wheat fields and mines of Canada, the sheep farms and gold of
Australia and many other sources; the estimate of population
should have included the countless millions from which Britain
could draw and did draw in the day of emergency. In this vast
Empire British capital had been invested to an enormous amount -
the estimated total in 1914 being $2,570,0000,000 for Canada and
Newfoundland, $1,893,000,000 in India and Ceylon,$1,850,000,000
in
south Africa, $1,660,000,000 in Australia, or a total in all
British countries of $8,900,000,000. When the War broke out these
Dominions endeavored to help the Mother Country in every possible
way and the following table shows what was done in Canada alone
during the first few months of the conflict:

THE DOMINION

Expeditionary force of over 32,000 men, fully equipped; 50,000
others under training for the front.
Over 200 field and machine guns.
Two submarines, for general service ($1,050,000); H.M.C.S. Niobe
and Rainbow for general service.
1,000,000 bags of flour.
$100,000 for "Hospice Canadien" in France.
$50,000 for the relief of Belgian sufferers.

THE PROVINCES

ALBERTA: 500,000 bushels of oats; 5,000 bags of flour for
Belgians. Civil service, 5 per cent of salaries up to $1500 per
annum, and 10 per cent in excess of that amount to Canadian
Patriotic Fund.

BRITISH COLUMBIA: 25,000 cases of canned salmon; $5,000 to
Belgian Relief Fund.

MANITOBA: 10,000 men; 50,000 bags of flour; $5,000 to Belgian
Relief Fund.

NEW BRUNSWICK: 1,000 men; 100,000 bushels of potatoes, 15,000
barrels of potatoes for Belgium.

NOVA SCOTIA: $100,000 to the Prince of Wales Fund; apples for the
troops; food and clothing for Belgium.

ONTARIO: $500,000; 250,000 bags of flour; 100,000 lbs of
evaporated apples for the Navy; $15,000 to the Belgian Relief
Fund.

PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND: 100,000 bushels of oats; cheese and hay.

QUEBEC: 4,000,000 lbs of cheese; $25,000 to Belgian Relief Fund.

SASKATCHEWAN: 1,500 horses ($250,000); $5,000 to Belgian Relief
Fund

THE YUKON: $6,000 to the Canadian Patriotic fund

THE CITIES

OTTAWA: $300,000 (for machine gun sections - 4 guns on armored
motors and a detachment of 30 men); $50,000 to the Canadian
Patriotic Fund.

QUEBEC: $20,000 Canadian Patriotic fund; insuring lives of Quebec
volunteers.

MONTREAL: $150,000 (Canadian Patriotic Fund); battery of
quick-firing guns; $10,000 to Belgian Relief fund.

TORONTO: $50,000 (Canadian Patriotic Fund); insuring lives of all
Toronto volunteers; 100 horses for training purposes; carload for
Belgians of canned provisions.

WINNIPEG: $5,000 monthly to Patriotic Fund

REGINA: $1,000 for comfort of the city's soldiers; $62,500 To
Belgian Relief Fund.

CALGARY:   1,000 MEN (Legion of Frontiersmen).

HAMILTON: $20,000 Patriotic Fund; $5,000 for local relief.

BERLIN: $10,000 Patriotic Fund.

ST. JOHNS, N.B. $10,000 Patriotic Fund; $2,000 Belgian Fund

THE WOMEN OF CANADA:
Building, equipping and maintenance of "Canadian Women's
Hospital" of 100 beds to supplement Naval Hospital at Haslar
($182,857); $100,000 To War Office (40 motor ambulance cars
purchased). Women of Nova Scotia $15,170 ($7,000 to Hospital,
$5,000 Canadian Patriotic fund and rest to Red Cross).

THE BANKS AND THE PATRIOTIC FUNDS

BANK OF MONTREAL              $110,000

CANADIAN BANK OF COMMERCE      50,000
ROYAL BANK OF CANADA           50,000
MERCHANTS BANK                 30,000
DOMINION BANK                  25,000
UNION BANK OF CANADA           25,000
BANK OF TORONTO                25,000
BANK OF OTTAWA                 25,000
BANK OF NOVA SCOTIA            25,000
BANK OF HAMILTON               25,000
BANK OF BRITISH NORTH AMERICA  25,000

Little Newfoundland sent a contingent of 510; placed a Naval
Reserve force of 1,000 men in training and prepared a second
contingent of 500 men, while contributing $120,000 to a local
Patriotic Fund. Australia handed over its fleet of battleships
and cruisers to the Admiralty and one of these, The Sydney,
captured the Emden of German fame, while the New Zealand, a
dreadnought from the Island Dominion of that name, held a place
in the North Sea fighting line. Australia also sent 20,000 men
who saw service before the end of the year in Egypt, provided
reserves and prepared two more contingents, while sending
donations of all kinds of food supplies for the poor in Britain
or for the Belgian refugees. From India at once went a portion of
the British Army which was replaced by native troops and then a
large contingent of the latter, which took part in the protection
of Egypt and in the fighting in France.

The great Princes of India - notably the Maharajahs of Nepaul,
Gwalior, Patiala, Baratppur, Sikkim and Dholpur - placed the
entire military resources of tens of millions of people at the
disposal of the King-Emperor. The Maharajah of Rewa cabled this
splendid message: "What orders from His Majesty for me and my
troops?" The Nizam of Hyderabad and the Maharajah of Bikanir
offered not only their troops, but the entire resources of their
great states and their own personal services at the front. Bengal
gave a million bags of jute for the army and the Maharajah of
Mysore proffered 3,500 men and 50 lakhs of rupees (about
$350,000). Practically all the 700 native rulers of states in
India offered personal services, men and money. For active
personal service the Viceroy selected the Chiefs of Jodhpur,
Bikanir, Kishangarh, Rutlam, Sachin, Patiala, Sir Pertab Singh,
Regent of Jodhpur, and others. Contingents of cavalry and
infantry, supplies and transports were forwarded besides a camel
corps from Bikanir, horses from many states, machine guns,
hospital-bed contributions, motor cars and large gifts to the
Patriotic and Belgian Relief Funds. New Zealand sent a first
contingent of 8,000 troops and relief forces, prepared to send
more and promised, like Canada and Australia, to continue
training and sending troops as long as they should be required.
On the other hand Great Britain undertook to finance the actual
military operations of these countries by lending the four
Dominions $210,000,000 and undertaking to provide more when
needed.

It was with this unity, and in this spirit, that the British
Empire entered the great War for the redemption of its pledges to
Belgium and adherence to its French obligations - Russia only
coming indirectly into the first stage of the question and Japan,
through the force of its Treaty, undertaking to guard British
interests in the East.


Chapter V. THE WORLD'S GREATEST WAR
Wars as Mileposts - A Continent in Arms - How Canada Prepared for
War - The British Sentiment - Lord Kitchener's Career - A
Forceful Character

The history of the leading events in the nations of Europe during
a hundred years of the past, so far as they related to the
decline of autocratic power in the monarchs and the development
of popular rights and liberty, has been given in the preceding
chapters, where it is brought down to the close of the Balkan War
and the opening of the great war that succeeded in 1914. As
regards this war, its story cannot be told or even summarized in
a chapter, but some indication of its general character may be
given.

WARS AS MILEPOSTS

Wars serve as convenient mileposts in the history of mankind.
They deal with the great struggles which break up the monotony of
peace and bring the nations into volcanic relations. They have
been many and their causes and effects various; strifes for spoil
or dominion; savage invasions of civilized lands; overflow of
vast areas by conquering tribes or nations. But among all the
world has so far known there has been none so stupendous in
character, so portentous in purpose, so vast in fighting
multitudes, so terrible in bloodshed, as the one with which we
are here concerned, the lurid meeting of the nations on the
blood-stained fields of battle which broke upon the quiet of the
world with startling suddenness in the summer of 1914. Launched
on the borders of little Servia, it soon had the continent for
its field of action, and all but one of the greater nations of
Europe for its participants. It may therefore fitly be designated
the Great War. Great it was, alike in the number and strength of
the Powers involved, in the enormous array of armed men engaged,
in the destructive power of the weapons employed, in the loss of
life and waste of wealth that attended its earthquaking
development.

In reading the history of the past we find it thickly strewn with
stories of fierce battles, a day, two days, rarely much longer in
extent, protracted intervals of marching and countermarching
succeeding before the armies again locked horns. Such was the
case in the American Civil War, in which the three days' battle
at Gettysburg was the greatest in length, if the six days'
fighting before Richmond be taken to constitute a succession of
battles.

In the Russo-Japanese war much longer struggles took place. The
armies at Liaoyung fought for eight days and those before Mukden
for twenty days. But a more obstinate struggle still was that of
September and October, 1914, when two armies, stretched out over
a line two hundred miles or more in length, fought with ceaseless
fury, by day and night alike, for more than a month. On the
moving picture screen of time this vast conflict stands out
without parallel in the world's annals, the most unyielding,
incessant battling ever known.

A CONTINENT IN ARMS

In the giant warfare here described we behold a continent, well
nigh a world, in arms. Along the rivers north of Paris three
powerful nations, Germany, France and Britain, wrestled like
mighty behemoths for supremacy. Far eastward, on the borders of
Russia, Austria and Germany, two other great Powers, Russia and
Austria, with German armies to aid the latter, strove with equal
fury for victory.

Thus raged the Great War. How many took part it is difficult to
estimate. Among the war tales of the past the most stupendous
army on record is that of Xerxes, said by Herodotus to number
2,317,600 men, who marched from Asia to face defeat in the
diminutive land of Greece. How large this fabulously great army
really was we shall never know, but even at the figures given it
was dwarfed by the hosts in arms in the Great European War, in
which between four and five million men fought with fierceness
unsurpassed.

The field of action of this mighty contest was not confined to
Europe. On the far-off border of Asia another Power, the warlike
empire of Japan, sent forth its soldiers to drive the Germans
from China. In Africa and on the South Pacific the colonists of
Britain set other forces in motion to invade the German colonial
regions. From British India sailed a strong array of dark-skinned
warriors to take part in the war in France. From Algeria and
Senegal came hordes of sable recruits for the French army, and
from the cities and provinces of the Dominion of Canada came
still another army of ardent patriots eager to aid the forces of
their fatherland. We may well speak of the contest as not one of
a continent but of the entire world.

HOW CANADA PREPARED FOR WAR

The story of the patriotic ardor of the Canadians is of interest,
as given by a correspondent of the London GRAPHIC, who passed
through the Dominion after the opening of the war.

"The news of the great war came like a bolt from the blue. The
effect was startling. The ordinary flow of Canadian life was
suddenly arrested. The customary routine seemed to stop dead
still. The whole of Canadian thought and much of the people's
energy were switched on to the great staggering fact that Europe
was at war, and the old country fighting for its life. A most
wonderful and touching patriotism welled up in the heart of the
Canadians. The air became electric with excitement and
enthusiasm. The prairie was indeed on fire. Passing through
English towns on my journey to London the calm and peaceful
demeanor of the people and the even flow of life seemed in
strange contrast with the land I had just left, where the
population was throbbing with loyal passion, and the war
dominated the existence of the inhabitants, high and low, from
Victoria to Halifax. One Canadian scene that remains impressed
upon my mind was the sea of upturned faces in front of the
offices of the Calgary News Telegram - every ear straining to the
point where the war news was announced at intervals through a
megaphone.

"'We stand shoulder to shoulder.' Sir Robert Borden, the Premier,
had said, 'with Britain and the other British Dominions in this
quarrel, and that duty we shall not fail to fulfil as the honor
of Canada demands.' It is being fulfilled in a score of different
ways, but mainly in the practical spirit that is characteristic
of the country. The Dominion is the Empire's granary, and through
the granary doors, as the Motherland knows, are passing huge
gifts of food to the British population. At the same time the
stoppage of the export of all foodstuffs to other countries is
proposed.

"Soon the Dominion began to mobilize. Regiments seemed to spring
up, as if by magic, from the ground - not hordes of untrained
men, but stalwart horsemen, accustomed to the rifle and inured to
a hard outdoor life. The Germans will knock against another 'bit
of hard stuff' when they meet the Canadian contingents. One of
the regiments carries the name of the Princess Patricia, who, by
the way, holds quite a unique position in the hearts of the
people. The popular Princess was, shortly after I left, to have
presented her regiment with their colors - worked by her own
hands.

"Londoners were happy in the knowledge that more such men could
be sent, if necessary, up to 200,000 in number - such was the
earnestness of the people. One met this practical earnestness in
a dozen different directions - in such facts, for instance, as
the conversion of the great Winnipeg Industrial Hall into a
military training center - and not the least significant feature
in the situation is the manner in which the prevalent enthusiasm
had spread to the American inhabitants of the country. The trade
intimacy between the United States and the Dominion was, indeed,
constantly growing, and the many great American manufacturing
concerns which had planted themselves in Canada had attained
prosperity. It was pleasant and reassuring to think that this had
not weakened the ties of attachment to the old country. In the
days to succeed the war the Dominion can look back with pride
upon the part she bore in sustaining the arms of Mother England,
and can take her place with happy confidence and added strength
as the eldest daughter in the great family of British peoples."

The enthusiasm thus indicated among the Canadians, which had its
outcome in the despatch of 323,000 sons of the dominion in late
September to the seat of war, to be quickly followed by a second
contingent, was paralleled in India, which sent to France 70,000
of its dusky sons to join the struggling hosts. As for the
remaining countries of the British empire, Australia, South
Africa, East Africa, etc., a similar sentiment of loyalty
prevailed, manifested there by the sending of contingents or in
expeditions against the German colonies in the South Sea and in
Africa. The whole empire was ready to support the mother country.

Certainly the Kaiser of Germany, William the War Lord, had set
loose in the air a nest of hornets to sting his well-trained
warriors. By his side stood only Austria, a composite empire
which soon found all its strength too little to hold back the
mighty Russian tide that swept across its borders. Thus this one
stalwart nation, with its weak auxiliary, was forced to face now
east, now west, against a continent in arms. It is difficult to
imagine that the Kaiser could have hoped to succeed, despite the
training of his people and the strength of his artillery. "God
fights with the heaviest battalions," said one who knew, and the
weight of battalions, though at first on William's side, could
not remain so.

THE BRITISH SENTIMENT

While the British people, with their lack of a system of
militarism, were not in condition to send large bodies of troops
at once to the aid of the mobilized French, they were soon ready
to despatch a useful contingent of trained men. Probably the
German emperor counted upon the disturbance in Ireland between
the Ulsterites and the people of the Catholic provinces to tie
the hands of the government, but these people at once suspended
their hostile sentiments in favor of the larger needs of their
country. In England itself the militant suffragettes showed equal
patriotism, at once agreeing to desist from all acts of violence
and offering to aid their country to the extent of their powers.

LORD KITCHENER'S CAREER

The British government appointed Lord Kitchener, the hero of many
successful expeditions, Secretary of State for War, putting the
whole management of military affairs into his competent hands.
His fitness for this was thoroughly attested by his long and
brilliant service, and as the presence of Napoleon was said to be
equal to an army, so was that of this able military leader.

For those who are not familiar with Kitchener's career a brief
statement concerning it may be useful. Born in 1850, Horatio
Herbert Kitchener entered the army in 1871, was in civil life
1874-82, then returned to army duty. He took part in the Nile
expedition of 1884 for the rescue of General Gordon and commanded
a brigade in the Suakim campaign of 1888. Governor of Suakim
1886-88, adjutant-general of the Egyptian army 1888-92, he was
appointed to the command of this army, with the Egyptian rank of
Sirdar, in 1890.

His service in Egypt was during the period of the Mahdi outbreak,
which began in 1883, defeated all the armies sent to quell it,
and for years held the Sudan region of Egypt. In 1896 Kitchener
set out for its suppression, recovering Dongola, and organizing
an expedition against the Khalifa, the successor of the Mahdi. He
defeated the Dervish army of the Khalifa in April, 1898, and on
September 2d of that year utterly crushed the Dervish hosts at
Omdurman, regaining the Sudan for Egypt and Britain.

This exploit brought him the thanks of parliament and the title
of baron, with a grant of 30,000 pounds and a sword of honor. In
1899 he went with Lord Roberts to South Africa as chief of staff,
and on Lord Roberts' return in 1900 he succeeded him as
commander-in-chief and brought the Boer War to a successful
conclusion. He was now made full general, with the rank of
viscount, and subsequently served as commander-in-chief in India.

A FORCEFUL CHARACTER

In an illuminating article in COLLIER'S WEEKLY, the well-known
Irish journalist, T. P. O'Connor, thus brought out the character
of the hero of Khartoum:

"I attribute something of the Lord Kitchener we know to the fact
that, though English by blood, he spent the first years of his
life in wandering over the hills and looking down on the
sea-tossed shores of County Kerry. That tact which enabled him to
settle the issue with Marchand, the French explorer, at Fashoda,
suggests some of the lessons in the soft answer which Ireland can
teach. You remember how, when it was possible that a collision
between him and Marchand might mean a war between England and
France, Lord Kitchener sent some fresh vegetables and champagne
to the daring French explorer, who had gone through the hunger,
thirst, and hardship of the desert for months. Marchand had to go
from Fashoda all the same, but he went with no personal
grievance.

"If I look for the roots of Lord Kitchener's greatness, I trace
them to intense ambition to succeed, to make the most of his
opportunities - above all, to the incessant desire to work and
fill every hour of his days with something done. He is sent as a
youngster to Palestine, through peril to life, through great
privation, through heart-breaking drudgery, he pursues his work
until he has completed a map of all western Palestine to the
amazement and delight of his employers. And he values this
experience so largely because he learns Arabic, and, above all,
he learns the Arabic character. One of the chroniclers of his
career makes the apt observation that, while the baton of the
marshal is in every French soldier's knapsack, Kitchener found
his coronet in the Arab grammar. But how many soldiers or men of
any class would have devoted the leisure hours of a fiercely
active task like Kitchener's in Palestine to the study of one of
the most difficult of languages?

"Hard work, patience, and the utilization of every second of
time, the eagerness always to learn - these are the chief secrets
of Lord Kitchener's enormous success in life. But the man who
works himself is ineffective in great things unless he has the
gift to choose the men who can work for him and with him. This
choice of subordinates is one or Lord Kitchener's greatest
powers. He nearly always has had the right man in the right
place. And his men return his confidence because he gives them
absolute confidence. He never thinks of asking a subordinate
whether he has done the job he has given him; he takes that for
granted, knowing his man; and he never worries his subordinates.

"This is one of the reasons why, though he works so terrifically,
he never is tired, never worried. He sits down at his desk at the
War Office for about ten hours a day; but he sits there calmly,
isn't ringing at bells and shouting down pipes; he does it all so
quietly that it seems mere pastime; and the effect of this
perfect tranquillity produces an extraordinary result on those
who work with him. They also do their work easily, tranquilly,
and without feeling it.

"A great soldier certainly; but perhaps a greater organizer than
anything else. This is his supreme quality, and for that quality
there is necessary, above all things, a clear, penetrating brain.
He doesn't form any visions - as Napoleon used to complain of
some of his marshals. At school he was celebrated for his
knowledge of mathematics, and especially for his phenomenal
rapidity in dealing with figures, and it was not accident that so
truly a scientific mind found its natural place in the engineers.
A mathematician, an engineer, a man of science, a great
accountant - these things he has been in all his enterprises. It
was these qualities that enabled him to make that astounding
railway which brought Cairo almost into touch with the Khalifa,
who, with his predecessor, the Mahdi, and with his tragically
potent ally, the hungry and all-devouring desert, had beaten back
so many other attempts to reach and to beat him.

"This man, who has fought such tremendous and historic battles
and confronted great odds, is yet a man who prefers a deal to a
struggle; and, though he can be so stern, has yet a diplomatic
tact that gets him and his country out of difficult hours. The
nature, doubtless, is complex, and stern determination and
tenacity are part of it; but there is also the other side, which
is much forgotten - especially by that class of writers who have
to describe human character as rigidly symmetrical and
unnaturally harmonious.

"That cold and penetrating eye of his makes it impossible to
imagine anybody taking any liberties with Lord Kitchener; yet one
of his greatest qualities, at once useful and charming, is his
accessibility. Anybody who has anything to say to him can
approach him; anybody who has anything to teach him will find a
ready and grateful learner. This is one of the secrets of his
extraordinary success and universal popularity in Egypt. Lord
Cromer was a great Egyptian ruler, and his services are
imperishable and gigantic; but Lord Cromer was the stern,
solitary, and inaccessible bureaucrat who worked innumerable
hours every day at his desk, never learned the Arabic language,
and possibly never quite grasped the Arab nature. Lord Kitchener
is the cadi under the tree. The mayor or the citizens of the
little Arab village can come to him, and the old soldier, and
even the fellah, alone; and they will find Lord Kitchener ready
to listen and to talk to them in their own tongue, to enter with
gusto into the pettiest details of their daily and squalid lives,
and ready also to apply the remedy to such grievances as commend
themselves to his judgment.

"As an illustration of his accessibility, let me repeat a
delicious story which delighted all Egypt. An old peasant came
out of the depths of the land all the way to Cairo to see the
great Kitchener, with the complaint that his white mule had been
stolen. The whole official machinery was interrupted for a while,
and the old fellah went back with his white mule. You can fancy
how that story was repeated in every fellah cabin in the land,
and how the devotion to Kitchener and trust in his justice and in
his sympathy went trumpet-tongued among this race, downtrodden
and neglected almost from the beginning of time."

Such is the man who, when chosen to head the British War
Department, had his bed sent to the office, that he might be on
duty day and night if needed; who insisted that no raw recruits
should be sent to the front, but put them through a rigid system
of drill and physical exercise to toughen their muscles and fit
them for the work of a soldier; who said that there would be
abundant time for fighting, as in his judgment there was a year
or more of war in prospect.


Chapter VI. THE EARTHQUAKE OF NAPOLEONISM

Its Effect on National conditions Finally Led to the War of 1914

Conditions in France and Germany - The Campaign in Italy - The
Victory at Marengo - Moreau at Hohenlinden - The Consul made
Emperor - The Code Napoleon - Campaign of 1805 - Battle of
Austerlitz - The Conquest of Prussia - The Invasion of Poland -
Eylau and Friedland - Campaign of 1809 - Victory at Wagram - The
Campaign in Spain - The Invasion of Russia - A Fatal Retreat -
Dresden and Leipzig - The Hundred Days - The Congress of Vienna -
The Holy Alliance

When, after a weary climb, we find ourselves on the summit of a
lofty mountain, and look back from that commanding altitude over
the ground we have traversed, what is it that we behold? The
minor details of the scenery, many of which seemed large and
important to us as we passed, are now lost to view, and we see
only the great and imposing features of the landscape, the high
elevations, the town-studded valleys, the deep and winding
streams, the broad forests. It is the same when, from the summit
of an age, we gaze backward over the plain of time. The myriad of
petty happenings are lost to sight, and we see only the striking
events, the critical epochs, the mighty crises through which the
world has passed. These are the things that make true history,
not the daily doings in the king's palace or the peasant's hut.
What we should seek to observe and store up in our memories are
the turning points in human events, the great thoughts which have
ripened into noble deeds, the hands of might which have pushed
the world forward in its career; not the trifling occurrences
which signify nothing, the passing actions which have borne no
fruit in human affairs. It is with such turning points, such
critical periods in modern history, that we are here dealing; not
to picture the passing bubbles on the stream of time, but to
point out the great ships which have sailed up that stream laden
with a noble freight. This is history in its deepest and best
aspect, and we have set our camera to photograph only the men who
have made and the events which constitute history in the phase
here outlined.

The first fifteen years of the nineteenth century in Europe yield
us the history of a man rather than of a continent. France was
the center of Europe; Napoleon, the Corsican, was the center of
France. All the affairs of all the nations seemed to gather
around this genius of war. He was respected, feared, hated; he
had risen with the suddenness of a thunder-cloud on a clear
horizon, and flashed the lightnings of victory in the dazzled
eyes of the nations. All the events of the period were
concentrated into one great event, and the name of that event was
Napoleon. He seemed incarnate war, organized destruction; sword
in hand, he dominated the nations, and victory sat on his banners
with folded wings. He was, in a full sense, the man of destiny,
and Europe was his prey.

Never has there been a more wonderful career. The earlier great
conquerors began life at the top; Napoleon began his at the
bottom. Alexander was a king; Caesar was an aristocrat of the
Roman republic; Napoleon rose from the people, and was not even a
native of the land which became the scene of his exploits. Pure
force of military genius lifted him from the lowest to the
highest place among mankind, and for long and terrible years
Europe shuddered at his name and trembled beneath the tread of
his marching legions. As for France, he brought it glory and left
it ruin and dismay.

The career of Napoleon Bonaparte began in a very modest way. Born
in Corsica and trained in a military school in France, his native
ability as a man of action was first made evident in 1794, when,
under the orders of the National Convention, he quelled the mob
of Paris with loaded cannon and put a final end to the Reign of
Terror that had long prevailed.

Placed at the head of the French army in Italy, Napoleon quickly
astonished the world by a series of the most brilliant victories,
defeating the Austrians and the Sardinians wherever he met them,
seizing Venice, the city of the lagoon, and forcing almost all
Italy to submit to his arms. A republic was established here and
a new one in Switzerland, while Belgium and the left bank of the
Rhine were held by France.

His wars here at an end, Napoleon's ambition led him to Egypt,
inspired by great designs which he failed to realize. In his
absence anarchy arose in France. The five Directors, then at the
head of the government, had lost all authority, and Napoleon, who
had unexpectedly returned, did not hesitate to overthrow them and
the Assembly which supported them. A new government, with three
Consuls at its head, was formed, Napoleon, as First Consul,
holding almost royal power. Thus France stood in 1800, at the end
of the eighteenth century.

CONDITIONS IN FRANCE AND GERMANY

In the remainder of Europe there was nothing to compare with the
momentous convulsion which had taken place in France. England had
gone through its two revolutions more than a century before, and
its people were the freest of any in Europe. Recently it had lost
its colonies in America, but it still held in that continent the
broad domain of Canada, and was building for itself a new empire
in India, while founding colonies in twenty other lands. In
commerce and manufactures it entered the nineteenth century as
the greatest nation on the earth. The hammer and the loom
resounded from end to end of the island, mighty centers of
industry arose where cattle had grazed a century before, coal and
iron were being torn in great quantities from the depths of the
earth, and there seemed everywhere an endless bustle and whirr.
The ships of England haunted all seas and visited the most remote
ports, laden with the products of her workshops and bringing back
raw material for her factories and looms. Wealth accumulated,
London became the money market of the world, the riches and
prosperity of the island kingdom were growing to be a parable
among the nations of the earth.

On the continent of Europe, Prussia, destined in time to become
great, had recently emerged from its medieval feebleness, mainly
under the powerful hand of Frederick the Great, whose reign
extended until 1786, and whose ambition, daring, and military
genius made him a fitting predecessor of Napoleon the Great, who
so soon succeeded him in the annals of war. Unscrupulous in his
aims, this warrior king had torn Silesia from Austria, added to
his kingdom a portion of unfortunate Poland, annexed the
principality of East Friesland, and lifted Prussia into a leading
position among the European states.

Germany, now - with the exception of Austria - a compact empire,
was then a series of disconnected states, variously known as
kingdoms, principalities, margravates, electorates, and by other
titles, the whole forming the so-called Holy Empire, though it
was "neither holy nor an empire." It had drifted down in this
fashion from the Middle Ages, and the work of consolidation had
but just begun, in the conquests of Frederick the Great. A host
of petty potentates ruled the land, whose states, aside from
Prussia and Austria, were too weak to have a voice in the
councils of Europe. Joseph II, the titular emperor of Germany,
made an earnest and vigorous effort to combine its elements into
a powerful unit; but he signally failed, and died in 1790, a
disappointed and embittered man.

Austria, then far the most powerful of the German states, was
from 1740 to 1780 under the reign of a woman, Maria Theresa, who
struggled in vain against her ambitious neighbor, Frederick the
Great, his kingdom being extended ruthlessly at the expense of
her imperial dominions. Austria remained a great country,
however, including Bohemia and Hungary among its domains. It was
lord of Lombardy and Venice in Italy, but was destined to play an
unfortunate part in the coming Napoleonic wars.

We have briefly epitomized Napoleon's early career, his doings in
the Revolution, in Italy, and in Egypt, unto the time that
France's worship of his military genius raised him to the rank of
First Consul, and gave him in effect the power of a king. No one
dared question his word, the army was at his beck and call, the
nation lay prostrate at his feet - not in fear but in admiration.
Such was the state of affairs in France in the closing year of
the eighteenth century. The Revolution was at an end, the
Republic existed only as a name; Napoleon was the autocrat of
France and the terror of Europe. From this point we resume the
story of his career.

The First Consul began his reign with two enemies in the field,
England and Austria. Prussia was neutral, and he had won the
friendship of Paul, the emperor of Russia, by a shrewd move.
While the other nations refused to exchange the Russian prisoners
they held, Napoleon sent home 6,000 of these captives, newly clad
and armed, under their own leaders, and without demanding ransom.
This was enough to win to his side the weak-minded Paul, whose
delight in soldiers he well knew.

Napoleon now had but two enemies in arms to deal with. He wrote
letters to the king of England and the emperor of Austria,
offering peace. The answers were cold and insulting, asking
France to take back her Bourbon kings and return to her old
boundaries. Nothing remained but war. Napoleon prepared it with
his usual rapidity, secrecy, and keenness of judgment.

THE CAMPAIGN IN ITALY

There were two French armies in the field in the spring of 1800,
Moreau commanding in Germany, Massena in Italy. Switzerland,
which was occupied by the French, divided the armies of the
enemy, and Napoleon determined to take advantage of the
separation of their forces, and strike an overwhelming blow. He
sent word to Moreau and Massena to keep the enemy in check at any
cost, and secretly gathered a third army, whose corps were
dispersed here and there, while the Powers of Europe were aware
only of the army of reserve at Dijon, made up of conscripts and
invalids. All was ready for the great movement which Napoleon had
in view.

Twenty centuries before, Hannibal had led his army across the
great mountain barrier of the Alps, and poured down like an
avalanche upon the fertile plains of Italy. The Corsican
determined to repeat this brilliant achievement and emulate
Hannibal's career. Several passes across the mountains seemed
favorable to his purpose, especially those of the St. Bernard,
the Simplon and Mount Cenis. Of these the first was the most
difficult; but it was much the shorter, and Napoleon determined
to lead the main body of his army over this ice-covered mountain
pass, despite its dangers and difficulties. The enterprise was
one to deter any man less bold than Hannibal or Napoleon, but it
was welcome to the hardihood and daring of these men, who
rejoiced in the seemingly impossible and spurned faltering at
hardships and perils.

The task of the Corsican was greater than that of the
Carthaginian. He had cannon to transport, while Hannibal's men
carried only swords and spears. But the genius of Napoleon was
equal to the task. The cannon were taken from their carriages and
placed in the hollowed-out trunks of trees, which could be
dragged with ropes over the ice and snow. Mules were used to draw
the gun-carriages and the wagon-loads of food and munitions of
war. Stores of provisions had been placed at suitable points
along the road.

The sudden appearance of the French in Italy was an utter
surprise to the Austrians. They descended like a torrent into the
valley, seized Ivry, and five days after reaching Italy met and
repulsed an Austrian force. The divisions which had crossed by
other passes one by one joined Napoleon. On June 9th Marshal
Lannes met and defeated the Austrians at Montebello, after a hot
engagement. "I heard the bones crackle like a hailstorm on the
roofs," he said. On the 14th, the two armies met on the plain of
Marengo, and one of the most famous of Napoleon's battles began.

THE VICTORY AR MARENGO

Napoleon was not ready for the coming battle, and was taken by
surprise. He had been obliged to break up his army in order to
guard all the passages open to the enemy. Suddenly attacked and
taken by surprise, his army was defeated and driven back in
retreat in the first stage of the battle. But Napoleon was not
the man to accept defeat. Hurrying up Desaix, one of his most
trusted generals, with his corps, he flung these fresh troops
upon the enemy, following up the assault with the dragoons of
Kellermann. The result was a disastrous rout of the Austrians,
who were driven from the field, leaving thousands of dead, and
other thousands of prisoners in the hands of the enemy.

A few days afterwards on the 19th, Moreau in Germany won a
brilliant victory at Hockstadt, near Blemheim, took 5,000
prisoners and twenty pieces of cannon, and forced from the
Austrians an armed truce which left him master of South Germany.
A still more momentous armistice was signed by Melas in Italy, by
which the Austrians surrendered Piedmont, Lombardy, and all their
territory as far as the Mincio, leaving France master of Italy.

MOREAU AT HOHENLINDEN

What followed must be briefly detailed. Only a truce, not a
peace, had followed the victories of Napoleon and Moreau, and
five months later, Austria refusing to make peace without the
concurrence of England, the war began again. Moreau winning
another famous victory on the plains of Hohenlinden, the
Austrians losing 8,000 in killed and wounded and 12,000 in
prisoners.

Moreau advanced to Vienna, where the emperor was forced to sign
an armistice, giving up to France the valley of the Danube, the
country of the Tyrol, a number of fortresses and large magazines
of war material. This truce was followed by a peace in February,
1801. It was one that left Napoleon the idol of France, the
terror of Europe, and the admiration of the world. He had proved
himself the mate of Caesar and Alexander as a conqueror.

THE CONSUL MADE EMPEROR

The events that followed must be briefly epitomized. For nearly
the only time in his career Napoleon had a period of peace. In
this he showed himself an autocratic but able ruler, making
himself king in everything but name, restoring the old court
customs and etiquette, but not interfering with the liberties and
privileges which the people had won by the Revolution. Feudalism
had been definitely overthrown and Napoleon's supremacy in the
state was one that recognized the popular freedom.

The culmination of Napoleon's ambition came in 1804, when he
followed the example of Caesar, the Roman conqueror, seeking the
crown as a reward for his victories. Like Caesar, he had his
enemies, but, more fortunate than Caesar, he escaped their plots
and was elected Emperor of the French by an almost unanimous vote
of the people. The Pope was obliged to come to Paris at the fiat
of the new autocrat and to anoint him as emperor, the sanction of
the Church being thus given to his new dignity. His empire was
one founded upon modern ideas, one called into existence by the
votes of a free people, not resting upon the necks of a nation of
serfs.

THE CODE NAPOLEON

During his brief respite from war Napoleon's activity was great,
his statesmanship notable. Great public works, monuments to his
glory, were constructed, wide schemes of public improvement were
entered upon, and important changes were made in the financial
system that provided the great sums needed for these enterprises.
The most important of these evidences of intellectual activity
was the Code Napoleon, the first organized code of French law and
still the basis of jurisprudence in France. This, first
promulgated in 1801 as the civil code of France, had its title
changed to Code Napoleon in 1804, and as such stands as one of
the greatest monuments to the mental capacity of this
extraordinary man.

The period of peace during which these events took place was one
of brief endurance. It practically ended in 1803, when Great
Britain, Napoleon's most persistent foe, again declared war. But
actual war did not begin until two years later.

The Emperor's role in this period was one of threat. England had
been invaded and conquered from France once before. It might be
again. Like William of Normandy, Napoleon prepared a large fleet
and strong army and threatened an invasion of the island kingdom.
This might possibly have been successful but for the shrewd
policy of William Pitt, the British Prime Minister, who organized
a coalition of Napoleon's enemies in Europe which gave him a new
use for his army.

CAMPAIGN OF 1805

The coalition embraced Austria, Prussia, Russia, Sweden and
Norway, with Great Britain at their back. The bold Corsican had
roused nearly all Europe against him. He dealt with it in his
usual alert and successful manner.

Quick as were his enemies to come into the field, they were not
quick enough for their vigilant foe. The army prepared for the
invasion of England was at once set in motion towards the Rhine,
and was handled with such skill as to surround at Ulm the
Austrian army under General Mack and force its surrender.

This took place in October. On the 1st of December the two armies
(92,000 of the allies to 70,000 French) came face to face on the
field of Austerlitz, where on the following day was to be fought
one of the world's most memorable battles.

BATTLE OF AUSTERLITZ

The Emperor Alexander had joined Francis of Austria, and the two
monarchs with their staff officers, occupied the castle and
village of Austerlitz. Their troops hastened to occupy the
plateau of Pratzen, which Napoleon had designedly left free. His
plans of battle were already fully made. He had, with the
intuition of genius, foreseen the probable maneuvers of the
enemy, and had left open for them the position which he wished
them to occupy. He even announced their movement in a
proclamation to his troops.

"The positions that we occupy are formidable," he said, "and
while the enemy march to turn my right they will present to me
their flank."

This movement to the right was indeed the one that had been
decided upon by the allies, with the purpose of cutting off the
road to Vienna by isolating numerous corps dispersed in Austria
and Styria. It had been shrewdly divined by Napoleon in choosing
his ground.

He held his own men in readiness while the line of the enemy
deployed. The sun was rising, its rays gleaming through a mist,
which dispersed as it rose higher. It now poured its brilliant
beams across the field, the afterward famous "sun of Austerlitz."
The movement of the allies had the effect of partly withdrawing
their troops from the plateau of Pratzen. At a signal from the
emperor the strongly concentrated center of the French army moved
forward in a dense mass, directing their march towards the
plateau, which they made all haste to occupy. They had reached
the foot of the hill before the rising mist revealed them to the
enemy.

The two emperors watched the movement without divining its
intent. "See how the French climb the height without staying to
reply to our fire," said Prince Czartoryski, who stood near them.

They were soon to learn why their fire was disdained. The allied
force, pierced in its center by the French, was flung back in
disorder and on all sides broke into a disorderly retreat. The
slaughter was frightful. One division, cut off from the army,
threw down its arms and surrendered. Two columns rushed upon the
ice of a frozen lake. Upon this the fire of the French cannon was
turned, the ice splintered and gave way beneath their feet and
thousands of the despairing troops perished in the freezing
waters. Of the whole army only one corps left the field in order
of battle. More than 30,000 prisoners, including twenty generals,
remained in Napoleon's hands, and with them a hundred and twenty
pieces of cannon and forty flags. Thus ended the most famous of
Napoleon's battles.

The victory of Austerlitz left Germany in Napoleon's hands, and
the remodeling of the map of Europe was one of the greatest that
has ever taken place at any one time. Kingdoms were formed and
placed under Napoleon's brothers or favorite generals. His
changes in the states of Germany were numerous and radical. Those
of south and west Germany were organized into the Confederation
of the Rhine, under his protection. Many of the small
principalities were suppressed and their territories added to the
larger states. As to the "Holy Roman Empire," a once powerful
organization which had long since sunk into a mere shadow, it
finally ceased to exist. The empire of France was extended by
these and other changes until is spread over Italy, the
Netherlands and the south and west of Germany.

Changes so great as these could scarcely be made without exciting
bitter opposition. Prussia had been seriously affected by
Napoleon's map-making, and in the end its king, Frederick
William, became so exasperated that he broke off all
communication with France and began to prepare for war.

THE CONQUEST OF PRUSSIA

It is by no means impossible that Napoleon had been working for
this. It is certain that he was quick to take advantage of it.
While the Prussian king was slowly collecting his troops and war
material, the veterans of France were already on the march and
approaching the borders of Prussia. The hasty levies of
"Frederick William were no match for the war-hardened French, the
Russians failed to come to their aid, and on the 4th of October,
1806, the two armies met at Jena.

The Prussians proved incapable of withstanding the impetuous
attack of the French and were soon broken and in panic and
flight. Nothing could stop them. Reinforcements coming up, 20,000
in number, were thrown across their path, but in vain, being
swept away by the fugitives and pushed back by the triumphant
pursuers.

At the same time another battle was in progress near Auerstadt
between Marshal Davoust and the forces of the Duke of Brunswick.
This, too, ended in victory for the French. The king had been
with the duke and was borne back by the flying host, the two
bodies of fugitives finally coalescing. In that one fatal day
Frederick William had lost his army and placed his kingdom in
jeopardy. "They can do nothing but gather up the debris," said
Napoleon.

The occupation of Berlin, the Prussian capital, quickly followed,
and the war ended with new map-making which greatly reduced the
influence of Prussia as a European Power.

THE INVASION OF POLAND

Russia was still in arms, and occupied Poland. Thither the
victorious French now advanced, making Warsaw, the Polish
capital, the goal of their march. The Russians were beaten and
forced back in every battle, and the Poles, hoping to regain
their lost liberties, gladly rose in aid of the invader. But the
French army found itself exposed to serious privations. The
country was a frozen desert, incapable of supplying food for an
army. The wintry chill and the desolate character of the country
seriously interfered with Napoleon's plans, the troops being
obliged to make their way through thick and rain-soaked forests,
and march over desolate and marshy plains. The winter of the
north fought against them like a strong army and many of them
fell dead without a battle. Warlike movements became almost
impossible to the troops of the south, though the hardy
northerners, accustomed to the climate, continued their military
operations.

EYLAU AND FRIEDLAND

By the end of January the Russian army was evidently approaching
in force, and immediate action became necessary. The cold
increased. The mud was converted into ice. On January 30, 1807,
Napoleon left Warsaw and marched in search of the enemy. General
Benningsen retreated, avoiding battle, and on the 7th of February
entered the small town of Eylau, from which his troops were
pushed by the approaching French. He encamped outside the town,
the French in and about it; it was evident that a great battle
was at hand.

The weather was cold. Snow lay thick upon the ground and still
fell in great flakes. A sheet of ice covering some small lakes
formed part of the country upon which the armies were encamped,
but was thick enough to bear their weight. It was a chill,
inhospitable country to which the demon of war had come.

Before daybreak on the 8th Napoleon was in the streets of Eylau,
forming his line of battle for the coming engagement. Soon the
artillery of both armies opened, and a rain of cannon balls began
to decimate the opposing ranks. The Russian fire was concentrated
on the town, which was soon in flames. That of the French was
directed against a hill which the emperor deemed it important to
occupy. The two armies, nearly equal in numbers, - the French
having 75,000 to the Russian 70,000 - were but a short distance
apart, and the slaughter from the fierce cannonade was terrible.

Nature, which had so far acted to check the advance of the French
in Poland, now threatened their defeat and destruction. A
snow-fall began, so thick and dense that the armies lost sight of
each other, the French columns losing their way in the gloom.
When the snow ceased, after a half-hour's fall, the French army
was in a critical position. It was in a wandering and
disorganized state, while the Russians were on the point of
executing a vigorous turning movement.

Yet the genius of Napoleon turned the scale. He ordered a grand
charge of all the cavalry of his army, driving the Russians back,
occupying a hilly ground in their rear, and in the end handling
them so vigorously that a final retreat began.

Thus ended the most indecisive of Napoleon's victories, one which
had almost been a defeat and which left both armies so exhausted
that months passed before either was in condition to resume the
war. It was the month of June before the armies were again put in
motion. Now the wintry desolation was replaced by a scene of
green woodland, shining lakes and attractive villages, the
conditions being far more favorable for warlike operations.

On June 13th the armies again met, this time at the town of
Friedland, on the River Alle, in the vicinity of Konigsberg,
toward which the Russians were marching. Here Benningsen, the
Russian general, had incautiously concentrated his troops within
a bend of the river, a tactical mistake of which Napoleon
hastened to take advantage.

General Ney fought his way into the town and took the bridges,
while the main force of the French marched upon the entrapped
enemy, who met with complete defeat, many being killed on the
field, many more drowned in the river. Konigsberg, the prize of
victory, was quickly occupied by the French, Prussia the ally of
Russia, thus losing all its area except the single town of Memel.
The result was disastrous to the Prussian king, who was forced to
yield more than half his kingdom.

Louisa, the beautiful queen of Frederick William of Prussia, had
an interview with Napoleon and earnestly sought to induce him to
mitigate his harsh terms. In vain she brought to bear upon him
all her powers of persuasion and attractive charm of manner. He
continued cold and obdurate and she left Tilsit deeply mortified
and humiliated.

If Napoleon had come near defeat in the campaign of 1807, he came
much nearer in that of 1809, in which his long career of victory
was for a time diversified by an example of defeat, from the
consequences of which only his indomitable energy saved him. And
this was at the hands of the Austrians, who had so often met with
defeat and humiliation at his hands.

In 1808 the defeat of his armies in Spain by the people organized
into guerilla bands forced him to take command there in person.
He defeated the insurgents wherever met, took the city of
Saragossa and replaced his brother Joseph on the throne. Then the
outbreak of war in Austria called him away and he was forced to
leave Spain for later attention

CAMPAIGN OF 1809

The declaration of war by Austria arose from indignation at the
arbitrary acts of the conqueror, this growing so intense that in
April 1809, a new declaration was made and new armies called into
the field.

The French campaign was characterized by the usual rapidity. But
on this occasion the Archduke Charles, who led the Austrians,
proved equally rapid, and was in the field so quickly that the
widely-spread French army was for a time in imminent danger of
being cut in two by the alert enemy.

Only a brief hesitation on the part of the Archduke saved the
French from this peril. They concentrated with the utmost haste,
forced the Austrians back, and captured a large number of
prisoners and cannon. In Italy, on the contrary, the Austrians,
were victorious, but the rapid advance of Napoleon towards Vienna
caused their recall and the campaign became a race for the
capital of Austria. In this Napoleon succeeded, the garrison
yielding the city to his troops.

Meanwhile the Archdukes Charles and John, the latter in command
of the army from Italy, were marching hastily towards the
opposite side of the Danube. Napoleon, seeking to strike a blow
before a junction between the armies could be made, crossed the
river by the aid of bridges thrown from the island of Lobau and
occupied the villages of Aspern and Essling.

This was done on May 20th, but during that night the strong
current of the river carried away the bridge, leaving the French
in a perilous situation. On the afternoon of the 21st the entire
Austrian army, 70,000 to 80,000 strong, attacked the French in
the two villages, who held their posts only with the greatest
difficulty.

By dawn of the 21st more than 70,000 French had crossed, but at
this critical interval the bridge again gave way, broken by the
fireships and the stone-laden boats sent by the Austrians down
the swift current. The struggle went on all day, the bridge being
again built and again broken, and at night the French, cut off
from their supply of ammunition, were forced to retreat.
Napoleon, for the first time in his career, had met with defeat.
More than 40,000 dead and wounded lay on that fatal field, among
them the brilliant Marshal Lannes, one of Napoleon's ablest aids.

VICTORY AT WAGRAM

Napoleon, however, had no thought of yielding his hold upon
Vienna. He brought forward new troops with all haste, until by
July 1st he had an army of 150,000 men. The Austrian army had
also been augmented and now numbered 135,000 or 140,000 men. They
had fortified the positions of the recent battle, expecting a new
attack in that quarter.

But of this Napoleon had no intention. He had selected the
heights from Neusiedl to Wagram, occupied by the Austrians, but
not fortified by them, as a more favorable point, and during the
night of July 4th he threw fresh bridges from Lobau to the main
land and set in motion the strong force occupying the island.
This moved against the heights of Wagram, occupying Aspern and
Essling in its advance.

The battle of the next day was one of desperate fury. Finally the
height was gained, giving the French the key of the battlefield.
The Archduke Charles looked in vain for the army under his
brother John, which failed to appear, and, assailed at every
point, was obliged to order a retreat. But this was no rout. The
retreat was conducted slowly and in battle array. Both the
Russians and the Austrians were proving worthy antagonists of the
great Corsican. Further hostilities were checked by a truce,
preliminary to a treaty of peace, signed October 14, 1809.

Ambition, unrestrained by caution, uncontrolled by moderation,
has its inevitable end. An empire built upon victory, trusting
solely to military genius, prepared for itself the elements of
its overthrow. This fact Napoleon was to learn. In the outset of
his career he opposed a new art of war to the obsolete one of his
enemies, and his path to empire was over the corpses of
slaughtered armies and the ruins of fallen kingdoms. But year by
year his foes learned his art, in war after war their resistance
grew more stringent, each successive victory was won with more
difficulty and at greater cost, and finally, at the crossing of
the Danube, the energy and genius of Napoleon met their equal,
and the standards of France, for the first time under Napoleon's
leadership, went back in defeat. It was the tocsin of fate. His
career of victory had culminated. From that day its decline
began.

THE CAMPAIGN IN SPAIN

The second check to Napoleon's triumphant career came from one of
the weaker nations of Europe, aided by the British under a
commander of renown. Napoleon, as already stated, after
overturning Spain had been called away by the Austrian war. This
ended by the treaty of peace, he filled Spain once more with his
veterans, increasing the strength of the army there to 300,000
men, under his ablest generals, Soult, Massena, Ney, Marmont,
Macdonald and others. They marched through Spain from end to end,
yet, though they held all the salient points, the people refused
to submit, but from their mountain fastnesses kept up a petty and
annoying war.

Massena invaded Portugal in 1811, but here he was faced by
General Wellington, leading a British army, and was forced to
retreat. Soult, who followed him, was equally unsuccessful, and
when Napoleon in 1812 depleted his army in Spain for the Russian
campaign, Wellington marched his army into Spain and, aided by
the Spanish patriots, took possession of Madrid, driving King
Joseph from his throne.

THE INVASION OF RUSSIA

Meanwhile Napoleon had entered upon the greatest and most
disastrous campaign in his history. Defied by Alexander I, Czar
of Russia, he had declared war upon that empire and sought its
conquest with the greatest army that ever marched under his
banners. On the banks of the Niemen, a river that flows between
Prussia and Poland, there gathered near the end of June 1812, an
immense army of more than 600,000 men, attended by an enormous
multitude of non-combatants, their purpose being the invasion of
the empire of Russia. Of this great army, made up of troops from
half the nations of Europe, there reappeared six months later on
that broad stream about 16,000 armed men, almost all that were
left of that stupendous host. The remainder had perished on the
desert soil or in the frozen rivers of Russia, few of them
surviving as prisoners in Russian hands. Such was the character
of the dread catastrophe that broke the power of the mighty
conqueror and delivered Europe from his autocratic grasp.

We cannot give the details of this fatal campaign, and shall only
summarize its chief incidents. Barclay de Tolly, Alexander's
commander in chief, adopted a Fabian policy, that of persistently
avoiding battle, and keeping the French in pursuit of a fleeting
will-of-the-wisp while their army wasted away from hardship and
disease in the inhospitable Russian clime.

His method was a wise one, desertion, illness, death of the
untrained recruits in rapid march under the hot midsummer sun,
did the work of many battles, and when Smolensk was reached after
two months of bootless marching, the "Grand Army" was bound to
have been reduced to half its numbers.

Moscow, the old capital of the Empire, was Napoleon's goal. He
felt sure that the occupation of that city would bring the
Russians to bay and force them to accept terms of peace. He was
sadly mistaken. The Russians, weary of retreating, faced him in
one battle, that of Borodino. Here they fought stubbornly, but
with the usual result. They could not stand against the impetuous
dash of Napoleon's veterans and were forced to retreat, leaving
40,000 dead and wounded upon the field. But the French army had
lost more than 30,000, including an unusual number of generals,
two being killed and thirty-nine wounded.

A FATAL RETREAT

On the 15th of September, Moscow, the "Holy City" of Russia was
occupied, Napoleon taking up his quarters in the famous palace of
the Kremlin, from which he hoped to dictate terms of peace to the
obstinate Czar. What were his feelings on the next morning when
word was brought him that Moscow was on fire, and flames were
seen leaping into the air in all directions.

The fire had been premeditated. From every quarter rose the
devouring flames. Even the Kremlin did not escape and Napoleon
was obliged to seek shelter outside the city, which continued to
burn for three days, when the wind sank and rain poured upon the
smoldering embers.

The dismayed conqueror waited in vain. He wrote letters to the
Czar, suggesting peace. His letters were left unanswered. He hung
on despairingly until the 18th of October, when he reluctantly
gave the order to retreat. Too long he had waited, for the
terrible Russian winter was about to descend.

That retreat was a frightful one. The army had been reduced to
103,000 men; the army followers had also greatly decreased in
numbers. But it was still a large host that set out upon its long
march over the frozen Russian plains.

The Russian policy now changed. The retreating army was attacked
at every suitable point. The food supply rapidly failed. On again
reaching Smolensk the army was only 42,000 strong, though the
camp followers are said to have still numbered 60,000.

On the 26th of November the ice-cold River Beresina was reached,
destined to be the most terrible point on the whole dreadful
march. Two bridges were thrown in all haste across the stream,
and most of the men under arms crossed, but 18,000 stragglers
fell into the hands of the enemy. How many were trodden to death
in the press or were crowded from the bridge into the icy river
cannot be told. It is said that when spring thawed the ice,
30,000 bodies were found and burned on the banks of the stream. A
mere fragment of the great army remained alive. Ney, who had been
the hero of the retreat, was the last man to cross that frightful
stream.

On the 13th of December some 16,000 haggard and staggering men,
almost too weak to hold the arms to which they still despairingly
clung, recrossed the Niemen, which the "Grand Army" had passed in
such magnificent strength and with such abounding resources less
than six months before. It was the greatest and most astounding
disaster in the military history of the world.

DRESDEN AND LEIPZIG

The lion was at bay, but there was fight left in him still. He
hurried back to France, gathered another army, refused all offers
of peace on the terms suggested by his enemies, and concentrated
an army at Dresden. Here on August 26, 1813, his last great
victory was won.

The final stand came at Leipzig, where, October 16-18, he waged a
three days' battle against all the powers of central and eastern
Europe. Then, his ammunition nearly exhausted, he was forced to
give the order to retreat.

The struggle was soon at an end. France was quickly invaded,
Paris was obliged to surrender, and on April 7, 1814, the emperor
signed an act of abdication and was exiled to the small island of
Elba, in the Mediterranean, with an army of 400 men, chosen from
his famous Old Guard. But the Powers of Europe, despite their
long experience of Napoleon, did not yet recognize the ability
and audacity of the man with whom they had to deal. While the
Congress of Vienna, convened to restore the old constitution of
Europe, was deliberating and disputing, word came that their
dethroned enemy was again on the soil of France and Louis XVIII,
his successor, was in full flight. He had landed on March 1,
1815, and was marching back to Paris, the people and the army
rallying to his support.

THE HUNDRED DAYS

Then came the famous Hundred Days, in which Napoleon showed much
of his old ability, rapidly organizing a new army, with which in
June he marched into Belgium, where the British under Wellington
and the Prussians under Blucher had gathered to meet him.

On the 16rh he defeated Blucher at Ligny. On the 18th he met
Wellington at Waterloo, and after a desperate struggle went down
in utter defeat. All day long the French and British had fought
without victory for either, but the arrival of Blucher with his
Prussians turned the scale. The French army broke and fled in
disastrous rout, three-fourths of its force being left on the
field, dead, wounded, or prisoners. It was the great soldier's
last fight. He was forced to surrender the throne, and was again
exiled, this time to the island of St. Helena, in the south
Atlantic. No such mistake as that of Elba was safe to make again.
Here ended the days of Napoleon Bonaparte, the greatest soldier
the world had ever known. His final hour of glory came in 1842,
when his remains were brought in pomp to Paris, there to find a
final resting place in the Hotel des Invalides.

THE CONGRESS OF VIENNA

This Congress of the rulers and statesmen of Europe, which opened
in September, 1814, and continued its work after the fall of
Napoleon at Waterloo, occupied itself with map-making on a
liberal scale. The empire which the conqueror had built up at the
expense of the neighboring countries, was quickly dismembered and
France reduced to its former limits, while all the surrounding
Powers took their shares of the spoils, Belgium and Holland being
combined into a single kingdom.

As for the rights of the people, what had become of them? Had
they been swept away and the old wrongs of the people brought
back? Not quite. The frenzied enthusiasm for liberty and human
rights of the past twenty-five years could not go altogether for
nothing. The lingering relics of feudalism had vanished, not only
from France but from all Europe, and no monarch or congress could
bring them back again. In its place the principles of democracy
had been carried by the armies of France throughout Europe and
deeply planted in a hundred places, and their establishment as
actual conditions was the most important part of the political
development of the nineteenth century.

THE HOLY ALLIANCE

Map-making was not the whole work of the Congress of Vienna. An
association was made of the rulers of Russia, Austria and
Prussia, under the promising title of the "Holy Alliance." These
devout autocrats proposed to rule in accordance with the precepts
of the Bible, to govern their subjects like loving parents, and
to see that peace, justice and religion should flourish in their
dominions.

Such was the theory, the real purpose was one of absolute
dominion, that of uniting their forces against democracy and
revolution wherever these should show themselves. It was not long
before there was work for them to do. The people began to move.
The attempt to re-establish absolute governments shook them out
of sluggish acceptance. Revolution lifted its head in spite of
the Holy Alliance, its first field being Spain. Revolt broke out
there in 1820 and was quickly followed by a similar revolt in
Naples.

These revolutionary movements roused the members of the Alliance.
An Austrian army invaded Italy, a French one, under the influence
of the Alliance, was sent to Spain, and both the revolutions were
vigorously quelled. The only revolt that succeeded was one in
Greece against the Turkish power. There was no desire to sustain
the Turks, and a Russian army was finally sent to aid the Greeks,
whose freedom was attained in April, 1830.

Such were the chief events that followed the fall of Napoleon.
Reaction was the order of the day. But it was a reaction that was
to be violently shaken in the period now reached, the
revolutionary year of 1830.


Chapter VII. PAN-SLAVISM VERSUS PAN-GERMANISM

Russia's Part in the Servian Issue - Strength of the Russian Army
- The Distribution of the Slavs - Origin of Pan-Slavism - The
Czar's Proclamation - The Teutons of Europe - Intermingling of
Races - The Nations at War

Pan-Slavism against Pan-Germanism was the issue which was
launched when the Emperor of all the Russias took up Servia's
quarrel with Austria-Hungary. Russia, if she wanted a ground for
war, could have found no better one. The popularity of her
aggressive big-brother attitude to all the Slavs was quickly
attested in St. Petersburg. It had been a long time since war had
appealed with the same favor to so large a part of the Czar's
people. Slavs there were in plenty to menace the allied German
Powers, even if there were not allied French arms, on Germany's
other flank, and Britain's naval supremacy to cope with. Slavs in
past times had spread over all of eastern Europe, from the Arctic
to the Adriatic and the Aegean Seas. Their continuity was long
ago broken into by an intrusion of Magyars. Finns, and
Roumanians, leaving a northern Slavic section composed of North
Russians, Poles, Czechs, and Slovaks, and a southern section
comprising the main body of the Balkan people. For over a
thousand years these Slavs have peopled Europe east of the Elbe
River. And for centuries they kept the hordes of Cossacks, Turks
and barbarians off Europe. Russia in those days was called "the
nation of the sword." And over a hundred years ago that sword was
drawn for Servia. After 400 years of vassalage to Turkey, the
Serbs rebelled in 1804, and then only Russian intervention saved
them from defeat. In later wars oppression of the Slavs was a
prominent issue.

RUSSIA'S PART IN THE SERVIAN ISSUE

What rendered the Russian menace so formidable at the opening of
the 1914 war was the unusual enthusiasm which was displayed.
Ordinarily, the huge population of Russia has been rather
apathetic toward the purposes of the Emperor. But in the case of
Austria's injustice to Servia the Czar, judging from the
demonstrations in St. Petersburg, could reasonably count upon
having behind him possibly 100,000,000 Slavs among his subjects.
Moscow and Odessa gave similar demonstrations of good feeling,
and it seemed as if, in the event of the Czar's assuming command
as generalissimo of all the forces, the wave of enthusiasm would
sweep over the whole empire. Who knows that is the strength of
the Russian bear, once he is roused to sullen fury? In the ten
years following the Russo-Japanese War Russia had greatly added
to her army and navy, and materially cut down the time required
for the mobilization of her forces by eliminating many of the
difficulties attendant upon transportation and equipment of
troops. Her quiet advances toward becoming a Power to be feared
by the most formidable European Nation had come to be recognized
even if in a vague way.

In considering the potential strength of the armies which Russia,
in the course of a long war, might put in the field, it may be
pointed out that military service in that empire of more than
160,000,000 people is universal and compulsory. Service under the
flag begins at the age of twenty and lasts for twenty-three
years. Usually it is proportioned as follows: Three or four years
in the active army, fourteen or fifteen in the Zapas, or first
reserve, and five years in the Opolchenie, or second reserve. For
the Cossacks, those fighters who are a conspicuous element of
Russia's military strength, there is hardly a cessation in
discipline during their early manhood. Holding their lands by
military tenure, they are liable to service for life. Furnishing
their own equipment and horses - the Cossack is almost invariably
a cavalryman - they pass through three periods of four years
each, with diminishing duties, until they wind up in the reserve,
which is liable to be called into the field in time of war.

STRENGTH OF THE RUSSIAN ARMY

Russia's field army consists of three powerful divisions - the
army of European Russia, the army of Asia, already referred to,
and the army of the Caucasus. The European Russian field army
consists of twenty-seven army corps - each corps comprising, at
fighting strength, about 36,000 men - and some twenty-odd cavalry
divisions, of 4,000 horsemen each. With the field army of the
Caucasus and the first and second reserve divisions of the
Cossacks, the total would be brought to nearly 1,600,000 men.
With the Asiatic army, the grand total, according to the latest
figures, would give the Russian armies a fighting strength of
1,850,000 men, of whom it would be practicable to assemble, say,
1,200,000 in a single theater of war. With respect to the armies
which could be put in the field in time of urgent demand, there
are conflicting estimates. It seems certain that Russia's war
strength is more than 5,500,000 men, but, of course, the train
service and the artillery for such a force is lacking. Two and
three-quarter million men could probably be mustered at one time.

In the event of a prolonged war, in which the tide of affairs
should put Russia strictly on the defensive, she would be less
easily invaded than any large country of Europe. The very extent
of her empire, protected by natural barriers at almost every side
save where she touches Northeast Europe, would present almost
insuperable difficulties to the invader. Napoleon paid dearly for
his fortitude in pushing his columns into Moscow. The only
conditions under which a repetition of such a feat is conceivable
were not likely to be found during a general European struggle.

THE DISTRIBUTION OF THE SLAVS

To make matters worse for the Austrian or German invader, there
are conflicting relations between their own people and the
Russians. The Polish provinces, for instance, however unfriendly
toward Russia, as one of the dismemberers of the Polish kingdom,
are strongly bound in blood and speech to the Russian nation. The
Poles and Russians are brother Slavs, and are likely to remember
this in any conflict which approaches an issue between
Pan-Germanism and Pan-Slavism. The Poles of East Prussia have an
ingrained hatred of their German masters and have been embittered
by political oppression almost to the point of revolt. Those
along Austria's eastern border are little less bitter.

The estimate is made that Europe contains in all about
140,000,000 Slavs, this being the most numerous race on the
continent, the Teutons ranking second. While the great bulk of
these are natives of Russia, they have penetrated in large
numbers to the west and south, and are to be found abundantly in
the Balkan region, in the Austrian realm, and in the region of
the disintegrated kingdom of Poland.

According to recent authoritative statistics the race question in
Austria-Hungary is decidedly complicated and diversified. In the
kingdoms and provinces represented in the Reichsrath in Vienna
there are nearly 10,000,000 Germans and 18,500,000 non-Germans.
Of these nearly 17,500,000 are Slavs. Among these Slavs, the
Croats and Serbs number 780,000, chiefly in Dalmatia, while there
are in all 660,000 Orthodox and nearly 3,500,000 Greek Uniats.

In Hungary, with its subject kingdoms of Croatia and Slavonia,
there are 8,750,000 Magyars, 2,000,000 Germans, and 8,000,000
other non-Magyars. Of these, 3,000,000 are Roumanians and well
over 5,000,000 Slavs. The Croats, or Roman Catholic Serbs, number
1,800,000, and their Orthodox brothers are 1,100,000 in number.
All told, Hungary has nearly 11,000,000 Roman Catholic subjects,
2,000,000 Greek Uniats, and 3,000,000 Orthodox. In this
connection it should be remembered that the Patriarchate of the
Orthodox Serb Church has been fixed at Karlowitz, under Hungarian
rule, for over two centuries.

In Bosnia there are 434,000 Roman Catholic Croats, 825,000
Orthodox Serbs, and over 600,000 Bosniaks, or Moslem Serbs. Thus
it will be seen that the Emperor Francis Joseph rules over more
than 24,000,000 Slavs and 3,225,000 Roumanians, of whom nearly
4,500,000 adhere to various Orthodox Churches and 5,400,000 are
Uniats. Of this Slav mass 5,000,000 Poles, mostly Roman
Catholics, are not particularly susceptible to Pan-Slav
propaganda, as that is largely Russian and Orthodox.

Within the boundaries of Germany herself there are over 3,000,000
Slavs, chiefly Poles, the Slavs of Polish descent in all being
estimated at 15,000,000. To these must be added the Bulgarians,
Serbs and Montenegrins of the Balkan region, constituting about
7,0000,000 more.

ORIGIN OF PAN-SLAVISM

The term Pan-Slavism has been given to the agitation carried on
by a great party in Russia, its purpose being the union of the
Slavic peoples of Europe under Russian rule, as an extensive
racial empire. This movement originated about 1830, when the
feeling of race relationship in Russia was stirred up by the
revolutionary movement in Poland. It gained renewed strength from
the Polish revolution of 1863, and still survives as the slogan
of an ardent party. The ideals of Pan-Slavism have made their way
into the Slavic populations of Bohemia, Silesia, Croatia and
Slavonia, where there is dread of the members of the race losing
their individuality under the aggressive addition of the
Austrian, German or Hungarian governments. In 1877-78 Russia
entered into war against Turkey as the champion of the Balkan
Slavs. A similar movement was that made in 1914, when the
independence of the Servian Slavs was threatened by Austria. The
immediate steps taken by Russia to mobilize her forces in
protection of the Serbs was followed as immediately by a
declaration of war on the part of the German emperor and the
quick plunging of practically the whole of Europe into a war.

THE CZAR'S PROCLAMATION

In this connection the proclamation made by the Russian Czar to
his people on August 3d, possesses much interest, as indicating
his Slavic sentiment. The text is as follows:

"By the grace of God we, Nicholas II, Emperor and Autocrat of all
the Russias, King of Poland and Grand Duke of Finland, etc, to
all our faithful subjects make known that Russia, related by
faith and blood to the Slav peoples and faithful to her
historical traditions, has never regarded their fate with
indifference.

"But the fraternal sentiments of the Russian people for the Slavs
have been awakened with perfect unanimity and extraordinary force
in these last few days, when Austria-Hungary knowingly addressed
to Servia claims unacceptable to an independent state.

"Having paid no attention to the pacific and conciliatory reply
of the Servian Government and having rejected the benevolent
intervention of Russia, Austria-Hungary made haste to proceed to
an armed attack and began to bombard Belgrade, an open place.

"Forced by the situation thus created to take necessary measures
of precaution, we ordered the army and the navy put on a war
footing, at the same time using every endeavor to obtain a
peaceful solution. Pourparlers were begun amid friendly relations
with Germany and her ally, Austria, for the blood and the
property of our subjects were dear to us.

"Contrary to our hopes in our good neighborly relations of long
date, and disregarding our assurances that the mobilization
measures taken were in pursuance of no object hostile to her,
Germany demanded their immediate cessation. Being rebuffed in
this demand, Germany suddenly declared war on Russia.

"Today it is not only the protection of a country related to us
and unjustly attacked that must be accorded, but we must
safeguard the honor, the dignity and the integrity of Russia and
her position among the Great Powers.

"We believe unshakably that all our faithful subjects will rise
with unanimity and devotion for the defense of Russian soil; that
internal discord will be forgotten in this threatening hour; that
the unity of the Emperor with his people will become still more
close and that Russia, rising like one man, will repulse the
insolent attack of the enemy.

"With a profound faith in the justice of our work and with a
humble hope in omnipotent providence in prayer we call God's
blessing on holy Russia and her valiant troops. Nicholas."

Later than this was an appeal made by the Czar to the Poles under
his rule, asking for their earnest support in the war arising
from the cause above stated, and promising them the boon which
the Polish people have long coveted: that of self-government and
a practical acknowledgment of their national existence.

THE TEUTONS OF EUROPE

While the Slavs form the great bulk of the inhabitants of eastern
Europe, the Teutons, or people of Teutonic race and language, are
widely spread in the west and north, including the
German-speaking people of Germany, Austria-Hungary and
Switzerland, the English-speaking people of the British Islands
(in a very far-away sense), the Scandinavian-speaking people of
Norway and Sweden, the Flemish-speaking people of Belgium, and
practically the whole people of Denmark and Holland. Yet, though
these are racially related there is no such feeling as a
Pan-Teutonic sentiment combining them into a racial unity.
Instead of community and fraternity, a very marked racial and
natural divergence exists between the several peoples named,
especially between the British and Germans. Pan-Germanism is not
Pan-Teutonism in any proper sense, being confined to the several
German countries of Europe, and especially to the combination of
states in the German Empire. It is the Teuton considered in this
minor sense that has set himself against the Slav, as a measure
of self-defense against the torrent of Slavism apparently seeking
an outlet in all directions.

Prolific as we know the Anglo-Saxons to have once been and as the
Germans still appear to be, there are few instances in human
history of a natural growth of population like that of the Slavs
in recent years. They have grown to outnumber the Germans nearly
three to one, and may perhaps do so in the future in a still
greater proportion.

This is a scarcely desirable state of affairs in view of the fact
that the Slavs as a whole are lower and more primitive in
character and condition than the Germans. The cultivated portion
of Slavic populations forms a very small proportion in number of
the whole, and stands far in advance of the abundant multitude of
peasants and artisans, a vast body of people who are ruled
chiefly by fear; fear of the State on one side, of the Church on
the other.

INTERMINGLING OF RACES

There has long been an embittered, remorseless, and often bloody
struggle for supremacy between the Teuton and the Slav, yet there
has been considerable intermingling of the races, many German
traders making their way into Russian towns, while multitudes of
Slavic laborers have penetrated into German communities. Eastern
Prussia has large populations of Slavs and its Polish subjects in
Posen have been persistently non-assimilable. But only within
recent times has there arisen a passion to "Russianize" all
foreign elements in the one nation and on the other hand to
"Germanize" all similar foreign elements in the other.
Austria-Hungary is the most remarkable combination of unrelated
peoples ever got together to make part of a state, and is
especially notable for its many separate groups of Slavs.
Bohemia, for instance, has a very large majority of Slavic
population, eager to be recognized as such, and there are Slavic
populations somewhat indiscriminately scattered throughout the
dual-monarchy, especially in Hungary.

These Slavic populations, however, differ widely in religious
belief. While largely of the Greek confession of faith, a
considerable section of them are Roman Catholics, and many are
faithful Mohammedans. This difference in religion plays a major
part in their political relations, a greater one than any feeling
of nationality and racial unity, and aids greatly in adding to
the diversity of condition and sentiment among these mixed
populations.

THE NATIONS AT WAR

In the war which sprang so suddenly and startlingly into the
field of events in 1914 very little of this sentiment of race
animosity appeared. While the German element remained intact in
the union of Germany and Austria, there was a strange mingling of
races in the other side of the struggle, that of the Slavic
Russian, the Teutonic Britain, and the Celtic French. As for
Italy, the non-Germanic member of the Triple Alliance, it at
first wisely declared itself out of the war, as one in which it
was in no sense concerned and under no obligation to enter into
from the terms of its alliance. Later events tended to bring it
into sympathy with the non-Germanic side, as a result of enmity
to Austria. So the conflict became narrowed down to a struggle
between Pan-Germanism on the one hand and a variety of unrelated
racial elements on the other. It may be that Emperor William had
a secret purpose to unite, if possible, all German-speaking
peoples under his single sway and that Czar Nicholas had similar
views regarding a union of the Slavs, but as they did not take
the world into their confidence no one can say what plans and
ambitions lay hidden in their mental treasure chests. In this
connection it is certainly of interest that three of the leaders
in this five-fold war were near relatives, the Czar, the Kaiser
and the British King being cousins and all of Teutonic blood.
This is a result of the intermarriage of royal families in these
later days.


Chapter VIII. The Ambition of Louis Napoleon

The Final Overthrow of Napoleonism

The Coup-d'Etat of 1851 - From President to Emperor - The Empire
is Peace - War With Austria - The Austrians Advance - The Battle
of Magenta - Possession of Lombardy - French Victory at Solferino
- Treaty of Peace - Invasion of Mexico - End of Napoleon's Career

The name of Napoleon is a name to conjure with in France. Two
generations after the fall of Napoleon the Great the people of
that country had practically forgotten the misery he had brought
them, and remembered only the glory with which he had crowned the
name of France. When, then, a man who has been designated as
Napoleon the Little offered himself for their suffrages, they
cast their votes almost unanimously in his favor.

Charles Louis Napoleon Bonaparte, to give this personage his full
name, was a son of Louis Bonaparte, once king of Holland, and
Hortense de Beauharnais, and had been recognized by Napoleon as,
after his father, the direct successor to the throne. This he
made strenuous efforts to obtain, hoping to dethrone Louis
Philippe and install himself in his place. In 1836, with a few
followers, he made an attempt to capture Strasbourg. His effort
failed and he was arrested and transported to the United States.
In 1839 he published a work entitled "Napoleonic Ideas," which
was an apology for the ambitious acts of the first Napoleon.

The growing unpopularity of Louis Philippe tempted Louis Napoleon
to make a second attempt to invade France. He did it in a rash
way almost certain to end in failure. Followed by about fifty
men, and bringing with him a tame eagle, which was expected to
perch upon his banner as the harbinger of victory, he sailed from
England in August, 1840, and landed at Boulogne. This desperate
and foolish enterprise proved a complete failure. The soldiers
whom the would-be sovereign expected to join his standard
arrested him, and he was tried for treason by the House of Peers.
This time he was not dealt with so leniently as before, but was
sentenced to imprisonment for life and was confined in the Castle
of Ham. From this fortress he escaped in disguise in May, 1846,
and made his way to England.

The revolution of 1848 gave the restless and ambitious claimant a
more promising opportunity. He returned to France, was elected to
the National Assembly, and on the adoption of the republican
constitution offered himself as a candidate for the presidency of
the new republic. And now the magic of the name of Napoleon told.
General Cavaignac, his chief competitor, was supported by the
solid men of the country, who distrusted his opponent; but the
people rose almost solidly in his support, and he was elected
president for four years by 5,562,834 votes, against 1,469,166
for Cavaignac.

The new President of France soon showed his ambition. He became
engaged in a contest with the Assembly and aroused the distrust
of the Republicans by his autocratic remarks. In 1849 he still
further offended the democratic party by sending an army to Rome,
which put an end to the republic in that city. He sought to make
his cabinet officers the pliant instruments of his will, and thus
caused De Tocqueville, the celebrated author, who was minister
for foreign affairs, to resign. "We were not the men to serve him
on those terms," said De Tocqueville, at a later time.

The new-made president was feeling his way to imperial dignity.
He could not forget that his illustrious uncle had made himself
emperor, and his ambition instigated him to the same course. A
violent controversy arose between him and the Assembly, which
body had passed a law restricting universal suffrage, thus
reducing the popular support of the president. In June, 1850, it
increased his salary at his request, but granted the increase
only for one year - an act of distrust which proved a new source
of discord.

THE "COUP D'ETAT" OF 1851

Louis Napoleon meanwhile was preparing for a daring act. He
secretly obtained the support of the army leaders and prepared
covertly for the boldest stroke of his life. On the 2d of
December 1851 - the anniversary of the establishment of the first
empire and of the battle of Austerlitz - he got rid of his
opponents by means of the memorable COUP D'ETAT, and seized the
supreme power of the state.

The most influential members of the Assembly had been arrested
during the preceding night, and when the hour for the session of
the House came the men most strongly opposed to the President
were in prison. Most of them were afterwards exiled, some for
life, some for shorter terms. This act of outrage and alleged
violation of plighted faith by their ruler roused the socialists
and republicans to the defense of their threatened liberties,
insurrections broke out in Paris, Lyons, and other towns, street
barricades were built, and severe fighting took place. But
Napoleon had secured the army, and the revolt was suppressed with
blood and slaughter. Baudin, one of the deposed deputies, was
shot on the barricade in the Faubourg St. Antoine, while waving
in his hand the decree of the constitution. He was afterwards
honored as a martyr to the cause of republicanism in France.

Napoleon had previously sought to gain the approval of the people
by liberal and charitable acts, and to win the good will of the
civic authorities by numerous progresses through the interior. He
now stood as a protector and promoter of national prosperity and
the rights of the people, and sought to lay upon the Assembly all
the defects of his administration. By these means, which aided to
awaken the Napoleonic fervor in the state, he was enabled safely
to submit his acts of violence and bloodshed to the approval of
the people. The new constitution offered by the president was put
to vote, and was adopted by the enormous majority of more than
seven million votes. By its terms Louis Napoleon was to be
president of France for ten years, with power equal to that of a
monarch, and the Parliament was to consist of two bodies, a
Senate and a Legislative House, which were given only nominal
power.

FROM PRESIDENT TO EMPEROR

This was as far as Napoleon dared to venture at that time. A year
later, on December 1, 1852, having meanwhile firmly cemented his
position in the state, he passed from president to emperor, again
by a vote of the people, of whom, according to the official
report, 7,824,189 cast their votes in his favor. That this report
told the truth, many denied, but it served the President's
purpose.

Thus ended the second French republic, by an act of usurpation of
the strongest and yet most popular character. The partisans of
the new emperor were rewarded with the chief offices of the
state; the leading republicans languished in prison or in exile
for the crime of doing their duty to their constituents; and
Armand Marrast, the most zealous champion of the republic, died
of a broken heart from the overthrow of all his efforts and
aspirations. The honest soldier and earnest patriot, Cavaignac,
in a few years followed him to the grave. The cause of liberty in
France seemed lost.

The crowning of a new emperor of the Napoleonic family in France
naturally filled Europe with apprehensions. But Napoleon III, as
he styled himself, was an older man than Napoleon I, and
seemingly less likely to be carried away by ambition. His
favorite motto, "The Empire is peace," aided to restore quietude,
and gradually the nations began to trust in his words: "France
wishes for peace; and when France is satisfied the world is
quiet."

Warned by one of the errors of his uncle, he avoided seeking a
wife in the royal families of Europe, but allied himself with a
Spanish lady of noble rank, the young and beautiful Eugenie de
Montijo, dutchess of Teba. At the same time he proclaimed that,
"A sovereign raised to the throne by a new principle should
remain faithful to that principle, and in the face of Europe
frankly accept the position of a parvenu, which is an honorable
title when it is obtained by the public suffrage of a great
people. For seventy years all princes' daughters married to
rulers of France have been unfortunate; only one, Josephine, was
remembered with affection by the French people, and she was not
born of a royal house."

The new emperor continued his efforts as president to win the
approval of the people by public works. He recognized the
necessity of aiding the working classes as far as possible, and
protecting them from poverty and wretchedness. During a dearth in
1853 a "baking fund" was organized in Paris, the city
contributing funds to enable bread to be sold at a low price.
Dams and embankments were built along the rivers to overcome the
effects of floods. New streets were opened, bridges built,
railways constructed, to increase internal traffic. Splendid
buildings were erected for municipal and government purposes.
Paris was given a new aspect by pulling down its narrow lanes,
and building wide streets and magnificent boulevards - the
latter, as was charged, for the purpose of depriving insurrection
of its lurking places. The great exhibition of arts and
industries in London was followed in 1854 by one in France, the
largest and finest seen up to that time. Trade and industry were
fostered by a reduction of tariff charges, joint stock companies
and credit associations were favored, and in many ways Napoleon
III worked wisely and well for the prosperity of France, the
growth of its industries, and the improvement of the condition of
its people.

THE EMPIRE IS PEACE

But the new emperor, while thus actively engaged in labors of
peace means lived up to the spirit of his motto, "The Empire is
peace." An empire founded upon the army needs to give employment
to that army. A monarchy sustained by the votes of a people
athirst for glory needs to do something to appease that thirst. A
throne filled by a Napoleon could not safely ignore the
"Napoleonic Ideas," and the first of these might be stated as
"The Empire is war." And the new emperor was by no means
satisfied to pose simply as the "nephew of his uncle." He
possessed a large share of the Napoleonic ambition, and hoped by
military glory to surround his throne with some of the luster of
that of Napoleon the First.

Whatever his private views, it is certain that France under his
reign became the most aggressive nation of Europe, and the
overweening ambition and self-confidence of the new emperor led
him to the same end as his great uncle, that of disaster and
overthrow. He was evidently bent on playing a leading part in
European politics, showing the world that one worthy to bear the
name of Napoleon was on the throne.

The very beginning of Louis Napoleon's career of ambition, as
president of the French Republic, was signalized by an act of
military force, in sending an army to Rome and putting an end to
the attempted Italian republic. These troops were kept there
until 1866, and the aspirations of the Italian patriots were held
in check until that year. Only when United Italy stood menacingly
at the gates of Rome were these foreign troops withdrawn. They
had retarded, perhaps, for a time the inevitable union of the
Italian states into a single kingdom; they certainly prevented
the establishment of a republic.

In 1854 Napoleon allied himself with the British and the Turks
against Russia, and sent an army to the Crimea, which played an
effective part in the great struggle in that peninsula. The
troops of France had the honor of rendering Sebastopol untenable,
carrying by storm one of its two great fortresses and turning its
guns upon the city.

WAR WITH AUSTRIA

The next act of war-policy by the French emperor was against
Austria. As the career of conquest of Napoleon had begun with an
attack upon the Austrians in Italy, Napoleon III attempted a
similar enterprise, and with equal success. He was said to have
been cautiously preparing for hostilities with Austria, thus to
emulate his great uncle, but lacked a satisfactory excuse for
declaring war. This came in 1858 from an attempt at
assassination. Felice Orsini, a fanatical Italian patriot,
incensed at Napoleon from his failing to come to the aid of
Italy, launched three explosive bombs against his carriage. The
effect was fatal to many of the people in the street, though the
intended victim escaped. Orsini while in prison expressed
patriotic sentiments and a loud-voiced love for his country.
"Remember that the Italians shed their blood for Napoleon the
Great," he wrote to the emperor. "Liberate my country, and the
blessings of twenty-five millions of people will follow you to
posterity."


Louis Napoleon, it was alleged, had once been a member of a
secret political society of Italy; he had taken the oath of
initiation; his failure to come to the aid of that country when
in power constituted him a traitor to his oath and one doomed to
death; the act of Orsini was apparently the work of the society.
That Napoleon was deeply moved by the attempted assassination is
certain, and the result of his combined fear and ambition was
soon to be shown by a movement in favor of Italian independence.

On New Year's Day, 1859, while receiving the diplomatic corps at
the Tuileries, Napoleon addressed the following significant words
to the Austrian ambassador: "I regret that our relations are not
so cordial as I could wish, but I beg you to report to the
Emperor that my personal sentiments towards him remain
unaltered." Such is the masked way in which diplomats announce an
intention of war. The meaning of the threatening words was soon
shown, when victor Emmanuel, shortly afterwards, announced at the
opening of the Chambers in Turin that Sardinia could no longer
remain indifferent to the cry for help which was rising from all
Italy. Ten years had passed since the defeat of the Sardinians by
an Austrian army on the plains of Lombardy, and the end for the
time of their hopes of a free and united Italy. During that time
they had cherished a hope of retribution, and the words of
Napoleon and Victor Emmanuel made it evident to them that an
alliance had been made with France and that the hour of vengeance
was at hand.

Austria was ready for the contest. Her finances, indeed, were in
a serious state, but she had a large army in Lombardy. This was
increased, Lombardy was declared in a state of siege, and every
step was taken to guard against assault from Sardinia. Delay was
disadvantageous to Austria, as it would permit her enemies to
complete their preparations, and on April 23, 1859, an ultimatum
came from Vienna, demanding that Sardinia should put her army on
a peace footing or war would ensue.

THE AUSTRIANS ADVANCE

A refusal came from Turin. Immediately Field-marshal Gyulai
received orders to cross the Ticino. Thus, after ten years of
peace, the beautiful plains of Northern Italy were once more to
endure the ravages of war. This act of Austria was severely
criticized by the neutral Powers, which had been seeking to allay
the trouble. Napoleon took advantage of it, as an aid to his
purposes, and accused Austria of breaking the peace by invading
the territory of his ally, the king of Sardinia.

The real fault committed by Austria, under the circumstances, was
not in precipitating war, which could not well be avoided in the
temper of her antagonists, but in putting, through court favor
and privileges of rank, an incapable leader at the head of the
army. Old Radetzky, the victor in the last war, was dead, but
there were other able leaders who were thrust aside in favor of
the Hungarian noble Franz Gyulai, a man without experience as
commander-in-chief of an army.

By his uncertain and dilatory movements Gyulai gave the
Sardinians time to concentrate an army of 80,000 men around the
fortress of Alessandria, and lost all the advantage of being the
first in the field. In early May the French army reached Italy,
partly by way of the St. Bernard Pass, partly by sea; and
Garibaldi, with his mountaineers, took up a position that would
enable him to attack the right wing of the Austrians.

Later in the month Napoleon himself appeared, his presence and
the name he bore inspiring the soldiers with new valor, while his
first order of the day, in which he recalled the glorious deeds
which their fathers had done on those plains under his great
uncle, roused them to the highest enthusiasm. While assuming the
title of commander-in-chief, he was wise enough to leave the
conduct of the war to his abler subordinates, MacMahon, Niel, and
others.

The Austrian general, having lost the opportunity to attack, was
now put on the defensive, in which his incompetence was equally
manifested. Being quite ignorant of the position of the foe, he
sent Count Stadion, with 12,000 men, on a reconnaissance. An
encounter took place at Montebello on May 20th, in which, after a
sharp engagement, Stadion was forced to retreat. Gyulai directed
his attention to that quarter, leaving Napoleon to march
unmolested from Alessandria to the invasion of Lombardy. Gyulai
then, aroused by the danger of Milan, began his retreat across
the Ticino, which he had so uselessly crossed.

The road to Milan crossed both the Ticino River and the Naviglio
Grande, a broad and deep canal, a few miles east of the river.
Some distance farther on lies the village of Magenta, the seat of
the first great battle of the war. Sixty years before, on those
Lombard plains, Napoleon the Great had first lost, and then, by a
happy chance, won the famous battle of Marengo. The Napoleon now
in command was a very different man from the mighty soldier of
the year 1800, and the French escaped a disastrous rout only
because the Austrians were led by a still worse general. Some one
has said that victory comes to the army that makes the fewest
blunders. Such seems to have been the case in the battle of
Magenta, where military genius was the one thing wanting.

The French pushed on, crossed the river without finding a man to
dispute the passage - other than a much-surprised customs
official - and reached an undefended bridge across the canal. The
high road to Milan seemed deserted by the Austrians. But
Napoleon's troops were drawn out in a preposterous line,
straddling a river and a canal, both difficult to cross, and
without any defensive positions to hold against an attack in
force. He supposed that the Austrians were stretched out in a
similar long line. This was not the case. Gyulai had all the
advantages of position, and might have concentrated his army and
crushed the advanced corps of the French if he had known his
situation and his business. As it was, between ignorance on the
one hand and indecision on the other, the battle was fought with
about equal forces in the field on either side.

The first contest took place at Buffalora, a village on the
canal, where the French encountered the Austrians in force. Here
a bloody struggle went on for hours, ending in the capture of the
place by the Grenadiers of the Guard, who held on to it
afterwards with stubborn courage.

THE BATTLE OF MAGENTA

General MacMahon, in command of the advance, had his orders to
march forward, whatever happened, to the church-tower of Magenta,
and, in strict obedience to orders, he pushed on, leaving the
grenadiers to hold their own as best they could at Bufflora, and
heedless of the fact that the reserve troops of the army had not
yet begun to cross the river. It was the 5th of June, and the day
was well advanced when MacMahon came in contact with the
Austrians at Magenta, and the great contest of the day began.

It was a battle in which the commanders on both sides, with the
exception of MacMahon, showed lack of military skill and the
soldiers on both sides the staunchest courage. The Austrians
seemed devoid of plan or system, and their several divisions were
beaten in detail by the French. On the other hand, General Camou,
in command of the second division of MacMahon's corps, acted as
Desaix had done at the battle of Marengo, marched at the sound of
the distant cannon. But, unlike Desaix, he moved so deliberately
that it took him six hours to make less than five miles. He was a
tactician of the old school, imbued with the idea that every
march should be made in perfect order.

At half-past four MacMahon, with his uniform in disorder and
followed by a few officers of his staff, dashed back to hurry up
this deliberate reserve. On the way thither he rode into a body
of Austrian sharpshooters. Fortune favored him. Not dreaming of
the presence of the French general, they saluted him as one of
their own commanders. On his way back he made a second narrow
escape from capture by the Uhlans.

The drums now beat the charge, and a determined attack was made
by the French, the enemy's main column being taken between two
fires. Desperately resisting, it was forced back step by step
upon Magenta. Into the town the columns rolled, and the fight
became fierce around the church. High in the tower of this
edifice stood the Austrian general and his staff, watching the
fortunes of the fray; and from this point he caught sight of the
four regiments of Camou, advancing as regularly as if on parade.
They were not given the chance to fire a shot or receive a
scratch, eager as they were to take part in the fight. At sight
of them the Austrian general ordered a retreat and the battle was
at an end. The French owed their victory largely to General
Mellinet and his Grenadiers of the Guard, who held their own like
bull-dogs at Buffalora while Camou was advancing with the
deliberation of the old military rules.

MacMahon and Mellinet and the French had won the day. Victor
Emmanuel and the Sardinians did not reach the ground until after
the battle was at an end. For his services on that day of glory
for France MacMahon was made Marshal of France and Duke of
Magenta.

POSSESSION OF LOMBARDY

The prize of the victory of Magenta was the possession of
Lombardy. Gyulai, unable to collect his scattered divisions, gave
orders for a general retreat. Milan was evacuated with
precipitate haste, and the garrisons were withdrawn from all the
towns, leaving them to be occupied by the French and Italians. On
the 8th of June Napoleon and Victor Emmanuel rode into Milan side
by side, amid the loud acclamations of the people, who looked
upon this victory as an assurance of Italian freedom and unity.
Meanwhile the Austrians retreated without interruption, not
halting until they arrived at the Mincio, where they were
protected by the famous Quadrilateral, consisting of the four
powerful fortresses or Peschiera, Mantua, Verona, and Leguano,
the mainstay of the Austrian power in Italy.

The French and Italians slowly pursued the retreating Austrians,
and on the 23d of June bivouacked on both banks of the Chiese
River, about fifteen miles west of the Mincio. The Emperor
Francis Joseph had recalled the incapable Gyulai, and, in hopes
of inspiring his soldiers with new spirit, himself took command.
The two emperors, neither of them soldiers, were thus pitted
against each other, and Francis Joseph, eager to retrieve the
disaster at Magenta, resolved to quit his strong position of
defense in the quadrilateral and assume the offensive.

FRENCH VICTORY AT SOLFERINO

At two o'colck in the morning of the 24th the allied French and
Italian army resumed its march, Napoleon's orders for the day
being based upon the reports of his reconnoitering parties and
spies. These led him to believe that, although a strong
detachment of the enemy might be encountered west of the Mincio,
the main body of the Austrians was awaiting him on the eastern
side of the river. But the French intelligence department was
badly served. The Austrians had stolen a march upon Napoleon.
Undetected by the French scouts, they had recrossed the Mincio,
and by nightfall of the 23rd their leading columns were occupying
the ground on which the French were ordered to bivouac on the
evening of the 24th. The intention of the Austrian emperor, now
commanding his army in person, had been to push forward rapidly
and fall upon the allies before they had completed the passage of
the river Chiese. But this scheme, like that of Napoleon, was
based on defective information. The allies broke up from their
bivouacs many hours before the Austrians expected them to do so,
and when the two armies came in contact early in the morning of
the 24th of June the Austrians were quite as much taken by
surprise as the French.

The Austrian army, superior in numbers to its opponents, was
posted in a half-circle between the Mincio and Chiese, with the
intention of pressing forward from these points upon a center.
But the line was extended too far, and the center was
comparatively weak and without reserves. Napoleon, who that
morning received complete intelligence of the position of the
Austrian army, accordingly directed his chief strength against
the enemy's center, which rested upon a height near the village
of Solferino.

Here, on the 24th of June, after a murderous conflict, in which
the French commanders hurled continually renewed masses against
the decisive position, while on the other side the Austrian
reinforcements failed through lack of unity of plan and decision
of action, the heights were at length won by the French troops in
spite of heroic resistance on the part of the Austrian soldiers;
the Austrian line of battle being cut through, and the army thus
divided into two separate masses. A second attack which Napoleon
promptly directed against Cavriano had a similar result; for the
commands given by the Austrian generals were confused and had no
general and definite aim.

The fate of the battle was already in a great measure decided,
when a tremendous storm broke forth that put an end to the combat
at most points, and gave the Austrians an opportunity to retire
in order. Only Benedek, who had twice beaten back the Sardinians
at various points, continued the struggle for some hours longer.
On the French side Marshal Niel had pre-eminently distinguished
himself by acuteness and bravery. It was a day of bloodshed, on
which two great powers had measured their strength against each
other for twelve hours. The Austrians had to lament the loss of
13,000 dead and wounded, and left 9,000 prisoners in the enemy's
hands; on the side of the French and Sardinians the number of
killed and wounded was even greater, for repeated attacks had
been made upon well-defended heights, but the number of prisoners
was not nearly so great.

TREATY OF PEACE

The victories in Italy filled the French people with the warmest
admiration for their emperor, they thinking, in their enthusiasm,
that a true successor of Napoleon the Great had come to bring
glory to their arms. Italy also was full of enthusiastic hope,
fancying that the freedom and unity of the Italians was at last
assured. Both nations were, therefore, bitterly disappointed in
learning that the war was at an end, and that a hasty peace had
been arranged between the emperors which left the hoped-for work
but half achieved.

Napoleon estimated his position better than his people. Despite
his victories, his situation was one of danger and difficulty.
The army had suffered severely in its brief campaign, and the
Austrians were still in possession of the Quadrilateral, a square
of powerful fortresses which he might seek in vain to reduce. And
a threat of serious trouble had arisen in Germany. The victorious
career of a new Napoleon in Italy was alarming. It was not easy
to forget the past. The German powers, though they had declined
to come to the aid of Austria, were armed and ready, and at any
moment might begin a hostile movement upon the Rhine.

Napoleon, wise enough to secure what he had won, without
hazarding its loss, arranged a meeting with the Austrian emperor,
whom he found quite as ready for peace. The terms of the truce
arranged between them were that Austria should abandon Lombardy
to the line of the Mincio, almost its eastern boundry, and that
Italy should form a confederacy under the presidency of the pope.
In the treaty subsequently made only the first of these
conditions was maintained, Lombardy passing to the king of
Sardinia. Hw received also the small states of Central Italy,
whose tyrants had fled, and ceded to Napoleon, as a reward for
his assistance, the realm of Savoy and the city and territory of
Nice.

INVASION OF MEXICO

Napoleon III had now reached the summit of his career. In
succeeding years the French were to learn that whatever his
ability Napoleon III was not a counterpart of the great Napoleon.
He gradually lost the prestige he had gained at Magenta and
Solferino. His first serious mistake was when he yielded to the
voice of ambition, and, taking advantage of the occupation of the
Americans in their civil war, sent an army to invade Mexico.

The ostensible purpose of this invasion was to collect a debt
which the Mexicans had refused to pay, and Great Britain and
Spain were induced to take part in the expedition. But their
forces were withdrawn when they found that Napoleon had other
purposes in view, and his army was left to fight its battles
alone. After some sanguinary engagements, the Mexican army was
broken into a series of guerilla bands, incapable of facing his
well-drilled troops, and Napoleon proceeded to reorganize Mexico
into an empire, placing the Archduke Maximilian of Austria on the
throne.

All went well while the people of the United States were fighting
for their national union, but when their war was over the
ambitious French emperor was soon taught that he had committed a
serious error. He was given plainly to understand that the French
troops could only be kept in Mexico at the cost of a war with the
United States, and he found it convenient to withdraw them early
in 1867. They had no sooner gone than the Mexicans were in arms
against Maximilian, whose rash acceptance of the advice of the
clerical party and determination to remain quickly led to his
capture and execution as a usurper. Thus ended in utter failure
the most daring effort to ignore the "Monroe Doctrine."

END OF NAPOLEON'S CAREER

The inaction of Napoleon during the wars which Prussia fought
with Denmark and Austria gave further blows to his prestige in
France, and the opposition to his policy of personal government
grew so strong that he felt himself obliged to submit his policy
to a vote of the people. He was sustained by a large majority,
and then loosened somewhat the reins of personal government, in
spite of the fact that the yielding of increased liberty to the
people would diminish his own control. Finally, finding himself
failing in health, confidence and reputation, he yielded to
advisers who convinced him that the only hope for his dynasty lay
in a successful war. As a result he undertook the war of 1870
against Prussia. The story of this war will be given in a
subsequent chapter. All that need be said here is that it proved
the utter incompetence of Napoleon III in military matters, he
being completely deceived in the condition of the French army and
unwarrantably ignorant of that of the Germans. The conditions
were such that victory for France was impossible, France losing
its second empire and Napoleon his throne. He died two years
later, an exile in England, that place of shelter for the royal
refugees of France.


Chapter IX. GARIBALDI AND ITALIAN UNITY

Power of Austria Broken

The Carbonari - Mazzini and Garibaldi - Cavour, the Statesman -
The Invasion of Sicily - Occupation of Naples - Victor Emmanuel
Takes Command - Watchword of the Patriots - Garibaldi Marches
Against Rome - Battle of Ironclads - Final Act of Italian Unity

From the time of the fall of the Roman Empire until late in the
nineteenth century, a period of some fourteen hundred years,
Italy remained disunited, divided up among a series of states,
small and large, hostile and peaceful, while its territory was
made the battle-field of the surrounding Powers, the helpless
prey of Germany, France and Spain. Even the strong hand of
Napoleon failed to bring it unity, and after his fall its
condition was worse than before, for Austria held most of the
north and exerted a controlling power over the remainder of the
peninsula, so that the fair form of liberty fled in dismay from
its shores.

But the work of Napoleon had inspired the patriots of Italy with
a new sentiment, that of union. Before the Napoleonic era the
thought of a united Italy scarcely existed, and patriotism meant
adherence to Sardinia, Naples, or some other of the many kingdoms
and duchies. After that era union became the watchword of the
revolutionists, who felt that the only hope of giving Italy a
position of dignity and honor among the nations lay in making it
one country under one ruler. The history of the nineteenth
century in Italy is the record of the attempt to reach this end,
and its successful accomplishment. And on that record the names
of two men most prominently appear, Mazzini, the indefatigable
conspirator, and Garibaldi, the valorous fighter; to whose names
should be added that of the eminent statesman, Count Cavour, and
that of the man who shared their statecraft and labors, Victor
Emmanuel, the first king of united Italy.

THE CARBONARI

The basis of the revolutionary movements in Italy was the secret
political association known as the Carbonari, formed early in the
nineteenth century and including members of all classes in its
ranks. In 1814 this powerful society projected a revolution in
Naples, and in 1820 it was strong enough to invade Naples with an
army and force from the king an oath to observe the new
constitution which it had prepared. The revolution was put down
in the following year by the Austrians, acting as the agents of
the "Holy Alliance" - the compact of Austria, Prussia and Russia.

An ordinance was passed condemning any one who should attend a
meeting of the Carbonari to capital punishment. But the society
continued to exist, despite this severe enactment, and was at the
basis of many of the outbreaks that took place in Italy from 1820
onward. Mazzini, Garibaldi, and all the leading patriots were
members of this powerful organization, which was daring enough to
condemn Napoleon III to death, and almost to succeed in his
assassination, for his failure to live up to his obligations as
an alleged member of the society.

MAZZINI AND GARIBALDI

Giuseppe Mazzini, a native of Genoa, became a member of the
Carbonari in 1830. His activity in revolutionary movements caused
him soon after to be proscribed, and in 1831 he sought
Marseilles, where he organized a new political society called
"Young Italy," whose watchword was "God and the People," and
whose basic principle was the union of the several states and
kingdoms into one nation, as the only true foundation of Italian
liberty. This purpose he avowed in his writings and pursued
through exile and adversity with inflexible constancy, and it is
largely due to the work of this earnest patriot that Italy today
is a single kingdom instead of a medley of separate states. Only
in one particular did he fail. His persistent purpose was to
establish a republic, not a monarchy.

While Mazzini was thus working with his pen, his compatriot,
Giuseppe Garibaldi, was working as earnestly with his sword. This
daring soldier, a native of Nice and reared to a life on the sea,
was banished as a revolutionist in 1834, and the succeeding
fourteen years of his life were largely spent in South America,
in whose wars he played a leading part.

The revolution of 1848 opened Italy to these two patriots, and
they hastened to return; Garibaldi to offer his services to
Charles Albert of Sardinia, by whom, however, he was treated with
coldness and distrust. Mazzini, after founding the Roman republic
in 1849, called upon Garibaldi to come to its defense, and the
latter displayed the greatest heroism in the contest against the
Neapolitan and French invaders. He escaped from Rome on its
capture by the French, and, after many desperate conflicts and
adventures with the Austrians, was again driven into exile, and
in 1850 became a resident of New York. For some time he worked in
a manufactory of candles on Staten Island, and afterwards made
several voyages on the Pacific.

The war in 1859 of Napoleon III and Victor Emmanuel against the
Austrians in Lombardy opened a new and promising channel for the
devotion of Garibaldi to his native land. Being appointed
major-general and commissioned to raise a volunteer corps, he
organized the hardy body of mountaineers called the "Hunters of
the Alps," and with them performed prodigies or valor on the
plains of Lombardy, winning victories over the Austrians at
Varese, Como and other places. In his ranks was his
fellow-patriot Mazzini.

The success of the French and Sardinians in Lombardy during this
war stirred Italy to its center. The grand duke of Tuscany fled
to Austria. The duchess or Parma sought refuge in Switzerland.
The duke of Modena found shelter in the Austrian camp. Everywhere
the brood of tyrants took to flight. Bologna threw off its
allegiance to the pope, and proclaimed the king of Sardinia
dictator. Several other towns in the States of the Church, did
the same. In the terms of the truce between Louis Napoleon and
Francis Joseph the rulers of these realms were to resume their
power if the people would permit. But the people would not
permit, and these minor states were all annexed to Sardinia,
which country was greatly expanded as a result of the war.

CAVOUR THE STATESMAN

It will not suffice to give all the credit for these
revolutionary movements to Mazzini, the organizer, Garibaldi, the
soldier, and the ambitious monarchs of France and Sardinia. More
important than king and emperor was the eminent statesman, Count
Cavour, prime minister of Sardinia from 1852. It is to this able
man that the honor of the unification of Italy most fully
belongs, though he did not live to see it. He sent a Sardinian
army to the assistance of France and England in the Crimea in
1855, and by this act gave his state a standing among the Powers
of Europe. He secured liberty of the press and favored toleration
in religion and freedom of trade. He rebelled against the
dominion of the papacy, and devoted his abilities to the
liberation and unity of Italy, undismayed by the angry
fulminations from the Vatican. The war of 1859 was his work, and
he had the satisfaction of seeing Sardinia increased by the
addition of Lombardy, Tuscany, Parma and Modena. A great step had
been taken in the work to which he had devoted his life.

THE INVASION OF SICILY

The next step in the great work was taken by Garibaldi, who now
struck at the powerful kingdom of Naples and Sicily in the south.
It seemed a difficult task. Francis II, the son and successor of
the infamous "King Bomba," had a well-organized army of 150,000
men. But his father's tyranny had filled the land with secret
societies, and fortunately at this time the Swiss mercenaries
were recalled home, leaving to Francis only his native troops,
many of them disloyal at heart to his cause. This was the
critical interval which Mazzini and Garibaldi chose for their
work.

At the beginning of April, 1860, the signal was given by separate
insurrections in Messina and Palermo. These were easily
suppressed by the troops in garrison; but though both cities were
declared in a state of siege, demonstrations took place by which
the revolutionary chiefs excited the public mind. On the 6th of
May, Garibaldi started with two steamers from Genoa with about a
thousand Italian volunteers, and on the 11th landed near Marsala,
on the west coast of Sicily. He proceeded to the mountains, and
near Salemi gathered round him the scattered bands of the free
corps. By the 14th his army had increased to 4,000 men. He now
issued a proclamation, in which he took upon himself the
dictatorship of Sicily, in the name of Victor Emmanuel, "king of
Italy."

After waging various successful combats under the most difficult
circumstances, Garibaldi advanced upon the capital, announcing
his arrival by beacon-fires kindled at night. On the 27th he was
in front of the Porta Termina of Palermo, and at once gave the
signal for the attack. The people rose in mass, and assisted the
operations of the besiegers by barricade-fighting in the streets.
In a few hours half the town was in Garibaldi's hands. But now
General Lanza, whom the young king had dispatched with strong
reinforcements to Sicily, furiously bombarded the insurgent city,
so that Palermo was reduced almost to a heap of ruins.

At this juncture, by the intervention of an English admiral, an
armistice was concluded, which led to the departure of the
Neapolitan troops and war vessels and the surrender of the town
to Garibaldi, who thus, with a band of 5,000 badly armed
followers, had gained a signal advantage over a regular army of
25,000 men. This event had tremendous consequences, for it showed
the utter hollowness of the Neapolitan government, while
Garibaldi's fame was everywhere spread abroad. The glowing fancy
of the Italians beheld in him the national hero before whom every
enemy would bite the dust. This idea seemed to extend even to the
Neapolitan court itself, where all was doubt, confusion and
dismay. The king hastily summoned a liberal ministry, and offered
to restore the constitution of 1848, but the general verdict was,
"too late," and his proclamation fell flat on a people who had no
trust in Bourbon faith.

The arrival of Garibaldi in Naples was enough to set in blaze all
the combustible materials in that state. His appearance there was
not long delayed. Six weeks after the surrender of Palermo he
marched against Messina. On the 21st of July the fortress of
Melazzo was evacuated, and a week afterwards all Messina except
the citadel was given up.

OCCUPATION OF NAPLES

Europe was astounded at the remarkable success of Garibaldi's
handful of men. On the mainland his good fortune was still more
astonishing. He had hardly landed - which he did almost in the
face of the Neapolitan fleet - when Reggio was surrendered and
its garrison withdrew. His progress through the south of the
kingdom was like a triumphal procession. At the end of August he
was at Cosenza; on the 5th of September at Eboli, near Salerno.
No resistance appeared. His very name seemed to work like magic
on the population. The capital had been declared in a state of
siege, and on September 6th the king took to flight, retiring,
with the 4,000 men still faithful to him, behind the Volturno.
The next day Garibaldi with a few followers, entered Naples,
whose populace received him with frantic shouts of welcome.

The remarkable achievements of Garibaldi filled all Italy with
overmastering excitement. He had declared that he would proclaim
the kingdom of Italy from the heart of its capital city, and
nothing less than this would content the people. The position of
the pope had become serious. He refused to grant the reforms
suggested by the French emperor, and threatened with
excommunication any one who should meddle with the domain of the
Church. Money was collected from faithful Catholics throughout
the world, a summons was issued calling for recruits to the holy
army of the pope, and the exiled French General Lamoriciere was
given the chief command of the troops, composed of men who had
flocked to Rome from many nations. It was hoped that the name of
the celebrated French leader would have a favorable influence on
the troops of the French garrison of Rome.

The settlement of the perilous situation seemed to rest with
Louis Napoleon. If he had let Garibaldi have his way the latter
would, no doubt, have quickly ended the temporal sovereignty of
the pope and made Rome the capital of Italy. But Napoleon seems
to have arranged with Cavour to leave the king of Sardinia free
to take possession of Naples, Umbria and the other provinces
provided that Rome and the "patrimony of St. Peter" were left
intact.

VICTOR EMMANUEL TAKES COMMAND

At the beginning of September two Sardinian army corps, under
Fanti and Cialdini, marched to the borders of the states of the
Church. Lamoriciere advanced against Cialdini with his motley
troops, but was quickly defeated, and on the following day was
besieged in the fortress of Ancona. On the 29th he and the
garrison surrendered as prisoners of war. On the 9th of October
Victor Emmanuel arrived and took command. There was no longer a
papal army to oppose him, and the march southward proceeded
without a check.

The object of the king in assuming the chief command was to
complete the conquest of the kingdom of Naples, in conjunction
with Garibaldi. For though Garibaldi had entered the capital in
triumph, the progress on the line of the Volturno had been slow;
and the expectation that the Neapolitan army would go over to the
invaders in a mass had not been realized. The great majority of
the troops remained faithful to the flag, so that Garibaldi,
although his irregular bands amounted to more than 25,000 men,
could not hope to drive away King Francis, or to take the
fortresses of Capua and Gaeta, without the help of Sardinia.
Against the diplomatic statesman Cavour, who fostered no
illusions, and saw the conditions of affairs in its true light,
the simple, honest Garibaldi cherished a deep aversion. He could
never forgive Cavour for having given up Nice, Garibaldi's native
town, to the French. On the other hand, he felt attracted toward
the king, who, in his opinion, seemed to be the man raised up by
Providence for the liberation of Italy.

Accordingly, when Victor Emmanuel entered Sessa, at the head of
his army, Garibaldi was easily induced to place his dictatorial
power in the hands of the king, to whom he left the completion of
the work of the union of Italy. After greeting Victor Emmanuel
with the title of King of Italy, and giving the required
resignation of his power, with the words, "Sire, I obey," he
entered Naples, riding beside the king; and then, after
recommending his companions in arms to his majesty's special
favor, he retired to his home on the island of Caprera, refusing
to receive a reward, in any shape or form, for his services to
the state and its head.

The progress of the Sardinian army compelled Francis to give up
the line of the Volturno, and he eventually took refuge, with his
best troops, in the fortress of Gaeta. On the maintenance of this
fortress hung the fate of the kingdom of Naples. Its defense is
the only bright point in the career of the feeble Francis, whose
courage was aroused by the heroic resolution of his young wife,
the Bavarian Princess Mary. For three months the defense
continued. But no European Power came to the aid of the king,
disease appeared with scarcity of food and of munitions of war,
and the garrison was at length forced to capitulate. The fall of
Gaeta was practically the completion of the great work of the
unification of Italy. Only Rome and Venice remained to be added
to the united kingdom. On February 18, 1861, Victor Emmanuel
assembled at Turin the deputies of all the states that
acknowledged his supremacy, and in their presence assumed the
title of King of Italy, which he was the first to bear. In four
months afterwards Count Cavour, to whom this great work was
largely due, died. He had lived long enough to see the purpose of
his life practically accomplished.

WATCHWORD OF THE PATRIOTS

Great as had been the change which two years had made, the
patriots of Italy were not satisfied. "Free from the Alps to the
Adriatic!" was their cry; "Rome and Venice!" became the watchword
of the revolutionists. Mazzini, who had sought to found a
republic, was far from content, and the agitation went on.
Garibaldi was drawn into it, and made bitter complaint of the
treatment his followers had received. In 1862, disheartened at
the inaction of the king, he determined to undertake against Rome
an expedition like that which he had led against Naples two years
before.

In June he sailed from Genoa and landed at Palermo, where he was
quickly joined by an enthusiastic party of volunteers. They
supposed that the government secretly favored their design, but
the king had no idea of fighting against the French troops in
Rome and arousing international complications, and he
energetically warned all Italians against taking part in
revolutionary enterprises.

GARIBALDI MARCHES AGAINST ROME

But Garibaldi persisted in his design. When his way was barred by
the garrison of Messina he tuned aside to Catania, where he
embarked with 2,000 volunteers, declaring he would enter Rome as
a victor, or perish beneath its walls. He landed at Melito on the
24th of August, and threw himself at once, with his followers,
into the Calabrian mountains. But his enterprise was quickly and
disastrously ended. General Cialdini despatched a division of the
regular army, under Colonel Pallavicino, against the volunteer
bands. At Aspromonte, on the 28th of August, the two forces came
into collision. A chance shot was followed by several volleys
from the regulars. Garibaldi forbade his men to return the fire
of their fellow-subjects of the Italian kingdom. He was wounded,
and taken prisoner with his followers, a few of whom had been
slain in the short combat. A government steamer carried the
wounded chief to Varignano, where he was held in a sort of
honorable imprisonment, and was compelled to undergo a tedious
and painful operation for the healing of his wound. He had at
least the consolation that all Europe looked with sympathy and
interest upon the unfortunate hero; and a general sense of relief
was felt when, restored to health, he was set free, and allowed
to return to his rocky island of Caprera.

Victor Emmanuel was seeking to accomplish his end by safer means.
The French garrison of Rome was the obstacle in his way, and this
was finally removed through a treaty with Louis Napoleon in
September, 1864, the emperor agreeing to withdraw his troops
during the succeeding two years, in which the pope was to raise
an army large enough to defend his dominions. Florence was to
replace Turin as the capital of Italy. This arrangement created
such disturbances in Turin that the king was forced to leave that
city hastily for his new capital. In December, 1866, the last of
the French troops departed from Rome, in spite of the efforts of
the pope to retain them. By their withdrawal Italy was freed from
the presence of foreign soldiers for the first time probably in a
thousand years.

In 1866 came an event which reacted favorably for Italy, though
her part in it was the reverse of triumphant. This was the war
between Prussia and Austria. Italy was in alliance with Prussia,
and Victor Emmanuel hastened to lead an army across the Mincio to
the invasion of Venetia, the last Austrian province in Italy.
Garibaldi at the same time was to invade the Tyrol with his
volunteers. The enterprise ended in disaster. The Austrian
troops, under the Archduke Albert, encountered the Italians at
Custozza and gained a brilliant victory, despite the much greater
numbers of the Italians.

Fortunately for Italy, the Austrians had been unsuccessful in the
north, and the emperor, with the hope of gaining the alliance of
France and breaking the compact between Italy and Prussia,
decided to cede Venetia to Louis Napoleon. His purpose failed.
All Napoleon did in response was to act as a peacemaker, while
the Italian king refused to recede from his alliance. Though the
Austrians were retreating from a country which no longer belonged
to them, the invasion of Venetia by the Italians continued, and
several conflicts with the Austrian army took place.

BATTLE OF IRONCLADS

But the most memorable event of this brief war occurred on the
sea - the greatest battle of ironclad ships in the period between
the American Civil War and the Japan-China contest. Both
countries concerned had fleets on the Adriatic. Italy was the
strongest in navel vessels, possessing ten ironclads and a
considerable number of wooden ships. Austria's ironclad fleet was
seven in number, plated with thin iron and with no very heavy
guns. In addition there was a number of wooden vessels and
gunboats. But in command of this fleet was an admiral in whose
blood was the iron which was lacking on his ships, Tegetthoff,
the Nelson of the Adriatic. Inferior as his ships were, his men
were thoroughly drilled in the use of the guns and the evolutions
of the ships, and when he sailed it was with the one thought of
victory.

Persano, the Italian admiral, as if despising his adversary,
engaged in siege of the fortified island of Lissa, near the
Dalmatian coast, leaving the Austrians to do what they pleased.
What they pleased was to attack him with a fury such as has been
rarely seen. Early on July 20, 1866, when the Italians were
preparing for a combined assault of the island by land and sea,
their movement was checked by the signal displayed on a scouting
frigate: "Suspicious-looking ships are in sight." Soon afterwards
the Austrian fleet appeared, the ironclads leading, the wooden
ships in the rear.

The battle that followed has had no parallel before or since. The
whole Austrian fleet was converted into rams. Tegetthoff gave one
final order to his captains: "Close with the enemy and ram
everything grey." Grey was the color of the Italian ships. The
Austrian were painted black, so as to prevent any danger of
error.

Fire was opened at two miles distance, the balls being wasted in
the waters between the fleets. "Full steam ahead," signaled
Tegetthoff. On came the fleets, firing steadily, the balls now
beginning to tell. "Ironclads will ram and sink the enemy,"
signaled Tegetthoff. It was the last order he gave until the
battle was won.

Soon the two lines of ironclads closed amid thick clouds of
smoke. Tegetthoff, in his flagship, the Ferdinand Max, twice
rammed a grey ironclad without effect. Then, out of the smoke,
loomed up the tall masts of the Re d'Italia, Persano's flagship
in the beginning of the fray. Against this vessel the Ferdinand
Max rushed at full speed, and struck her fairly amidships. Her
sides of iron were crushed in by the powerful blow, her tall
masts toppled over, and down beneath the waves sank the great
ship with her crew of 600 men. The next minute another Italian
ship came rushing upon the Austrian, and was only avoided by a
quick turn of the helm.

One other great disaster occurred to the Italians. The Palestro
was set on fire, and the pumps were put actively to work to drown
the magazine. The crew thought the work had been successfully
performed, and that they were getting the fire under control,
when there suddenly came a terrible burst of flame attended by a
roar that drowned all the din of the battle. It was the death
knell of 400 men, for the Palestro had blown up with all on
board. The great ironclad turret ship and ram of the Italian
fleet, the Affondatore, to which Admiral Persano had shifted his
flag, far the most powerful vessel in the Adriatic, kept outside
of the battle line, and was of little service in the fray. It was
apparently afraid to encounter Tegetthoff's terrible rams. The
battle ended with the Austrian fleet, wooden vessels and all,
passing practically unharmed through the Italian lines into the
harbor of Lissa, leaving death and destruction in their rear.
Tegetthoff was the one Austrian who came out of that war with
fame. Persano on his return home was put on trial for cowardice
and incompetence. He was convicted of the latter and dismissed
from the navy in disgrace.

FINAL ACT OF ITALIAN UNITY

But Italy, though defeated by land and sea, gained a valuable
prize from the war, for Napoleon ceded Venetia to the Italian
king, and soon afterwards Victor Emmanuel entered Venice in
triumph. Thus was completed the second act in the unification of
Italy.

The national party, with Garibaldi at its head, still aimed at
the possession of Rome, as the historic capital of the peninsula.
In 1867 he made a second attempt to capture Rome, but the papal
army, strengthened with a new French auxiliary force, defeated
his badly armed volunteers, and he was taken prisoner and held
captive for a time, after which he was sent back to Caprera. This
led to the French army of occupation being returned to Civita
Vecchia, where it was kept for several years.

The final act came as a consequence of the Franco-German war of
1870, which rendered necessary the withdrawal of the French
troops from Italy. The pope was requested to make a peaceful
abdication. As he refused this, the States of the Church were
occupied up to the walls of the capital, and a three-hours'
cannonade of the city sufficed to bring the long strife to an
end. Rome became the capital of Italy, and the whole peninsula,
for the first time since the fall of the ancient Roman empire,
was concentrated into a single nation, under one king.


Chapter X. THE EXPANSION OF GERMANY

Beginnings of Modern World Power

William I of Prussia - Bismarck's Early Career - The
Schleswig-Holstein Question - Conquest of the Duchies -
Bismarck's Wider Views - War Forced on Austria - The War in Italy
- Austria's Signal Defeat at Sadowa - The Treaty of Prague -
Germany after 1866

The effort made in 1848 to unify Germany had failed for two
reasons - first, because its promoters had not sufficiently clear
and precise ideas, and, secondly, because they lacked material
strength. Until 1859 reaction against novelties and their
advocates dominated in Germany and even Prussia as well as in
Austria. The Italian war, as was readily foreseen, and as wary
counselors had told Napoleon III, revived the agitation in favor
of unity beyond the Rhine. After September 16, 1859, it had its
center in the national circle of Frankfort and its manifesto in
the proclamation which was issued on September 4, 1860, a
proclamation whose terms, though in moderate form, clearly
announced the design of excluding Austria from Germany. It was
the object of those favoring unity, but with more decision than
in 1848, to place the group of German states under Prussia's
imperial direction. The accession of a new king, William I, who
was already in advance called William the Conqueror, was likely
to bring this project to a successful issue. The future German
emperor's predecessor, Frederick William IV, with the same
ambition as his brother, had too many prejudices and too much
confusion in his mind to be capable of realizing it. Becoming
insane towards the close of 1857, he had to leave the government
to William, who, officially regent after October 7, 1858, became
king on January 2, 1861.

WILLIAM I OF PRUSSIA

The new sovereign was almost sixty-four years old. The son of
Frederick William III and Queen Louisa, while yet a child he had
witnessed the disasters of his country and his home, and then as
a young man had had his first experience of arms towards the
close of the Napoleonic wars. Obliged to flee during the revolt
of 1848, he had afterwards, by his pro-English attitude at the
time of the Crimean war, won the sympathies of the Liberals, who
joyfully acclaimed his accession. To lower him to the rank of a
party leader was to judge him erroneously. William I was above
all a Prussian prince, serious, industrious, and penetrated with
a sense of his duties to the state, the first of which, according
to the men of his house, has ever been to aggrandize it; and he
was also imbued with the idea that the state was essentially
incarnate in him.

"I am the first king," he said at his coronation, "to assume
power since the throne has been surrounded with modern
institutions, BUT I do not forget that the crown comes from God."

He had none of the higher talents that mark great men, but he
possessed the two essential qualities of the head of a state -
firmness and judgment. He showed this by the way in which he
chose and supported those who built up his greatness, and this
merit is rarer than is generally supposed. A soldier above all,
he saw that Prussia's ambitions could be realized only with a
powerful army.

Advised by Von Moltke, the army's chief of staff after 1858, and
Von Roon, the great administrator, who filled the office of
minister of war, he changed the organization of 1814, which had
become insufficient. Instead of brigades formed in war time, half
of men in active service and half of reserves, regiments were now
recruited by a three (instead of a two) years' service and
reinforced in case of need by the classes of reserves. The
Landwehr, divided into two classes (twenty-five to thirty-two
years and thirty-two to thirty-nine), was grouped separately.
This system gave seven hundred thousand trained soldiers, Prussia
having then seventeen million inhabitants. This was more than
either France or Austria had. The armament was also superior.
Frederick William I had already said that the first result to be
obtained in this direction was celerity in firing. This was
assured by the invention of the needle gun.

BISMARCK'S EARLY CAREER

Such a transformation entailed heavy expenses. The Prussian
Chamber, made up for the most part of Liberals, did not
appreciate its utility. Moreover, it was not in favor of
increasing the number of officers, because they were recruited
from the nobility. After having yielded with bad grace in 1860,
the deputies refused the grants in 1861 and 1862. It was at this
time that Bismarck was called to the ministry (September 24,
1862). Otto von Bismarck-Schonhausen, born April 1, 1815,
belonged by birth to that minor Prussian nobility, rough and
realistic, but faithful and disciplined, which has ever been one
of the Prussian state's sources of strength. After irregular
studies at the university of Gottingen, he had entered the
administration, but had not been able to stay in it, and had
lived on his rather moderate estates until 1847. The diet of that
year, to which he had been elected, brought him into prominence.
There he distinguished himself in the Junker (poor country
squires') party by his marked contempt for the Liberalism then in
vogue and his insolence to the Liberals. Frederick William IV
entrusted him with representing Prussia at Frankfort, where he
assumed the same attitude towards the Austrians (1851-59).

He was afterward ambassador at St. Petersburg, and had just been
sent to Paris in the same capacity when he became prime minister.

His character was a marked one. In it was evident a taste for
sarcastic raillery and a sort of frankness, apparently brutal,
but really more refined than cruel. His qualities were those of
all great politicians, embracing energy, decision and realism;
that is, talent for appreciating all things at their effective
value and for not letting himself be duped either by appearances,
by current theories, or by words. Very unfavorably received by
the parliament, he paid little heed to the furious opposition of
the deputies, causing to be promulgated by ordinance the budget
which they refused him, suppressing hostile newspapers, treating
his adversaries with studied insolence, and declaring to them
that, if the Chamber had its rights, the king also had his, and
that force must settle the matter in such a case. To get rid of
these barren struggles, he took advantage of the first incident
of foreign politics. The Schleswig-Holstein question furnished
him with the desired opportunity.

THE SCHLESWIG-HOLSTEIN QUESTION

This was the first of the  various important questions of
international policy in which Bismarck became concerned. The
united provinces of Schleswig-Holstein, lying on the northern
border of Denmark  had long been notable as a source of continual
strife between Germany and Denmark. The majority of the
inhabitants of Schleswig were Danes, but those of Holstein were
very largely Germans, and the question of their true national
affiliation lay open from the time of their original union in
1386. It became insistent after the middle of the nineteenth
century.

The Treaty of London in 1852 had maintained the union of Holstein
with Denmark, but did not put a definite end to the demands of
the Germans, who held that it was a constituent part of Germany.
The quarrel was renewed in 1855 over a common constitution given
by King Frederick VII to all his states. This was abolished in
1858, and afterwards the Danes sought to grant complete autonomy
to the duchies of Schleswig and Lauenburg, this movement being
with the purpose of making more complete the union of Schleswig
with their country. This step, taken in 1863, led to a protest
from the German diet.

In all this there was food for an indefinite contest, for, on the
one hand, Schleswig did not form a part of the Confederation,
but, on the other, certain historical bonds attached it to
Holstein, and its population was mixed. The death of Frederick
VII (November 15, 1863), who was succeeded by a distant relative,
Christian IX, further complicated the quarrel. The duke of
Augustenburg claimed the three duchies, though he had previously
renounced them. The German diet, on its part, wanted the Danish
constitution abolished in Schleswig.

The dream of the petty German states hostile to Prussia, and
especially of the Saxon minister, Von Beust, was to strengthen
their party by the creating of a new duchy. Bismarck admirably
outplayed everybody. He knew that the great Powers were at odds
with one another over Poland. He, on the contrary, could count on
Russia's friendship and the personal aid of Queen Victoria, whom
Prince Albert had completely won over to pro-German ideas. He
used England to make Christian IX consent to the occupation of
Holstein, which, he said, was in reality an acknowledgment of
that king's rights. At this stage, had the Danes yielded to the
necessities of the situation and withdrawn from Schleswig under
protest, the European Powers would probably have intervened and a
congress would have restored Schleswig to the Danish realm.
Bismarck prevented this by a cunning stratagem, making the
Copenhagen government believe that Great Britain had taken a step
hostile to that government. There was no truth in this, but it
succeeded in inducing Denmark to remain defiant. As a
consequence, on the 1st of February 1864, the combined forces of
Prussia and Austria crossed the Eider and invaded the province.

It was a movement to regain to Germany a section held to be
non-Danish in population and retained by Denmark against the
traditions and will of its people. Austria, which did not wish to
appear less German than Prussia, though the matter did not
directly appeal to that country, joined in the movement, being
drawn into it by Bismarck's shrewd policy.

It was not the original intention to go beyond the borders of the
duchies and invade Denmark, but when Christian IX tried to resist
the invasion this was done. The Danewerk and the Schlei were
forced, and the Danish army was defeated at Flensburg and driven
back into Dueppel, which was taken by assault. A conference of
the great Powers, opened at London (April 25th to June 25th),
brought about no result. Napoleon III did not refuse to act, but
he wanted as a condition that England would promise him something
more than its moral support, which it refused to do. Finally
Jutland was invaded and conquered, and Van Moltke was already
preparing for a landing in Fuenen when Christian IX gave up all
the duchies by the Vienna preliminaries (August 1st), confirmed
by treaty on October 30th following.

CONQUEST OF THE DUCHIES

The fate of the conquest remained to be decided upon. Bismarck
settled it, after a pretence of investigation, by concluding that
the rights of King Christian over the duchies were far superior
to those of the duke of Augstenburg, who had a hereditary claim,
and that as Prussia and Austria had won them from the king by
conquest, they had become the lawful owners. An agreement was
made in which Holstein was assigned to Austria and Schleswig to
Prussia, and for the time the question seemed settled.

BISMARCK'S WIDER VIEWS

This was far from being the case. Bismarck held views of far more
expanded scope. He wanted to exclude Austria from the German
confederation, and to do so desired war with that country as the
only practical means of gaining his ends. In 1865 he made the
significant remark that a single battle in Bohemia would decide
everything and that Prussia would win that battle. A remark like
this was indicative of the purpose entertained and the events
soon to follow.

In such a war, however, it was important to secure the neutrality
of France. The alert Prussian statesman had already assured
himself of that of Russia. To gain France to his side he held an
interview with Napoleon III at Biarritz in October, 1865. The
cunning diplomat offered the emperor an alliance with a view to
the extension of Prussia and Italy, by means of which France
would take Belgium. Napoleon saw very clearly that the offer was
chimerical, but he believed that Prussia if fighting alone would
be rapidly crushed, and that the alliance of Italy would aid him
in protracting the war, thus enabling him to intervene as a
peacemaker and to impose a vast rearrangement of territory, the
most essential provision of which would be the exchange of
Venetia for Silesia. Whatever Napoleon's views, Bismarck saw that
he was safe from any interference on the part of France, and
returned with the fixed design of driving Austria to the wall.

WAR FORCED ON AUSTRIA

He found the desired pretext in the Holstein question and the far
more serious one of reforming the federal government. On January
24, 1866, he reproached the Austrian government with favoring in
Holstein the pretensions of the Duke of Augustenburg. The
grievance soon became envenomed by complaints and ulterior
measures. In April Bismarck denounced the so-called offensive
measures which Austria was taking in Bohemia and which, in short,
were only precautionary. Yet at the same time he himself was
signing with Italy a treaty, concluded for three months, by
virtue of which Victor Emmanuel was to declare war against
Austria as soon as Prussia itself had done so.

Bismarck, now invited to lay the Austrian-Prussian dispute before
the diet, answered by asking that an assembly elected by
universal suffrage be called to discuss the question of federal
reform. And when Austria offered to disarm in Bohemia if Prussia
would do so on its part, Bismarck demanded, in addition,
disarmament in Venetia, a condition he knew to be unacceptable.
On May 7, 1866, he declared he would not accept the diet's
intervention in the duchies question, and on the 8th ordered the
mobilization of the Prussian army.

Napoleon III at this juncture proposed the holding of a congress
for settling the duchies question and that of federal reform.
Thiers had warned him in vain, in an admirable speech delivered
on May 3d, that France had everything to lose by aiding in
bringing about the unity of Germany. The emperor obstinately
persisted, proposing to tear up those treaties of 1815 which, two
years before, he had childishly declared to be no longer in
existence. His proposition of a congress, however, failed through
the refusal of Austria and the petty states to take part in it.
He next signed with Austria a secret treaty by which the latter
promised to cede Venetia after its first victory and on condition
of being indemnified at Prussia's expense. By a strange
inconsistency the French emperor proposed at the same time to
make Prussia more homogeneous in the north.

Bismarck acted in a far clearer manner than the French emperor.
On June 5th, General von Gablenz, the Austrian governor of
Holstein, convened the states of that country, Austria declaring
that the object of this measure was to enable the federal diet to
settle the question. A German force under General Manteuffel at
once invaded the duchy and, having far superior forces at his
disposal, took possession of it. On the 10th, Prussia asked the
different German States to accept a new constitution based on the
exclusion of Austria, the election of a parliament by universal
suffrage, the creation of a strong federal power and a common
army. The diet answered by voting the federal execution against
Prussia. Thereupon the Prussian envoy, Savigny, withdrew,
declaring that his sovereign ceased to recognize the
Confederation.

Events proved how correctly Bismarck had judged in his confidence
in Prussia's military strength. The Prussian forces amounted to
330,000 men, who were to be aided in the south by 240,000
Italians. Austria had 335,000 troops and its German allies
146,000. Generally the last named had little zeal.

The Austrian government acted slowly, while its adversary
vigorously assumed the offensive. On June 16th, after an
unavailing notice, the Prussian troops invaded Saxony and
occupied it without resistance, the Saxon army withdrawing to
Bohemia. The same was the case in Hesse, whose grand duke was
taken prisoner, while his army joined the Bavarians. Still less
fortunate was the king of Hanover, who did not even save his
army, which also retreating towards the south, was surrounded and
obliged to capitulate at Langensalza (June 29th).

In the south the Prussian General Vogel von Falkenstein, who had
but 57,000 men against over 100,000, took advantage of the fact
that his adversaries had separated into two masses, the one at
Frankfort, and the other at Meiningen, to beat them separately,
the Bavarians at Kissingen (July 10th) and the Prince of Hesse,
commanding the other army, at Aschaffenurg (July 14th). On the
16th the Prussians entered Frankfort, which they overwhelmed with
requisitions and contributions. General Manteuffel, Falkenstein's
successor, then drove the federal armies from the line of the
Tauber, where they had united, back to Wurzburg. On the 28th an
armistice was concluded.

THE WAR IN ITALY

The Italians had been less successful. Archduke Albert, who
commanded in Venetia, had only 70,000 men, but they were Croatian
Slavs, that is, Austria's best troops. Confronting him, Victor
Emmanuel commanded 124,000 men on the Chiese and Cialdini 80,000
in the neighborhood of Ferrara. They proved unable to act
together. Cialdini let himself be kept in check by a mere handful
of troops, while the Austrian archduke attacked the Italian royal
army at Custozza. Serious errors in tactics and panic in an
Italian brigade, which fled before three platoons of lancers that
had the audacity to charge it, gave victory to the Austrians.
Cialdini had remained behind the Po. Garibaldi, who had
undertaken with 36,000 men, to conquer the Trent region, defended
by only 13,000 regulars and 4,000 militia under General von Kuhn,
found himself not only repulsed in every attack, but, had it not
been for the evacuation of Venetia, his adversary would have
pursued him on Italian territory. The important events which took
place at sea have been described in the preceding chapter.

AUSTRIA'S SIGNAL DEFEAT OF SADOWA

It was not on these events that the outcome of the war was to
depend, but on the victory or defeat of the chief Austrian army.
The forces of the two Powers on the Silesian and Saxon frontier
were almost equal; but the Austrian commander-in-chief, Benedek,
brave and brilliant as a division leader, proved unequal to his
present task. He dallied in Moravia until June 16th, while the
Prussians entered Bohemia in two separate masses, one on each
side of the Riesen Gebirge. Benedek wavered and blundered. He
sent only 60,000 men against 150,000 under Prince Frederick
Charles, and they suffered four defeats in as many days (June
26-29th). At the same time he had made the same mistake in regard
to the Prince Royal, who won in over half a dozen skirmishes.
During the following night, June 29-30th, the second Prussian
army reached the Elbe.

Benedek's incapacity was now completely demonstrated. He
telegraphed to the emperor to make peace at any cost, and
retreated on Olmutz. Then he changed his mind and decided to
fight, seeking to throw the blame for his own errors on his
subordinates. The battle-field chosen by him was near the village
of Sadowa, and here his army, though sadly demoralized, fought
with much bravery. The Austrians, whom their general had notified
of the imminent battle only in the middle of the night, had
fortified the slopes and villages as best they could. At eight in
the morning Frederick Charles began the attack by crossing the
Bistritz. Benedek's center resisted, but the right and left wings
lost ground. At half past eleven the Prussians were losing ground
and seemed ready to retreat. At this critical moment the army of
the Prince Royal appeared, coming from the north.

The second and sixth Austrian corps, obliged to confront the new
troops with a flank march under the fire of the Prussian
artillery, could not hold out long, and about three o'clock the
strongest Austrian position was lost. It was necessary at any
cost to regain it, but all efforts failed against their own
intrenchments, defended by the captors with desperate energy. At
half past four retreat became necessary. Half of the Austrian
army escaped without much difficulty; but the rest, three army
corps, driven towards the Elbe by the entire victorious army,
would have been annihilated but for the devotedness of the
cavalry and the artillerymen. These formed successive fire lines,
and continuing to shoot until the muzzles of their guns were
reached, saving the infantry from destruction through dint of
dying at their posts. Despite this diversion it was a frightful
rout, which cost the vanquished 40,000 men and 187 pieces of
artillery. The Prussians lost only 10,000 dead and wounded.

THE TREATY OF PRAGUE

The Austrians tried to fall back on Vienna, but only three corps
out of eight reached there, as the Prussian army by a rapid march
had forced the others to seek refuge at Presburg. On July 18th
the Prussian armies were concentrated on the Russbach. Archduke
Albert, recalled from Italy, had taken command of the troops
covering Vienna, but the internal condition of the empire, where
Hungary was in agitation, was too disquieting for it to be
possible, without aid, to continue the war. This aid Napoleon III
could and should have furnished. The French army had suffered
from the expedition to Mexico. Yet it would have been possible to
put a hundred thousand men on foot immediately, and later on,
Bismarck acknowledged that this would have sufficed to change the
result. But Napoleon III was ill and swayed between opposing
influences. Prince Napoleon, whom he heeded very much, was
decidedly in favor of Prussia. Accordingly, no step was taken but
an offer of mediation. Then he had the weakness, in spite of his
minister, Drouyn de Lhuys, to consent to the annexations which
Prussia wished to bring about in northern Germany. He asked,
however, that Austria lose only Venetia, but it was precisely
Bismarck's will that had, and not without difficulty, persuaded
King William that he must not, by territorial demands, compromise
the alliance which he afterwards realized.

On July 26th the peace preliminaries of Nikolsburg were signed.
Austria paid a considerable indemnity, abandoned its former
position in Germany, acknowledged the extension of Prussian
authority to the line of the Main and the annexations which
Prussia would deem it to its purpose to make. The three Danish
duchies were likewise abandoned. It was stipulated only that the
inhabitants of northern Schleswig should be consulted as to their
wish to be restored or not to Denmark, which was never done. The
definitive treaty was signed on August 25th at Prague. As for
Italy, Francis Joseph had ceded Venetia to Napoleon III, who was
to transmit it to Victor Emmanuel, but the Italians protested
loudly against the idea of being satisfied with so little. They
wanted in addition at least the Trent country. "Have you, then,"
Bismarck said to them, "lost another battle to claim a province
more?"  On August 10th the preliminaries of peace were signed on
that side. The final treaty, that of Vienna, was concluded on
October 3, 1866.

GERMANY AFTER 1866

Prussia, now master of Germany, annexed Hanover, Hesse-Cassel,
Nassau and the city of Frankfort, which increased its population
by four and a half millions. The rest of the northern states as
far as the Main were to form under its direction the
Confederation of Northern Germany (proclaimed July 1, 1867), with
a constitution exactly the same as that of the German empire of
today. As for the southern states, they remained independent, but
signed military agreements which connected them with Prussia.
Napoleon III tried in vain to obtain a compensation for that
enormous increase of power. To the first overtures which he made
to this end (he wanted the Palatinate) Bismarck answered with a
flat refusal and a threat of war. He added, however, that he
would consent to an enlargement of France from Belgium, a project
which he was afterwards careful to mention as coming from the
Paris cabinet.

Bismarck had succeeded in humbling Austria and reducing its
importance among the great Powers of Europe, and had expanded
Prussia alike on the north and south and made it decisively the
ruling nation in Central Europe. As we have seen, it had
concluded military agreements with the states of southern
Germany. It held them also in another manner, namely, by means of
the Zollverein, signed anew on June 4, 1867. But it was as yet
far from having brought about a peaceful realization of unity.
The southern states, not merely the sovereigns only, but the
peoples as well, had always shown little taste for Prussian
leadership, and after 1866 this feeling was very visible. It was
for that reason that Bismarck had need of a war against France to
strengthen his position. Union against the foreigner was the
cement with which he hoped to complete political unity. Such a
war came near breaking out in 1867 in relation to Luxembourg.
Napoleon III keenly desired to have at least that country as
compensation for Prussia's aggrandizements, and the king of
Holland was disposed to cede his rights for a consideration. But
Bismarck, after having secretly approved of the bargain,
officially declared his opposition to it. Napoleon, hampered at
one and the same time by the Paris Exposition of that year and by
the bad condition of his army, was too happy to escape from
embarrassment, since it was evident that the Prussians were not
willing to evacuate the fortress of Luxembourg, by obtaining with
the aid of the other Powers that the little duchy be declared
neutral and the walls of its capital destroyed.

In spite of this arrangement, it remained certain to everybody
that a conflict would break out in a short time between France
and Prussia. We have seen what reasons Bismarck had for the
methods pursued by him and those projected. Napoleon III's
government, justly censured by opinion for the weakness which it
had shown in 1866 and constantly losing its authority, was
destined to fall into the first trap its adversary would set for
it. What this trap was and the momentous events to which it led
will be described in the next chapter.


Chapter XI. THE FRANCO-PRUSSIAN WAR

Birth of the German Empire and the French Republic

Causes of Hostile Relations - Discontent in France - War with
Prussia Declared - Self-Deception of the French - First Meeting
of the Armies - The Stronghold of Metz - Mars-la-Tour and
Gravelotte - Napoleon III at Sedan - The Emperor a Captive;
France a Republic - Bismarck Refuses Intervention - Fall of the
Fortresses - Paris is Besieged - Defiant Spirit of the French -
The Struggle Continued - Operations Before Paris - Fighting in
the South - The War at an End

In 1866 the war between the two great powers of Germany, in which
most of the smaller powers were concerned, led to more decided
measures, in the absorption by Prussia of the weaker states, the
formation of a North German League among the remaining states of
the north, and the offensive and defensive alliance with Prussia
of the south German states. By the treaty of peace with Austria,
that power was excluded from the German League, and Prussia
remained the dominant power in Germany. A constitution for the
League was adopted in 1867, providing for a Diet, or legislative
council of the League, elected by the direct votes of the people,
and an army, which was to be under the command of the Prussian
king and subject to the military laws of Prussia. Each state in
the League bound itself to supply a specified sum for the support
of the army.

Here was a union with a backbone - an army and a budget - and
Bismarck had done more in the five years of his ministry in
forming a united Germany than his predecessors had done in fifty
years. But the idea of union and alliance between kindred states
was then widely in the air. Such a union had been practically
completed in Italy, and Hungary in 1867 regained her ancient
rights, which had been taken from her in 1849, being given a
separate government, with Francis Joseph, the emperor of Austria,

as its king. It was natural that the common blood of the Germans
should lead them to a political confederation, and equally
natural that Prussia, which so overshadowed the smaller states in
strength, should be the leading element in the alliance.

Yet, though Prussia had concluded military agreements with the
states of southern Germany and held them also by means of the
Zollverein, this was far from bringing about a peaceful
realization of unity. The southern states, not merely the
sovereigns only, but the peoples, have always had little taste
for Prussian leadership, and after 1866 this feeling was very
visible. For this reason Bismarck felt it important to instigate
a war against France. Union against the foreigner was to complete
political unity. This subject has been dealt with in the
preceding chapter, and we need here merely to repeat that warlike
sentiments were in the air in 1867, in regard to the desire of
Napoleon III to add to his empire the little duchy of Luxembourg
and Bismarck's opposition to this desire. France was not then in
a favorable condition for war, and the matter was finally settled
by declaring Luxembourg a neutral state and ordering the walls
around its capital to be destroyed.

CAUSES OF HOSTILE RELATIONS

In spite of this settlement, it remained certain to everybody
that a conflict would break out in a short time between France
and Prussia. We have seen what reasons Bismarck had for such a
war. Napoleon III's government, justly censured by opinion for
the weakness which it had shown in 1866, was eager to retrieve
the fault it had then committed. Yet the weakness of the
administration continued and prevented it from adopting the
indispensable military measures that it should have done. The
enemies of power were declaiming against standing armies, which
they declared useless. The government deputies were afraid to
dissatisfy their constituents by aggravating the burdens of the
service. Marshal Niel, minister of war, tried indeed to adopt
measures with a view to the seemingly inevitable conflict. He
caused to be elaborated a plan of campaign, a system of
transportation by railway, an arrangement for the chief places of
the east to be armed with rifled cannon. But the Chamber grudged
him the appropriations for the increase of the army, asking him
if "he wished to make France a vast barracks." "Take care," he
answered the opposition, "lest you make it a vast cemetery."
Accordingly, when the mobile national guard had been created,
made up of all the young men who had not been drawn by lot,
organization was given to it only on paper, and it was never
drilled. Leboeuf, who succeeded Niel in August, 1869, abandoned,
moreover, most of his predecessor's plans. He even neglected to
do anything towards carrying out on the eastern frontier any of
the works of defense already recommended as urgent by the
generals of the restoration.

And thus time passed on until the eventful year 1870. By that
year Prussia had completed its work among the north German states
and was ready for the issue of hostilities, if this should be
necessary. On the other hand, Napoleon, who had found his
prestige in France from various causes decreasing, felt obliged
in 1870 to depart from his policy of personal rule and give that
country a constitutional government. This proposal was submitted
to a vote of the people and was sustained by an immense majority.
He also took occasion to state that "peace was never more assured
than at the present time." This assurance gave satisfaction to
the world, yet it was a false one, for war was probably at that
moment assured.

DISCONTENT IN FRANCE

There were alarming signs in France. The opposition to
Napoleonism was steadily gaining power. A bad harvest was
threatened - a serious source of discontent. The parliament was
discussing the reversal of the sentence of banishment against the
Orleans family. These indications of a change in public sentiment
appeared to call for some act that would aid in restoring the
popularity of the emperor. And of all the acts that could be
devised a national war seemed the most promising. If the Rhine
frontier, which every Frenchman regarded as the natural boundary
of the empire, could be regained by the arms of the nation,
discontent and opposition would vanish, the name of Napoleon
would win back its old prestige, and the reign of Bonapartism
would be firmly established.

Acts speak louder than words, and the acts of Napoleon were not
in accord with his assurances of peace. Extensive military
preparations began, and the forces of the empire were
strengthened by land and sea, while great trust was placed in a
new weapon, of murderous powers, called the Mitrailleuse, the
predecessor of the machine gun, and capable of discharging
twenty-five balls at once.

CAUSES OF HOSTILE RELATIONS

On the other hand, there were abundant indications of discontent
in Germany, where a variety of parties inveighed against the
rapacious policy of Prussia, and where Bismarck had sown a deep
crop of hate. It was believed in France that the minor states
would not support Prussia in a war. In Austria the defeat of 1866
rankled, and hostilities against Prussia on the part of France
seemed certain to win sympathy and support in that composite
empire. Colonel Stoffel, the French military envoy at Berlin,
declared that Prussia would be found abundantly prepared for a
struggle; but his warnings went unheeded in the French Cabinet,
and the warlike preparations continued.

Napoleon did not have to go far for an excuse for the war upon
which he was resolved. One was prepared for him in that potent
source of trouble, the succession to the throne of Spain. In that
country there had for years been no end of trouble, revolts,
Carlist risings, wars and rumors of wars. The government of Queen
Isabella, with its endless intrigues, plots and alternation of
despotism and anarchy, and the pronounced immorality of the
queen, had become so distasteful to the people that finally,
after several years of revolts and armed risings, she was driven
from her throne by a revolution, and for a time Spain was without
a monarch and was ruled on the republican principles.

But this arrangement did not prove satisfactory. The party in
opposition looked around for a king, and negotiations began with
a distant relative of the Prussian royal family, Leopold of
Hohenzollern. Prince Leopold accepted the offer, and informed the
king of Prussia of his decision.

The news of this event caused great excitement in Paris, and the
Prussian government was advised of the painful feeling to which
the incident had given rise. The answer from Berlin that the
Prussian government had no concern in the matter, and that Prince
Leopold was free to act on his own account, did not allay the
excitement. The demand for war grew violent and clamorous, the
voices of the feeble opposition in the Chambers were drowned, and
the journalists and war partisans were confident of a short and
glorious campaign and a triumphant march to Berlin.

The hostile feeling was reduced when King William of Prussia,
though he declined to prohibit Prince Leopold from accepting the
crown, expressed his concurrence with the decision of the prince
when he withdrew his acceptance of the dangerous offer. This
decision was regarded as sufficient, even in Paris; but it did
not seem to be so in the palace, where an excuse for a
declaration of war was ardently desired. The emperor's purpose
was enhanced by the influence of the empress, and it was finally
declared that the Prussian king had aggrieved France in
permitting the prince to become a candidate for the throne
without consulting the French Cabinet.

WAR WITH PRUSSIA DECLARED

Satisfaction for this shadowy source of offense was demanded, but
King William firmly refused to say any more on the subject and
declined to stand in the way of Prince Leopold if he should again
accept the offer of the Spanish throne. This refusal was declared
to be an offense to the honor and a threat to the safety of
France. The war party was so strongly in the ascendant that all
opposition was now looked upon as lack of patriotism, and on the
15th of July the Prime Minister Ollivier announced that the
reserves were to be called out and the necessary measures taken
to secure the honor and security of France. When the declaration
of war was hurled against Prussia the whole nation seemed in
harmony with it and public opinion appeared for once to have
become a unit throughout France.

Rarely in the history of the world has so trivial a cause given
rise to such stupendous military and political events as took
place in France in a brief interval following this blind leap
into hostilities. Instead of a triumphant march to Berlin and the
dictation of peace from its palace, France was to find itself in
two months' time without an emperor or an army, and in a few
months more completely subdued and occupied by foreign troops,
while Paris had been made the scene of a terrible siege and a
frightful communistic riot, and a republic had succeeded the
empire. It was such a series of events as have seldom been
compressed within the short interval of half a year.

In truth Napoleon and his advisers were blinded by their hopes to
the true state of affairs. The army on which they depended, and
which they assumed to be in a high state of efficiency and
discipline, was lacking in almost every requisite of an efficient
force. The first Napoleon had been his own minister of war. The
third Napoleon, when told by his war minister that "not a single
button was wanted on a single gaiter," took the words for the
fact, and hurled an army without supplies and organization
against the most thoroughly organized army the world had ever
known. That the French were as brave as the Germans goes without
saying; they fought desperately, but from the first confusion
reigned in their movements, while military science of the highest
kind dominated those of the Germans.

Napoleon was equally mistaken as to the state of affairs in
Germany. The disunion upon which he counted vanished at the first
threat of war. All Germany felt itself threatened and joined
hands in defense. The declaration of war was received there with
as deep an enthusiasm as in France and excited a fervent
eagerness for the struggle. The new popular song, DIE WACHT AM
RHEIN ("The Watch on the Rhine"), spread rapidly from end to end
of the country, and indicated the resolution of the German people
to defend to the death the frontier stream of their country.

SELF-DECEPTION OF THE FRENCH

The French looked for a parade march to Berlin, even fixing the
day of their entrance into that city - August 15th, the emperor's
birthday. On the contrary, they failed to set their foot on
German territory, and soon found themselves engaged in a death
struggle with the invaders of their own land. In truth, while the
Prussian diplomacy was conducted by Bismarck, the ablest
statesman Prussia had ever known, the movements of the army were
directed by far the best tactician Europe then possessed, the
famous Von Moltke, to whose strategy the rapid success of the war
against Austria had been due. In the war with France Von Moltke,
though too old to lead the armies in person, was virtually
commander-in-chief, and arranged those masterly combinations
which overthrew all the power of France in so remarkably brief a
period. Under his directions, from the moment war was declared
everything worked with clock-like precision. It was said that Von
Moltke had only to touch a bell and all went forward. As it was,
the Crown Prince Frederick fell upon the French while still
unprepared, won the first battle, and steadily held the advantage
to the end, the French being beaten by the strategy that kept the
Germans in superior strength at all decisive points.

But to return to the events of war. On July 23, 1870, the Emperor
Napoleon, after making his wife, Eugenie regent of France, set
out with his son at the head of the army, full of high hopes of
victory and triumph. By the end of July King William had also set
out from Berlin to join the armies that were then in rapid
motion, towards the frontier.

The emperor made his way to Metz, where was stationed his main
army, about 200,000 strong, under Marshals Bazaine and Canrobert
and General Bourgaki. Further east, under Marshal MacMahon, the
hero of Magenta, was the southern army, of about 100,000 men. A
third army occupied the camp at Chalons, while a well-manned
fleet set sail for the Baltic, to blockade the harbors and assail
the coast of Germany. The German army was likewise in three
divisions, the first, of 61,000 men, under General Steinmetz; the
second, of 206,000 men, under Prince Frederick Charles; and the
third, of 180,000 men, under the crown prince and General
Blumenthal. The king, commander-in-chief of the whole, was in the
center, and with him the general staff under the guidance of the
alert von Moltke. Bismarck and the minister of war Von Roon were
also present, and so rapid was the movement of these great forces
that in two weeks after the order to march was given 300,000
armed Germans stood in rank along the Rhine.

FIRST MEETING OF THE ARMIES

The two armies first came together on August 2d, near Saarbruck,
on the frontier line of the hostile kingdoms. It was the one
success of the French, for the Prussians, after a fight in which
both sides lost equally, retired in good order. This was
proclaimed by the French papers as a brilliant victory, and
filled the people with undue hopes of glory. It was the last
favorable report, for they were quickly overwhelmed with tidings
of defeat and disaster.

Weissenburg, on the borders of Rhenish Bavaria, had been invested
by a division of MacMahon's army. On August 4th the right wing of
the army of the Crown Prince Frederick attacked and repulsed this
investing force after a hot engagement, in which its leader,
General Douay, was killed, and the loss on both sides was heavy.
Two days later occurred a battle which decided the fate of the
whole war, that of Worth-Reideshofen, where the army of the crown
prince met that of MacMahon, and after a desperate struggle,
which continued for fifteen hours, completely defeated him, with
very heavy losses on both sides. MacMahon retreated in haste
towards the army at Chalons, while the crown prince took
possession of Alsace, and prepared for the reduction of the
fortresses on the Rhine, from Strasburg to Belfort. On the same
day as that of the battle of Worth, General Steinmetz stormed the
heights of Spicheren, and, though at great loss of life, drove
Frossard from those heights and back upon Metz.

The occupation of Alsace was followed by that of Lorraine, by the
Prussian army under King William, who took possession of Nancy
and the country surrounding on August 11th. These two provinces
had at one time belonged to Germany, and it was the aim of the
Prussians to retain them as the chief anticipated prize of the
war. Meanwhile the world looked on in amazement at the
extraordinary rapidity of the German success, which, in two weeks
after Napoleon left Paris, had brought his power to the verge of
overthrow.

THE STRONGHOLD OF METZ

Towards the Moselle River and the strongly fortified town of
Metz, 180 miles northeast of Paris, around which was concentrated
the main French force, all the divisions of the German army now
advanced, and on the 14th of August they gained a victory at
Colombey-Nouilly which drove their opponents back from the open
field towards the fortified city.

It was Moltke's opinion that the French proposed to make their
stand before this impregnable fortress, and fight there
desperately for victory. But, finding less resistance than he
expected, he concluded, on the 15th, that Bazaine, in fear of
being cooped up within the fortress, meant to march towards
Verdun, there to join his forces with those of MacMahon and give
battle to the Germans in the plain.

The astute tactician at once determined to make every effort to
prevent such a concentration of his opponents, and by the evening
of the 15th a cavalry division had crossed the Moselle and
reached the village of Mars-la-Tour, where it bivouacked for the
night. It had seen troops in motion towards Metz, hut did not
know whether these formed the rear-guard of the French army or
its vanguard in its march towards Verdun.

In fact, Bazaine had not yet got away with his army. All the
roads from Metz were blocked with heavy baggage, and it was
impossible to move so large an army with expedition. The time
thus lost by Bazaine was diligently improved by Frederick
Charles, and on the morning of the 16th the Brandenburg army
corps, one of the best and bravest in the German army, had
followed the cavalry and come within sight of the Verdun road. It
was quickly perceived that a French force was before them, and
some preliminary skirmishing developed the enemy in such strength
as to convince the leader of the corps that he had in his front
the whole or the greater part of Bazaine's army, and that its
escape from Metz had not been achieved.

They were desperate odds with which the brave Brandenburgers had
to contend, but they had been sent to hold the French until
reinforcements could arrive, and they were determined to resist
to the death. For nearly six hours they resisted, with
unsurpassed courage, the fierce onslaughts of the French, though
at a cost of life that perilously depleted the gallant corps.
Then, about four o'clock in the afternoon, Prince Frederick
Charles came up with reinforcements to their support and the
desperate contest became more even.

MARS-LA-TOUR AND GRAVELOTTE

Gradually fortune decided in favor of the Germans, and by the
time night had come they were practically victorious, the field
of Mars-la-Tour, after the day's struggle, remaining in their
hands. But they were utterly exhausted, their horses were worn
out, and most of their ammunition was spent, and though their
impetuous commander forced them to a new attack, it led to a
useless loss of life, for their powers of fighting were gone.
They had achieved a fearful loss, amounting to about 16,000 men
on each side. "The battle of Vionville (Mars-la-Tour) is without
a parallel in military history," said Emperor William, "seeing
that a single army corps, about 20,000 men strong, hung on to and
repulsed an enemy more than five times as numerous and well
equipped. Such was the glorious deed done by the Brandenburgers,
and the Hohenzollerns will never forget the debt they owe to
their devotion."

Two days afterwards (August 16th) at Gravelotte, a village
somewhat nearer to Metz, the armies, somewhat recovered from the
terrible struggle of the 14th, met again, the whole German army
being now brought up, so that over 100,000 men faced the 140,000
of the French. It was the great battle of the war. For four hours
the two armies stood fighting face to face, without any special
result, neither being able to drive back the other. The French
held their ground and died. The Prussians dashed upon them and
died. Only late in the evening was the right wing of the French
army broken, and the victory, which at five o'clock remained
uncertain, was decided in favor of the Germans. More than 40,000
men lay dead and wounded upon the field, the terrible harvest of
those nine hours of conflict. That night Bazaine withdrew his
army behind the fortifications at Metz. His effort to join
MacMahon had ended in failure.

It was the fixed purpose of the Prussians to detain him in that
stronghold, and thus render practically useless to France its
largest army. A siege was to be prosecuted, and an army of
150,000 men was extended around the town. The fortifications were
far too strong to be taken by assault, and all depended on a
close blockade. On August 31st Bazaine made an effort to break
through the German lines, but was repulsed. It became now a
question of how long the provisions of the French would hold out.

NAPOLEON III AT SEDAN

The French emperor, who had been with Bazaine, had left his army
before the battle of Mars-la-Tour, and was now with MacMahon at
Chalons. Here lay an army of 125,000 infantry and 12,000 cavalry.
On it the Germans were advancing, in doubt as to what movement it
would make, whether back towards Paris or towards Metz for the
relief of Bazaine. They sought to place themselves in a position
to check either. The latter movement was determined on by the
French, but was carried out in a dubious and uncertain manner,
the time lost giving abundant opportunity to the Germans to learn
what was afoot and to prepare to prevent it. As soon as they were
aware of MacMahon's intention of proceeding to Metz they made
speedy preparations to prevent his relieving Bazaine. By the last
days of August the army of the crown prince had reached the right
bank of the Aisne, and the fourth division gained possession of
the line of the Meuse. On August 30th the French under General de
Failly were attacked by the Germans at Beaumont and put to flight
with heavy loss. It was evident that the hope of reaching Metz
was at an end, and MacMahon, abandoning the attempt, concentrated
his army around the frontier fortress of Sedan.

This old town stands on the right bank of the Meuse, in an angle
of territory between Luxembourg and Belgium, and is surrounded by
meadows, gardens, ravines, ditches and cultivated fields; the
castle rising on a cliff-like eminence to the southwest of the
place. MacMahon had stopped here to give his weary men a rest,
not to fight, but von Moltke decided, on observing the situation,
that Sedan should be the grave-yard of the French army. "The trap
is now closed, and the mouse in it," he said, with a chuckle of
satisfaction.

Such proved to be the case. On September 1st the Bavarians won
the village of Bazeille, after hours of bloody and desperate
struggle. During this severe fight Marshal MacMahon was so
seriously wounded that he was obliged to surrender the chief
command, first to Duerot, and then to General Wimpffen, a man of
recognized bravery and cold calculation.

Fortune soon showed itself in favor of the Germans. To the
northwest of the town, the North German troops invested the exits
from St. Meuges and Fleigneux, and directed a fearful fire of
artillery against the French forces, which, before noon, were so
hemmed in the valley that only two insufficient outlets to the
south and north remained open. But General Wimpffen hesitated to
seize either of these routes, the open way to Illy was soon
closed by the Prussian guard corps, and a murderous fire was now
directed from all sides upon the French, so that, after a last
energetic struggle, they gave up all attempts to force a passage,
and in the afternoon beat a retreat towards Sedan. In this small
town the whole army of MacMahon was collected by evening, and
there prevailed in the streets and houses an unprecedented
disorder and confusion, which was still further increased when
the German troops from the surrounding heights began to shoot
down upon the fortress, and the town took fire in several places.

SURRENDER OF NAPOLEON'S ARMY

That an end might be put to the prevailing misery, Napoleon now
commanded General Wimpffen to capitulate. The flag of truce
already waved on the gates of Sedan when Colonel Bronsart
appeared, and in the name of the king of Prussia demanded the
surrender of the army and fortress. He soon returned to
headquarters, accompanied by the French General Reille, who
presented to the king a written message from Napoleon: "As I may
not die in the midst of my army, I lay my sword in the hands of
your majesty." King William accepted it with an expression of
sympathy for the hard fate of the emperor and of the French army
which had fought so bravely under his own eyes. The conclusion of
the treaty of capitulation was placed in the hands of Wimpffen,
who, accompanied by General Castelnau, set out for Donchery to
negotiate with Moltke and Bismarck. No attempts, however, availed
to move Moltke from his stipulation for the surrender of the
whole army at discretion; he granted a short respite, but if this
expired without surrender, the bombardment of the town was to
begin anew.

At six o'clock in the morning the capitulation was signed and was
ratified by the king at his headquarters at Vendresse (2d
September). Thus the world beheld the incredible spectacle of an
army of 83,000 men surrendering themselves and their weapons to
the victor, and being carried off as prisoners of war to Germany.
Only the officers who gave their written word of honor to take no
further part in the present war with Germany were permitted to
retain their arms and personal property. Probably the assurance
of Napoleon, the he had sought death on the battle-field but had
not found it, was literally true; at any rate, the fate of the
unhappy man, bowed down as he was both by physical and mental
suffering, was so solemn and tragic that there was no room for
hypocrisy, and that he had exposed himself to personal danger was
admitted on all sides. Accompanied by Count Bismarck, he stopped
at a small and mean-looking laborer's inn on the road to
Donchery, where, sitting down on a stone seat before the door,
with Count Bismarck, he declared that he had not desired the war,
but had been driven to it through the force of public opinion;
and afterwards the two proceeded to the little castle of
Bellevue, near Frenois, to join King William and the crown
prince. A telegram to Queen Augusta thus describes the interview:
"What an impressive moment was the meeting with Napoleon! He was
cast down, but dignified in his bearing. I have granted him
Wilhelmshohe, near Cassel, as his residence. Our meeting took
place in a little castle before the western glacis of Sedan.

THE EMPEROR A CAPTIVE; FRANCE A REPUBLIC

The locking up of Bazaine in Metz and the capture of MacMahon's
army at Sedan were events fatal to France. The struggle continued
for months, but it was a fight against hope. The subsequent
events of the war consisted of a double siege, that of Metz and
that of Paris, with various minor sieges, and a desperate but
hopeless effort of France in the field. As for the empire of
Napoleon III, it was at an end. The tidings of the terrible
catastrophe at Sedan filled the people with a fury that soon
became revolutionary. While Jules Favre, the republican deputy,
was offering a motion in the Assembly that the emperor had
forfeited the crown, and that a provisional government should be
established, the people were thronging the streets of Paris with
cries of "Deposition! Republic!" On the 4th of September the
Assembly had its final meeting. Two of its prominent members,
Jules Favre and Gambetta, sustained the motion for deposition of
the emperor, and it was carried after a stormy session. They then
made their way to the senate-chamber, where, before a thronging
audience, they proclaimed a republic and named a government for
the national defense. At its head was General Trochu, military
commandant at Paris. Favre was made minister of foreign affairs;
Gambetta, minister of the interior; and other prominent members
of te Assembly filled the remaining cabinet posts. The
legislature was dissolved, the Palais de Bourbon was closed, and
the Empress Eugenie quitted the Tuileries and made her escape
with a few attendants to Belgium, whence she sought a refuge in
England. Prince Louis Napoleon made his way to Italy, and the
swarm of courtiers scattered in all directions; some faithful
followers of the deposed monarch seeking the castle of
Wilhelmshohe, where the unhappy Louis Napoleon occupied as a
prison the same beautiful palace and park in which his uncle
Jerome Bonaparte had once passed six years in a life of pleasure.
The second French Empire was at an end; the third French Republic
had begun - one that had to pass through many changes and escape
many dangers before it would be firmly established.

"Not a foot's breadth of our country nor a stone of our
fortresses shall be surrendered," was Jules Favre's defiant
proclamation to the invaders, and the remainder of the soldiers
in the field were collected in Paris, and strengthened with all
available reinforcements. Every person capable of bearing arms
was enrolled in the national army, which soon numbered 400,000
men. There was need of haste, for the victors at Sedan were
already marching upon the capital, inspired with high hopes from
their previous astonishing success. They knew that Paris was
strongly fortified, being encircled by powerful lines of defense,
but they trusted that hunger would soon bring its garrison to
terms. The same result was looked for at Metz, and at Strasbourg,
which was also besieged.

Thus began at three main points and several minor ones a military
siege the difficulties, dangers, and hardships of which surpassed
even those of the winter campaign in the Crimea. Exposed at the
fore-posts to the enemy's balls, chained to arduous labor in the
trenches and redoubts, and suffering from the effects of bad
weather, and insufficient food and clothing, the German soldiers
were compelled to undergo great privations and sufferings before
the fortifications; while many fell in the frequent skirmishes
and sallies, many succumbed to typhus and epidemic disease.

No less painful and distressing was the condition of the
besieged. While the garrison soldiers on guard were constantly
compelled to face death in nocturnal sallies, or led a pitiable
existence in damp huts, having inevitable surrender constantly
before their eyes, and disarmament and imprisonment as the reward
of all their struggles and exertions, the citizens in the towns,
the women and children, were in constant danger of being shivered
to atoms by the fearful shells, or of being buried under falling
walls and roofs; and the poorer part of the population saw with
dismay the gradual diminution of the necessaries of life, and
were often compelled to pacify their hunger with the flesh of
horses, and disgusting and unwholesome food.

BISMARCK REFUSES INTERVENTION

The republican government possessed only a usurped power, and
none but a freely elected national assembly could decide as to
the fate of the French nation. Such an assembly was therefore
summoned for the 16th of October. Three members of the government
- Cremieux, Fourichon, and Glais-Bizoin - were despatched before
the entire blockade of the city had been effected, to Tours, to
maintain communication with the provinces. An attempt was also
made at the same time to induce the great Powers which had not
taken part in the war to organize an intervention, as hitherto
only America, Switzerland and Spain had sent official
recognition. For this important and delicate mission the old
statesman and historian Thiers was selected, and, in spite of his
three-and-seventy years, immediately set out on the journey to
London, St. Petersburg, Vienna and Florence. Count Bismarck,
however, in the name of Prussia, refused any intervention in
internal affairs. In two despatches to the ambassadors of foreign
courts, the chancellor declared that the war, begun by the
Emperor Napoleon, had been approved by the representatives of the
nation, and that thus all France was answerable for the result.
Germany was obliged, therefore, to demand guarantees which should
secure her in future against attack, or, at any rate, render
attack more difficult. Thus a cession of territory on the part of
France was laid down as the basis of a treaty of peace. The
neutral powers were also led to the belief that if they fostered
in the French any hope of intervention, peace would only be
delayed. The mission of Thiers, therefore, yielded no useful
result, while the direct negotiation which Jules Favre conducted
with Bismarck proved equally unavailing.

FALL OF THE FORTRESSES

Soon the beleaguered fortresses began to fall. On the 23d of
September the ancient town of Toul, in Lorraine, was forced to
capitulate, after a fearful bombardment; and on the 27th
Strasbourg, in danger of the terrible results of a storming,
after the havoc of a dreadful artillery fire, hoisted the white
flag, and surrendered on the following day. The supposed
impregnable fortress of Metz held out little longer. Hunger did
what cannon were incapable of doing. The successive sallies made
by Bazaine proved unavailing, though, on October 7th his soldiers
fought with desperate energy, and for hours the air was full of
the roar of cannon and mitrailleuse and the rattle of musketry.
But the Germans withstood the attack unmoved, and the French were
forced to withdraw into the town.

Bazaine then sought to negotiate with the German leaders at
Versailles, offering to take no part in the war for three months
if permitted to withdraw. But Bismarck and Moltke would listen to
no terms other than unconditional surrender, and these terms were
finally accepted, the besieged army having reached the brink of
starvation. It was with horror and despair that France learned on
the 30th of October, that the citadel of Metz, with its
fortifications and arms of defense, had been yielded to the
Germans, and its army of more than 150,000 men had surrendered as
prisoners of war.

This hasty surrender at Metz, a still greater disaster to France
than that of Sedan, was not emulated at Paris, which for four
months held out against all the efforts of the Germans. On the
investment of the great city, King William removed his
headquarters to the historic palace of Versailles, setting up his
homely camp-bed in the same apartments from which Lois XIV had
once issued his despotic edicts and commands. Here Count Bismarck
conducted his diplomatic labors and Moltke issued his directions
for the siege, which, protracted from week to week and month to
month, gradually transformed the beautiful neighborhood, with its
prosperous villages, superb country houses, and enchanting parks
and gardens, into a scene of sadness and desolation.

PARIS IS BESIEGED

In spite of the vigorous efforts made by the commander-in-chief
Trochu, both by continuous firing from the forts and by repeated
sallies, to prevent Paris from being surrounded, and to force a
way through the trenches, his enterprises were rendered fruitless
by the watchfulness and strength of the Germans. The blockade was
completely accomplished; Paris was surrounded and cut off from
the outer world; even the underground telegraphs, through which
communication was for a time secretly maintained with the
provinces, were by degrees discovered and destroyed. But to the
great astonishment of Europe, which looked on with keenly pitched
excitement at the mighty struggle, the siege continued for months
without any special progress being observable from without or any
lessening of resistance from within. On account of the extension
of the forts, the Germans were compelled to remain at such a
distance that a bombardment of the town at first appeared
impossible; a storming of the outer works would, moreover, be
attended with such sacrifices that the humane temper of the king
revolted from such a proceeding. The guns of greater force and
carrying power which were needed from Germany, could only be
procured after long delay on account of the broken lines of
railway. Probably also there was some hesitation on the German
side to expose the beautiful city, regarded by so many as the
"metropolis of civilization," to the risk of a bombardment, in
which works of art, science, and a historical past would meet
destruction. Nevertheless, the declamations of the French at the
vandalism of the northern barbarians met with assent and sympathy
from most of the foreign Powers.

Determination and courage falsified the calculations at
Versailles of a quick cessation of the resistance. The republic
offered a far more energetic and determined opposition to the
Prussian arms than the empire had done. The government of the
national defense still declaimed with stern reiteration: "Not a
foot's breadth of our country; not a stone of our fortresses!"
and positively rejected all proposals of treaty based on
territorial concessions. Faith in the invincibility of the
republic was rooted as an indisputable dogma in the hearts of the
French people. The victories and the commanding position of
France from 1792 to 1799 were regarded as so entirely the
necessary result of the Revolution, that a conviction prevailed
that the formation of a republic, with a national army for its
defense, would have an especial effect on the rest of Europe.
Therefore, instead of summoning a constituent Assembly, which, in
the opinion of Prussia and the other foreign Powers, would alone
be capable of offering security for a lasting peace, it was
decided to continue the revolutionary movements, and to follow
the same course which, in the years 1792 and 1793, had saved
France from the coalition of the European Powers. It was held
that a revolutionary dictatorship such as had once been exercised
by the Convention and the members of the Committee of Public
Safety, must again be revived, and a youthful and hot-blooded
leader was alone needed to stir up popular feeling and set it in
motion.

To fill such a part no one was better adapted than the advocate
Gambetta, who emulated the career of the leaders of the
Revolution, and whose soul glowed with a passionate ardor of
patriotism. In order to create for himself a free sphere of
action, and to initiate some vigorous measure in place of the
well-rounded phrases and eloquent proclamations of his colleagues
Trochu and Jules Favre, he quitted the capital in an air-balloon
and entered into communication with the government delegation at
Tours, which through him soon obtained a fresh impetus. His next
most important task was the liberation of the capital from the
besieging German army, and the expulsion of the enemy from the
"sacred" soil of France. For this purpose he summoned, with the
authority of a minister of war, all persons capable of bearing
arms up to forty years of age to take active service, and
despatched them into the field; he imposed war-taxes, and
terrified the tardy and refractory with threats of punishment.
Every force was put in motion; all France was transformed into a
great camp.

A popular war was now to take the place of a soldier's war, and
what the soldiers had failed to effect must be accomplished by
the people; France must be saved, and the world freed from
despotism. To promote this object, the whole of France, with the
exception of Paris, was divided into four general governments,
the headquarters of the different governors being Lille, Le Mans,
Bourges, and Besancon. Two armies, from the Loire and from the
Somme, were to march simultaneously towards Paris, and aided by
the sallies of Trochu and his troops, were to drive the enemy
from the country. Energetic attacks were now attempted from time
to time, in the hope that when the armies of relief arrived from
the provinces, it might be possible to effect a coalition; but
all these efforts were constantly repulsed after a hot struggle
by the besieging German troops. At the same time, during the
month of October, the territory between the Oise and the Lower
Seine was scoured by reconnoitering troops, under Prince
Albrecht, the southeast district was protected by a Wurtemberg
detachment through the successful battle near Nogent on the
Seine, while a division of the third army advanced towards the
south accompanied by two cavalry divisions. A more unfortunate
circumstance, however, for the Parisians was the cutting off of
all communication with the outer world, for the Germans had
destroyed the telegraphs. But even this obstacle was overcome by
the inventive genius of the French. By means of pigeon
letter-carriers and air-balloons, they were always able to
maintain a partial though one-sided and imperfect communication
with the provinces, and the aerostatic art was developed and
brought to perfection on this occasion in a manner which had
never before been considered possible.

DEFIANT SPIRIT OF THE FRENCH

The whole of France, and especially the capital, was already in a
state of intense excitement when the news of the capitulation of
Metz came to add fresh fuel to the flame. Outside the walls
Gambetta was using heroic efforts to increase his forces,
bringing Bedouin horsemen from Africa and inducing the stern old
revolutionist Garibaldi to come to his aid; and Thiers was
opening fresh negotiations for a truce. Inside the walls the Red
Republic raised the banners of insurrection and attempted to
drive the government of national defense from power.

This effort of the dregs of revolution to inaugurate a reign of
terror failed, and the provisional government felt so elated with
its victory that it determined to continue at the head of affairs
and to oppose the calling of a chamber of national
representatives. The members proclaimed oblivion for what had
passed, broke off the negotiations for a truce begun by Thiers,
and demanded a vote of confidence. The indomitable spirit shown
by the French people did not, on the other hand, inspire the
Germans with a very lenient or conciliatory temper. Bismarck
declared in a despatch the reasons why the negotiations had
failed: "The incredible demand that we should surrender the
fruits of all our efforts during the last two months, and should
go back to the conditions which existed at the beginning of the
blockade of Paris, only affords fresh proof that in Paris
pretexts are sought for refusing the nation the right of
election." Thiers mournfully declared the failure of his
undertaking, but in Paris the popular voting resulted in a
ten-fold majority in favor of the government and the policy of
postponement.

After the breaking off of the negotiations, the world anticipated
some energetic action towards the besieged city. The efforts of
the enemy were, however, principally directed to drawing the iron
girdle still tighter, enclosing the giant city more and more
closely, and cutting off every means of communication, so that at
last a surrender might be brought about by the stern necessity of
starvation. That this object would not be accomplished as
speedily as at Metz, that the city of pleasure, enjoyment, and
luxury would withstand a siege of four months, had never been
contemplated for a moment. It is true that, as time went on, all
fresh meat disappeared from the market, with the exception of
horse-flesh; that white bread, on which Parisians place such
value, was replaced by a baked compound of meal and bran; that
the stores of dried and salted food began to decline, until at
last rats, dogs, cats, and even animals from the zoological
gardens were prepared for consumption at restaurants.

Yet, to the amazement of the world, all these miseries,
hardships, and sufferings were courageously borne, nocturnal
watch was kept, sallies were undertaken, and cold, hunger, and
wretchedness of all kinds were endured with an indomitable
steadfastness and heroism. The courage of the besieged Parisians
was also animated by the hope that the military forces in the
provinces would hasten to the aid of the hard-pressed capital,
and that therefore an energetic resistance would afford the rest
of France sufficient time for rallying all its forces, and at the
same time exhibit an elevating example. In the carrying out of
this plan, neither Trochu nor Gambetta was wanting in the
requisite energy and circumspection. The former organized sallies
from time to time, in order to reconnoiter and discover whether
the army of relief was on its way from the provinces; the latter
exerted all his powers to bring the Loire army up to the Seine.
But both erred in undervaluing the German war forces; they did
not believe that the hostile army would be able to keep Paris in
a state of blockade, and at the same time engage the armies on
the south and north, east and west. They had no conception of the
hidden, inexhaustible strength of the Prussian army organization
- of a nation in arms which could send forth constant
reinforcements of battalions and recruits, and fresh bodies of
disciplined troops to fill the gaps left in the ranks by the
wounded and fallen. There could be no doubt as to the termination
of this terrible war, or the final victory of German energy and
discipline.

THE STRUGGLE CONTINUED

Throughout the last months of the eventful year 1870, the
northern part of France, from the Jura to the Channel, from the
Belgian frontier to the Loire, presented the aspect of a wide
battlefield. Of the troops that had been set free by the
capitulation of Metz, a part remained behind in garrison, another
division marched northwards in order to invest the provinces of
Picardy and Normandy, to restore communication with the sea, and
to bar the road to Paris, and a third division joined the second
army whose commander-in-chief, Prince Frederick Charles, set up
his headquarters at Troyes. Different detachments were despatched
against the northern fortresses, and by degrees Soissons, Verdun,
Thionville, Ham, where Napoleon had once been a prisoner,
Pfalzburg and Montmedy, all fell into the hands of the Prussians,
thus opening to them a free road for the supplies of provisions.
The garrison troops were all carried off as prisoners to Germany;
the towns - most of them in a miserable condition - fell into the
enemy's hands; many houses were mere heaps of ruins and ashes,
and the larger part of the inhabitants were suffering severely
from poverty, hunger and disease.

The greatest obstacles were encountered in the northern part of
Alsace and the mountainous districts of the Vosges and the Jura,
where irregular warfare, under Garibaldi and other leaders,
developed to a dangerous extent, while the fortress of Langres
afforded a safe retreat to the guerilla bands. Lyons and the
neighboring town of St. Etienne  became hotbeds of excitement,
the red flag being raised and a despotism of terror and violence
established. Although many divergent elements made up this army
of the east, all were united in hatred of the Germans.

Thus, during the cold days of November and December, when General
Von Treskow began the siege of the important fortress of Belfort,
there burst forth a war around Gray and Dijon marked by the
greatest hardships, perils and privations to the invaders. Here
the Germans had to contend with an enemy much superior in number,
and to defend themselves against continuous firing from houses,
cellars, woods and thickets, while the impoverished soil yielded
a miserable subsistence, and the broken railroads cut off freedom
of communication and of reinforcement.

The whole of the Jura district, intersected by hilly roads as far
as the plateau of Langres, where, in the days of Caesar, the
Romans and Gauls were wont to measure their strength with each
other, formed during November and December the scene of action of
numerous encounters which, in conjunction with sallies from the
garrison at Belfort, inflicted severe injury on Werder's troops.
Dijon had repeatedly to be evacuated; and the nocturnal attack at
Chattillon, 20th November, by Garibaldians, when one hundred
seventy horses were lost, affording a striking proof of the
dangers to which the German army was exposed in this hostile
country; although the revolutionary excesses of the turbulent
population of the south diverted to a certain extent the
attention of the National Guard, who were compelled to turn their
weapons against an internal enemy.

By means of the revolutionary dictatorship of Gambetta the whole
French nation was drawn into the struggle, the annihilation of
the enemy being represented as a national duty, and the war
assuming a steadily more violent character. The indefatigable
patriot continued his exertions to increase the army and unite
the whole south and west against the enemy, hoping to bring the
army of the Loire to such dimensions that it would be able to
expel the invaders from the soil of France. But these raw
recruits were poorly fitted to cope with the highly disciplined
Germans, and their early successes were soon followed by defeat
and discouragement, while the hopes entertained by the Paris
garrison of succor from the south vanished as news of the steady
progress of the Germans was received.

OPERATIONS BEFORE PARIS

During these events the war operations before Paris continued
uninterruptedly. Moltke had succeeded, in spite of the
difficulties of transport, in procuring an immense quantity of
ammunition, and the long-delayed bombardment of Paris was ready
to begin. Having stationed with all secrecy twelve batteries with
seventy-six guns around Mont Avron, on Christmas-day the firing
was directed with such success against the fortified eminences,
that even in the second night the French, after great losses,
evacuated the important position, the "key of Paris," which was
immediately taken possession of by the Saxons. Terror and dismay
spread through the distracted city when the eastern forts, Rosny,
Nogent and Noisy, were stormed amid a tremendous volley of
firing. Vainly did Trochu endeavor to rouse the failing courage
of the National Guard; vainly did he assert that the government
of the national defense would never consent to the humiliation of
a capitulation; his own authority had already waned; the
newspapers already accused him of incapacity and treachery, and
began to cast every aspersion on the men who had presumptuously
seized the government, and yet were not in a position to effect
the defense of the capital and the country. After the new year
the bombardment of the southern forts began, and the terror in
the city daily increased though the violence of the radical
journals kept in check any hint of surrender or negotiation. Yet
in spite of fog and snow storms the bombardment was
systematically continued, and with every day the destructive
effect of the terrible missiles grew more pronounced.

Trochu was blamed for having undertaken only small sallies, which
could have no result. The commander-in-chief ventured no
opposition to the party of action. With the consent of the mayors
of the twenty ARRONDISSEMENTS of Paris a council of war was held.
The threatening famine, the firing of the enemy, and the
excitement prevailing among the adherents of the red republic
rendered a decisive step necessary. Consequently, on the 19th of
January, a great sally was decided on, and the entire armed
forces of the capital were summoned to arms. Early in the morning
a body of 100,000 men marched in the direction of Meudon, Sevres
and St. Cloud for the decisive conflict. The left wing was
commanded by General Vinoy, the right by Ducrot, while Trochu
from the watch-tower directed the entire struggle. With great
courage Vinoy dashed forward with his column of attack towards
the fifth army corps of General Kirchbach, and succeeded in
capturing the Montretout entrenchment, through the superior
number of his troops, and in holding it for a time. But when
Ducrot, delayed by the barricades in the streets, failed to come
to his assistance at the appointed time, the attack was driven
back after seven hours' fierce fighting by the besieging troops.
Having lost 7,000 dead and wounded, the French in the evening
beat a retreat, which almost resembled a flight. On the following
day Trochu demanded a truce, that the fallen National Guards,
whose bodies strewed the battlefield, might be interred. The
victors, too, had to render the last rites to many a brave
soldier. Thirty-nine officers and six hundred and sixteen
soldiers were given in the list of the slain.

Entire confidence had been placed by the Parisians in the great
sally. When the defeat, therefore, became known in its full
significance, when the number of the fallen was found to be far
greater even than had been stated in the first accounts, a dull
despair took possession of the famished city, which next broke
forth into violent abuse against Trochu, "the traitor."
Capitulation now seemed imminent; but as the commander-in-chief
had declared that he would never countenance such a disgrace, he
resigned his post to Vinoy. Threatened by bombardment from
without, terrified within by the pale specter of famine,
paralyzed and distracted by the violent dissensions among the
people, and without prospect of effective aid from the provinces,
what remained to the proud capital but to desist from a conflict
the continuation of which only increased the unspeakable misery,
without the smallest hope of deliverance? Gradually, therefore,
there grew up a resolution to enter into negotiations with the
enemy; and it was the minister, Jules Favre, who had been
foremost with the cry of "no surrender" four months before, who
was now compelled to take the first step to deliver his country
from complete ruin. It was probably the bitterest hour in the
life of the brave man, who loved France and liberty with such a
sincere affection, when he was conducted through the German
outposts to his interview with Bismarck at Versailles. He brought
the proposal for a convention, on the strength of which the
garrison was to be permitted to retire with military honors to a
part of France not hitherto invested, on promising to abstain for
several months from taking part in the struggle. But such
conditions were positively refused at the Prussian headquarters,
and a surrender was demanded as at Sedan and Metz. Completely
defeated, the minister returned to Paris. At a second meeting on
the following day, it was agreed that from the 27th, at twelve
o'clock at night, the firing on both sides should be
discontinued. This was the preliminary to the conclusion of a
three weeks' truce, to await the summons of a National Assembly,
with which peace might be negotiated.

FIGHTING IN THE SOUTH

The war was at an end so far as Paris was concerned. But it
continued in the south, where frequent defeat failed to depress
Gambetta's indomitable energy, and where new troops constantly
replaced those put to rout. Garibaldi, at Dijon, succeeded in
doing what the French had not done during the war, in capturing a
Prussian banner. But the progress of the Germans soon rendered
his position untenable, and, finding his exertions unavailing, he
resigned his command and retired to his island of Caprera. Two
disasters completed the overthrow of France. Bourbaki's army,
85,000 strong, became shut in, with scanty food and ammunition,
among the snow-covered valleys of the Jura, and to save the
disgrace of capitulation it took refuge on the neutral soil of
Switzerland; and the strong fortress of Belfort, which had been
defended with the utmost courage against its besiegers, finally
yielded, with the stipulation that the brave garrison should
march out with the honors of war. Nothing now stood in the way of
an extension of the truce. On the suggestion of Jules Favre, the
National Assembly elected a commission of fifteen members, which
was to aid the chief of the executive and his ministers, Picard
and Favre, in the negotiations for peace. That cessions of
territory and indemnity of war expenses would have to be conceded
had long been acknowledged in principle; but protracted and
excited discussions took place as to the extent of the former and
the amount of the latter, while the demanded entry of the German
troops into Paris met with vehement opposition. But Count
Bismarck resolutely insisted on the cession of Alsace and German
Lorraine, including Metz and Diedenhofen. Only with difficulty
were the Germans persuaded to separate Belfort from the rest of
Loraine, and leave it still in the possession of the French. In
respect to the expenses of the war, the sum of five milliards of
francs ($1,000,000,000) was agreed upon, of which the first
milliard was to be paid in the year 1871, and the rest in a
stated period. The stipulated entry into Paris also - so bitter
to the French national pride - was only partially carried out;
the western side only of the city was to be traversed in the
march of the Prussian troops, and again evacuated in two days. On
the basis of these conditions, the preliminaries of the Peace of
Versailles were concluded on the 26th of February between the
Imperial Chancellor and Jules Favre. Intense excitement prevailed
when the terms of the treaty became known; they were dark days in
the annals of French history. But in spite of the opposition of
the extreme Republican party, led by Quinet and Victor Hugo, the
Assembly recognized by an overpowering majority the necessity for
the Peace, and the preliminaries were accepted by 546 to 107
votes. Thus ended the mighty war between France and Germany - a
war which has had few equals in the history of the world.

THE WAR AT AN END

Had King William received no indemnity in cash or territory from
France, he must still have felt himself amply repaid for the cost
of the brief but sanguinary war, for it brought him a power and
prestige with which the astute diplomatist Bismarck had long been
seeking to invest his name. Political changes move slowly in
times of peace, rapidly in times of war. The whole of Germany,
with the exception of Austria, had sent troops to the conquest of
France, and every state, north and south alike, shared in the
pride and glory of the result. South and North Germany had
marched side by side to the battle-field, every difference of
race or creed forgotten, and the honor of the German fatherland
the sole watchword. The time seemed to have arrived to close the
breach between north and south, and obliterate the line of the
Main, which had divided the two sections. North Germany was
united under the leadership of Prussia, and the honor in which
all alike shared now brought South Germany into line for a
similar union.

The first appeal in this direction came from Baden. Later in the
year plenipotentiaries sought Versailles from the kingdoms of
Bavaria and Wurtemberg and the grand duchies of Baden and Hesse,
their purpose being to arrange for and define the conditions of
union between the South and the North German states. For weeks,
this momentous question filled all Germany with excitement and
public opinion was in a state of high tension. The scheme of
union was by no means universally approved, there being a large
party in opposition, but the majority in its favor in Chambers
proved sufficient to enable Bismarck to carry out his plan.


Chapter XII. BISMARCK AND THE NEW GERMAN EMPIRE

Building the Bulwarks of the Twentieth Century Nation

Bismarck as a Statesman - Uniting the German States - William I
Crowned at Versailles - A Significant Decade - The Problem of
Church Power - Progress of Socialism - William II and the
Resignation of Bismarck - Old Age Insurance - Political and
Industrial Conditions in Germany

Throughout the various events narrated in the two preceding
chapters the hand of Bismarck was everywhere visible. He had
proved himself a statesman of the highest powers, and these
powers were devoted without stint to the aggrandizement of
Prussia. As for the surrounding nations and their rights and
immunities, these did not count as against his policies.
Conscience did not trouble him. The slaughter of thousands of men
on the battle-field did not disturb his equanimity. He was
unalterably fixed in his purposes, unscrupulous in the means
employed, shrewd, keen and far-sighted in his measures, Europe
being to him but a great chess-board, on which his hand moved
kings, knights, and pawns with mechanical inflexibility. To him
the end justified the means, however lacking in justice or mercy
these means might prove.

Denmark was despoiled to extend the territory of Prussia to the
north. Austria, Bismarck's unwary accomplice in this act of
spoliation, was robbed of its share of the spoils, and drawn into
a war in which it met with disastrous defeat, the prestige of
Prussia being vastly increased on the field of Sadowa.
Subsequently came the great struggle with France, fomented by his
wiles and ending in triumph for his policies So far all had gone
well for him, the final outcome of his schemes resulting in the
unification of the minor German states into one powerful empire.

BISMARCK AS A STATESMAN

It was in the formation of the modern German Empire that the
far-sighted plans of Bismarck culminated. King William was a
willing partner for this purpose, moving as he suggested and
doing as he wished. The states of Germany, aside from Austria,
had actively participated in the recent war, the steps towards
unification which had been taken during the few preceding years
having now reached the point in which a complete amalgamation
might be effected.

The Holy Roman Empire, which had lasted throughout the medieval
period in some phase of strength and power, at times predominant,
at times little more than a title, had received its death-blow
from the hands of Napoleon and vanished from the historic stage.
It was Bismarck's design to restore the German Empire - not the
old, moth-eaten fiction of the past, but an entirely new one -
and give Prussia the position it had earned, that of the great
center of German racial unity. In this project Austria, long at
the head of the old empire, was to have no part, the imperial
dignity being conferred upon the venerable King William of
Prussia, a monarch whose birth dated back to the eighteenth
century, and who had lived throughout the Napoleonic wars.

UNITING THE GERMAN STATES

Near the close of 1870 Bismarck concluded treaties with the
ambassadors of the South German States, in which they agreed to
accept the constitution of the North German Union. These treaties
were ratified, after some opposition from members of the lower
house, by the legislatures of the four states involved. The next
step in the proceeding was a suggestion from the king of Bavaria
to the other princes that the imperial crown of Germany should be
offered to King William of Prussia.

When the North German diet at Berlin had given its consent to the
new constitution, a congratulatory address was despatched to the
Prussian monarch at Versailles. It announced to the aged
hero-king the nation's wish that he should accept the new
dignity. He replied to the deputation in solemn audience that he
accepted the imperial dignity which the German nation and its
princes had offered him. On the 1st of January, 1871, the new
constitution was to come into operation.

WILLIAM I CROWNED AT VERSAILLES

The solemn assumption of the imperial office did not take place,
however, until the 18th of January, the day on which, one hundred
and seventy years before, the new emperor's ancestor, Frederick
I, had placed the Prussian crown on his head at Konigsberg, and
thus laid the basis of the growing greatness of his house. It was
an ever-memorable coincidence that, in the superb-mirrored hall
of the Versailles palace, where since the days of Richelieu so
many plans had been concocted for the humiliation of Germany,
King William should now proclaim himself German emperor. After
the reading of the imperial proclamation to the German people by
Count Bismarck, the Grand Duke led a cheer, in which the whole
assembly joined amid the singing of national hymns. Thus the
important event had taken place which again summoned the German
Empire to life, and made over the imperial crown with renewed
splendor to another royal house. Barbarossa's old legend, that
the dominion of the empire was, after long tribulation, to pass
from the Hohenstaufen to the Hohenzollern, was now fulfilled; the
dream long aspired after by German youth had now become a reality
and a living fact.

The tidings of the conclusion of peace with France, whose
preliminaries were completed at Frankfort on the 10th of May,
1871, filled all Germany with joy, and peace festivals on the
most splendid scale extended from end to end of the new empire,
in all parts of which an earnest spirit of patriotism was shown,
while Germans from all regions of the world sent home expressions
of warm sympathy with the new national organization of their
fatherland.

A SIGNIFICANT DECADE

The decade just completed had been one of remarkable political
changes in Europe, unsurpassed in significance during any other
period of equal length. The temporal dominion of the pope had
vanished and all Italy had been united under the rule of a single
king. The empire of France had been overthrown and a republic
established in its place, while that country had sunk greatly in
prominence among the European states. Austria had been utterly
defeated in war, had lost its last hold on Italy and its position
of influence among the German states. And all the remaining
German lands had united into a great and powerful empire,
promising to gain such extraordinary military strength that the
surrounding nations looked on in doubt, full of vague fears of
trouble from this new and potent power introduced into their
midst.

Bismarck, however, showed an earnest desire to maintain
international peace and good relations, seeking to win the
confidence of foreign governments, while at the same time
improving and increasing that military force which had been
proved to be so mighty an engine of war.

In the constitution of the new empire two legislative bodies,
already possessed by the Confederation of North German States
were provided for - the BUNDESRATH or Federal Council, whose
members are annually appointed by the respective state
governments and the REICHSTAG or representative body. whose
members are elected by universal suffrage for a period of three
years, an annual session being required. Germany, therefore, in
its present organization, is practically a federal union of
states, each with its own powers of internal government, and with
a common legislature approximating to our Senate and House of
Representatives. But this did not make the German emperor a
parliamentary monarch. From the fact that the consent of both
assemblies was necessary to change the law, he governed as he
pleased and had no other ministerial representative than the high
chancellor of the empire, depending solely on the sovereign.
After 1870 he was in the empire what he had been previously in
Prussia, the essential representative of the country and the
supreme head of the military forces.

The remaining incidents of Bismarck's remarkable career may be
briefly given. It consisted largely in a struggle with the
Catholic Church organization, which had attained to great power
in Germany, and was aggressive to an extent that roused the
vigorous opposition of the chancellor of the empire, who was not
willing to acknowledge any power in Germany other than that of
the emperor.

King Frederick William IV, the predecessor of the reigning
monarch, had made active efforts to strengthen the Catholic
Church in Prussia, its clergy gaining greater privileges in that
Protestant state than they possessed in any of the Catholic
states. They had established everywhere in North Germany their
congregations and monasteries, and by their control of public
education seemed in a fair way eventually to make Catholicism
supreme in the empire.

THE PROBLEM OF CHURCH POWER

This state of affairs Bismark set himself energetically to
reform. The minister of religious affairs was forced to resign,
and his place was taken by Falk, an energetic statesman, who
introduced a new school law, bringing the whole educational
system under state control, and carefully regulating the power of
the clergy over religious and moral education. This law met with
such violent opposition that all the personal influence of
Bismarck and Falk was needed to carry it, and it gave such deep
offense to the pope that he refused to receive the German
ambassador. He declared the Falk law invalid, and the German
bishops united in a declaration against the chancellor. Bismarck
retorted by a law expelling the Jesuits from the empire.

In 1873 the state of affairs became so embittered that the rights
and liberties of the citizens seemed to need protection against
a priesthood armed with extensive powers of discipline and
excommunication. In consequence Bismarck introduced, and by his
eloquence and influence carried, what were known as the May Laws.
These required the scientific education of the Catholic clergy,
the confirmation of clerical appointments by the state, and the
formation of a tribunal to consider and revise the conduct of the
bishops.

These enactments precipitated a bitter contest between Church and
State, while the pope declared the May Laws null and void and
threatened with excommunication all priests who should submit to
them. The State retorted by withdrawing its financial support
from the Catholic church and abolishing those clauses of the
constitution under which the Church claimed independence of the
State. Pope Pius IX died in 1878, and on the election of Leo XIII
attempts were made to reconcile the existing differences. The
reconciliation was a victory for the Church, since the May Laws
ceased to be operative, the church revenues were restored and the
control of the clergy over education in considerable measure was
regained. New concessions were granted in 1886 and 1887, and
Bismarck felt himself beaten in his long conflict with his
clerical opponents, who had proved too strong and deeply
entrenched for him.

PROGRESS OF SOCIALISM

Economic questions became also prominent, the revenues of the
empire requiring some change in the system of free trade and the
adoption of protective duties, while the railroads were acquired
as public property by the various states of the empire. Meanwhile
the rapid growth of socialism excited apprehension, which was
added to when two attempts were made on the life of the emperor.
These were attributed to the socialists, and severe laws for the
suppression of socialism were enacted. Bismark also sought to cut
the ground from under the feet of the socialists by an endeavor
to improve the condition of the working classes. In 1881 laws
were passed compelling employers to insure their workmen in case
of sickness or accident, and in 1888 a system of compulsory
insurance against death and old age was introduced. None of these
measures, however, checked the growth of socialism, which very
actively continued.

In 1882 a meeting was arranged by the chancellor between the
emperors of Germany, Russia, and Austria, which was looked upon
in Europe as a political alliance. In 1878 Russia drifted
somewhat apart from Germany, but in the following year an
alliance of defense and offense was concluded with Austria, and a
similar alliance at a later date with Italy. This, which
continued to 1914, was known as the Triple Alliance. In 1877
Bismarck announced his intention to retire, being worn out with
the great labors of his position. To this the emperor, who felt
that his state rested on the shoulders of the "Iron Chancellor,"
would not listen, though he gave him indefinite leave of absence.

On March 9, 1888, Emperor William died. He was ninety years of
age, having been born in 1797. He was succeeded by his son
Frederick, then incurably ill from a cancerous affection of the
throat, which carried him to the grave after a reign of
ninety-nine days. His oldest son, William, succeeded on June 15,
1888, as William II.

WILLIAM II AND THE RESIGNATION OF BISMARCK

The liberal era which was looked for under Frederick was checked
by his untimely death, his son at once returning to the policy of
William I and Bismarck. He proved to be far more positive and
dictatorial in disposition than his grandfather, with decided and
vigorous views of his own, which soon brought him into conflict
with the equally positive chancellor. The result was a rupture
with Bismarck, and his resignation (a virtual dismissal) from the
premiership in 1890. The young emperor proposed to be his own
minister and subsequently devoted himself in a large measure to
the increase of the army and navy, a policy which brought him
into frequent conflicts with the Reichstag, whose rapidly growing
socialistic membership was in strong opposition to this
development of militarism.

The old statesman, to whom Germany owed so much, was deeply
aggrieved by this lack of gratitude on the part of the
self-opinionated young emperor, in view of his great services to
the state. The wound rankled deeply, though a seeming
reconciliation took place. But the political career of the great
Bismarck was at an end, and he died on July 30, 1898. It is an
interesting coincidence that almost at the same time died the
distinguished but markedly different statesman of England,
William Edward Gladstone. Count Cavour, another great European
statesman of the latter half of the nineteenth century, had
completed his work and passed away nearly forty years before.

The career of William II soon became one of much interest and
some alarm to the other nations of Europe. His eagerness for the
development of the army and navy, and the energy with which he
pushed forward its organization and sought to add to its
strength, seemed significant of warlike intentions, and there was
dread that this energetic young monarch might break the peace of
Europe, if only to prove the irresistible strength of the
military machine he had formed. But as years went on the
apprehensions to which his early career and expressions gave rise
were quieted, and the fear that he would plunge Europe into war
lessened. The army and navy appeared to some as rather a costly
plaything of the active young man than an engine of destruction,
while it tended in considerable measure to the preservation of
peace by rendering Germany a power dangerous to go to war with.

The speeches with which the emperor began his reign showed an
exaggerated sense of the imperial dignity, though his later
career indicated far more judgment and good sense than the early
display of overweening self-importance promised, and the views of
William II eventually came to command far more respect than they
did at first. He showed himself a man of exuberant energy.
Despite a permanent weakness of his left arm and a serious
affection of the ear, he early became a skilful horseman and an
untiring hunter, as well as an enthusiastic yachtsman, and there
were few men in the empire more active and enterprising than the
Kaiser.

OLD AGE INSURANCE

A principal cause of the break between William and Bismarck was
the imperial interference with the laws for the suppression of
socialism. As already stated, the old chancellor had established
a system of compulsory old age insurance, through which workmen
and their employers - aided by the state - were obliged to
provide for the support of artisans after a certain age. The
system seems to have worked satisfactorily, but socialism of a
more radical kind grew in the empire far more rapidly than the
emperor approved of, and he vigorously, though unsuccessfully
endeavored to prevent its increase. Another of his favorite
measures, a religious education bill, he was obliged to withdraw
on account of the opposition it excited. On more than one
occasion he came into sharp conflict with the Reichstag
concerning increased taxation for the army and navy, and a strong
party against his autocratic methods sprang up, and forced him
more than once to recede from warmly-cherished measures.

POLITICAL AND INDUSTRIAL CONDITIONS IN GERMANY

It may be of interest here to say something concerning the
organization of the German empire. The constitution of this
empire, as adopted April 16, 1871, proposes to "form an eternal
union for the protection of the realm and the care of the welfare
of the German people," and places the supreme direction of
military and political affairs in the King of Prussia, under the
title of Deutscher Kaiser (German emperor). The war-making powers
of the emperor, however, are restricted, since he is required to
obtain the consent of the Bundesrath (the Federal Council) before
he can declare war otherwise than for the defense of the realm.
His authority as emperor, in fact, is much less than that which
he exercises as King of Prussia, since the imperial legislature
is independent of him, he having no power of veto over the laws
passed by it. His actual military power, however, is practically
supreme, as demonstrated in the opening events of the war of
1914.

The legislature, as stated, consists of two bodies, the
Bundesrath, representing the states of the union, whose members,
58 in number, are chosen for each session by the several state
governments; and the Reichstag, representing the people, whose
members, 397 in number, are elected by universal suffrage for
periods of five years. The German union, as constituted in 1914,
comprised four kingdoms, six grand duchies, five duchies, seven
principalities, three sovereign cities, and the Reichsland of
Alsace-Lorraine; twenty-six separate states in all. It included
all the German peoples of Europe with the exception of those in
Austria.

The progress of Germany within the modern period has been very
great. The population of the states of the empire, 24,831,000 at
the end of the Napoleonic wars, had become, a century later, over
64,000,000, having added 40,000,000 to the roll of inhabitants.
The country, once divided into an unwieldy multitude of states,
often of minute proportions, has become consolidated into the
number above named, each of these possessing some degree of
importance. These, as combined into a federal union, or empire,
have an area of 208,830 square miles, of which Prussia holds the
lion's share, its area being 134,605 square miles.

The presidency of the empire belongs to the king of Prussia and
is hereditary in his family. Besides the Imperial Parliament,
each state has its own special legislature and laws, but
railroads regarded as necessary for the defense of Germany or the
facilitating of general communications may come under a law of
the empire, even against the opposition of the members of the
confederation whose territory is traversed. The states have their
respective armies, but it is the emperor who disposes of them; he
appoints the heads of the contingents, approves the generals, and
has the right to establish fortresses over the whole territory of
the empire.

The wealth of the German empire has grown in a far greater area
than its population, it having developed into the most active
manufacturing country in Europe. Agriculture has similarly
advanced, and one of its chief products, that of the sugar beet,
has enormously increased, beet-root sugar being among its chief
industrial yields. In addition, Germany has grown to be one of
the most active commercial nations of the earth. Thus it has
taken a place among the most active productive and commercial
countries, its wealth and importance being correspondingly
augmented. These particulars are of interest as showing the
standing of Germany at the outbreak of the war of 1914 and
indicating its degree of ability to bear the fearful strain of so
great a war.


Chapter XIII. GLADSTONE AS AN APOSTLE OF REFORM

Great Britain Becomes a World Power

Gladstone and Disraeli - Gladstone's Famous Budget - A Suffrage
Reform Bill - Disraeli's Reform Measure - Irish Church
Disestablishment - An Irish Land Bill - Desperate State of
Ireland - The Coercion Bill - War in Africa - Home Rule for
Ireland

It is a fact of much interest, as showing the growth of the human
mind, that William Ewart Gladstone, the great advocate of English
Liberalism, made his first political speech in vigorous
opposition to the Reform Bill of 1831. He was then a student at
Oxford University, but this boyish address had such an effect
upon his hearers, that Bishop Wordsworth felt sure the speaker
would "one day rise to be Prime Minister of England." This
prophetic utterance may be mated with another one, by Archdeacon
Denison, who said: "I have just heard the best speech I ever
heard in my life, by Gladstone, against the Reform Bill. But,
mark my words, that man will one day be a Liberal, for he argued
against the Bill on liberal grounds."

Both these far-seeing men hit the mark. Gladstone became Prime
Minister and the leader of the Liberal Party in England. Yet he
had been reared as a Conservative, and for many years he marched
under the banner of conservatism. His political career began in
the first Reform Parliament, in January, 1833. Two years
afterward he was made an under-secretary in Sir Robert Peel's
Cabinet. It was under the same premier that he first became a
full member of the cabinet, in 1845, as Secretary of State for
the Colonies. He was still a Tory in home politics, but had
become a Liberal in his commercial ideas, and was Peel's
right-hand man in carrying out his great commercial policy.

The repeal of the Corn-Laws was the work for which his cabinet
had been formed, and Gladstone, as the leading free-trader in the
Tory ranks, was called to it. As for Cobden, the apostle of
free-trade, Gladstone admired him immensely. "I do not know," he
said in later years, "that there is in any period a man whose
public career and life were nobler or more admirable. Of course,
I except Washington. Washington, to my mind, is the purest figure
in history." As an advocate of free trade Gladstone first came
into connection with another noble figure, that of John Bright,
who was to remain associated with him during most of his career.
In 1857 he first took rank as one of the great moral forces of
modern times. In that year he visited Naples, where he saw the
barbarous treatment of political prisoners under the government
of the infamous King Bomba, and described them in letters whose
indignation was breathed in such tremendous tones that England
was stirred to its depths and all Europe awakened. These
thrilling epistles gave the cause of Italian freedom an impetus
that had much to do with its subsequent success, and gained for
Gladstone the warmest veneration of patriotic Italians.

GLADSTONE AND DISRAELI

In 1852 he first came into opposition with the man against whom
he was to be pitted during the remainder of his career, Benjamin
Disraeli, who had made himself a power in Parliament, and in that
year became Chancellor of the Exchequer in Lord Derby's Cabinet
and leader of the House of Commons. The revenue budget introduced
by him showed a sad lack of financial ability, and called forth
sharp criticisms, to which he replied in a speech made up of
scoffs, gibes and biting sarcasms, so daring and audacious in
character as almost to intimidate the House. As he sat down, Mr.
Gladstone rose and launched forth into an oration which became
historic. He gave voice to that indignation which lay suppressed
beneath the cowed feeling which for the moment the Chancellor of
the Exchequer's performance had left among his hearers. In a few
minutes the House was wildly cheering the intrepid champion who
had rushed into the breach, and when Mr. Gladstone concluded,
having torn to shreds the proposals of the budget, a majority
followed him into the division lobby, and Mr. Disraeli found his
government beaten by nineteen votes. Such was the first great
encounter between the two rivals.

GLADSTONE'S FAMOUS BUDGET

In the cabinet that followed, headed by Lord Aberdeen, Gladstone
succeeded Disraeli as Chancellor of the Exchequer, a position in
which he was to make a great mark. In April, 1853, he introduced
his first budget, a marvel of ingenious statesmanship, in its
highly successful effort to equalize taxation. It remitted
various taxes which had pressed hard upon the poor and restricted
business, and replaced them by applying the succession duty to
real estate, increasing the duty on spirits, and extending the
income tax.

Taken altogether, and especially in its expedients to equalize
taxation, this first budget of Mr. Gladstone may be justly called
the greatest of the century. The speech in which it was
introduced and expounded created an extraordinary impression on
the House and the country. For the first time in Parliament
figures were made as interesting as a fairy tale; the dry bones
of statistics were invested with a new and potent life, and it
was shown how the yearly balancing of the national accounts might
be directed by and made to promote the profoundest and most
fruitful principles of statesmanship. With such lucidity and
picturesqueness was this financial oratory rolled forth that the
dullest intellect could follow with pleasure the complicated
scheme; and for five hours the House of commons sat as if it were
under the sway of a magician's wand. When Mr. Gladstone resumed
his seat, it was felt that the career of the coalition ministry
was assured by the genius that was discovered in its Chancellor
of the Exchequer.

It was, indeed, to Gladstone's remarkable oratorical powers that
much of his success as a statesman was due. No man of his period
was his equal in swaying and convincing his hearers. His rich and
musical voice, his varied and animated gestures, his impressive
and vigorous delivery, great fluency, and wonderful precision of
statement, gave him a power over an audience which few men of the
century have enjoyed. His sentences, indeed, were long and
involved, growing more so as his years advanced, but their fine
choice of words, rich rhetoric, and eloquent delivery carried
away all that heard him, as did his deep earnestness and intense
conviction of the truth of his utterances.

Meanwhile his Liberalism had been steadily growing reaching its
culmination in 1865, when the Tory University of Oxford, which he
had long represented, rejected him as its member, unable longer
to swallow his ultra views. The rejection was greeted by him as a
compliment. He at once offered himself as a candidate for South
Lancashire and in the opening of his speech at Manchester said:
"At last, my friends, I am come among you; to use an expression
which has become very famous and is not likely to be forgotten,
'I am come among you unmuzzled.'"

Unmuzzled he indeed was, free at last to give the fullest
expression to his Liberal faith. In 1866 he became, for the first
time in his career, leader of the House of Commons - Lord
Russell, the Prime Minister, being in the House of Lords. Many of
his friends feared for him in this difficult position; but the
event proved that they had no occasion for alarm, he showing
himself one of the most successful leaders the House had ever
had.

A SUFFRAGE REFORM BILL

His first important duty in this position was to introduce the
new Suffrage Reform Bill, a measure to extend the franchise in
counties and boroughs that would have added about 400,000 voters
to the electorate. In the debate that followed, Gladstone and
Disraeli were again pitted against each other in a grand
oratorical contest. Disraeli taunted him with his youthful speech
at Oxford against the Reform Bill of 1831. Gladstone retorted by
scoring his opponent for clinging to a conservatism which he
gloried in having been strong enough to reject. He ended with
this stirring prediction:

"You cannot fight against the future. Time is on our side. The
great social forces which move onwards in their might and
majesty, and which the tumult of our debates does not for a
moment impede or disturb, those great social forces are against
you; they are marshaled on our side; and the banner which we now
carry into this fight, though perhaps at some moment it may droop
over our sinking heads, yet it soon again will float in the eye
of Heaven, and it will be borne by the firm hands of the united
people of the three kingdoms, perhaps not to an easy, but to a
certain, and to a not far distant, victory."

He was right in saying that it would not be a distant victory.
Disraeli and his party defeated the bill, but the people rose in
a vigorous demand for it, ten thousand of them marching past
Gladstone's house, singing odes in honor of "the People's
William." John Bright, an eloquent orator and strenuous advocate
of oral reform and political progress, joined Gladstone in his
campaign. Through the force of their eloquence the tide of public
opinion rose to such a height that the new Derby-Disraeli
ministry was obliged to bring in a bill similar in purpose to
that which it had overthrown.

DISRAELI'S REFORM MEASURE

This Tory bill proved satisfactory to Gladstone in its general
features. He had won a great victory in forcing its introduction.
But he proposed so many changes in its details - all of them
yielded in committee - that a satirical lord remarked that
nothing of the original bill remained but its opening word
"Whereas." As thus modified, it was more liberal than the measure
that had been defeated, and the people gave full credit for it to
Gladstone, whom they credited with giving them their right to
vote.

The two potent political champions, Gladstone and Disraeli, soon
after attained the summit height of British political ambition.
In February, 1868, the failing health of Lord Derby forced him to
resign the ministry, and Disraeli succeeded him as Prime
Minister, thus the "Asian Mystery," as he had been entitled,
gained the highest office in the British government. He did not
hold this office long. His party was defeated on the question of
the disestablishment of the Irish church, and on December 4th of
the same year Gladstone took his place. Thus, after thirty-five
years of public life, Gladstone had attained the post in which he
was to spend most of his later life.

Bishop Wilberforce, who met him in this hour of triumph, wrote
thus of him in his journal: "Gladstone as ever great, earnest and
honest; as unlike the tricky Disraeli as possible. He is so
delightfully true and the same; just as full of interest in every
good thing of every kind."

The period which followed the election of 1868 - the period of
the Gladstone Administration of 1868-74 - has been called "the
Golden age of Liberalism." It was certainly a period of great
reforms. The first, the most heroic, and probably - taking all
the results into account - the most completely successful of
these, was the disestablishment of the Irish Church.

IRISH CHURCH DISESTABLISHMENT

Any interference with the prerogatives or absoluteness of an
established church institution is sure to arouse vigorous
opposition. The disestablishment Bill, introduced on the 1st of
March, 1869, was greeted in Ireland with the wildest protests
from those interested in the Establishment. One synod, with a
large assumption of inspired knowledge, denounced it as "highly
offensive to the Almighty God." A martial clergyman offered to
"kick the queen's crown into the Boyne," if she assented to any
such measure. Another proposed to fight with the Bible in one
hand the and sword in the other.

These wild outbreaks of theological partisanship had no effect on
Gladstone, whose speech was one of the greatest marvels amongst
his oratorical achievements. His chief opponent declared that
though it lasted three hours, it did not contain a redundant
word. The scheme which it unfolded -- a scheme which withdrew the
temporal establishment of a Church in such a manner that the
church was benefited, not injured, and which lifted from the
backs of an oppressed people an intolerable burden - was a
triumph of creative genius.

Disraeli's speech in opposition to this measure was referred bo
by the LONDON TIMES as flimsiness relieved by spangles." After a
debate in which Mr. Bright made one of his most famous speeches,
the bill was carried by a majority of 118. Before this strong
manifestation of the popular will the House of Lords, which
deeply disliked the bill, felt obliged to give way, and passed it
by a majority of seven.

AN IRISH LAND BILL

In 1870 Mr. Gladstone introduced his Irish Land Bill, a measure
of reform which Parliament had for years refused to grant. By it
the tenant was given the right to hold his farm as long as he
paid his rent, and received a claim upon the improvement made by
himself and his predecessors - a tenant-right which he could
sell. This bill was triumphantly carried; and another important
Liberal measure, Mr. Forster's Education bill, became law.

Other liberal measures were passed, but the tide which had set so
long in this direction turned at last, the government was
defeated in 1873 on a bill for University Education, and in a
subsequent election the Liberal party met with defeat. Gladstone
at once resigned and was succeeded by Disraeli. Two years later
the latter was raised to the peerage by the Queen under the title
of the Earl of Beaconsfield. Gladstone was not in the field for
honors of this type. He much preferred to inherit the title of a
distinguished predecessor, that of "The Great Commoner." During
his recess from office he occupied himself in literary labors and
as a critical commentator upon the foreign policy of Disraeli,
which plunged the country into a Zulu war which Gladstone
denounced as "one of the most monstrous and indefensible in our
history," and an Afghan war which he described as a national
crime.

These and other acts of Tory policy in time brought liberalism
again into the forefront, an election held in 1880 resulted in a
great Liberal victory, Disraeli (then Lord Beaconsfield) resigned
and Gladstone was once again called to the head of the ministry.
In the new administration the foreign policy, the meddling in the
concerns of the East, which had held precedence over domestic
affairs under the preceding administration, vanished from sight,
and the Irish question again became prominent. Ireland had now
gained an able leader, Charles Stewart Parnell, founder of the
Irish Land League, a trade union of Irish farmers, and its
affairs could no longer be consigned to the background.

Gladstone, in assuming control of the new government, was quite
unaware of the task before him. When he had completed his work
with the Church and the Land bills ten years before, he fondly
fancied that the Irish question was definitely settled. The Home
Rule movement, which was started in 1870, seemed to him a wild
delusion which would die away of itself. In 1884 he said: "I
frankly admit that I had had much upon my hands connected with
the doings of the Beaconsfield Government in every quarter of the
world, and I did not know - no one knew - the severity of the
crisis that was already swelling upon the horizon, and that
shortly after rushed upon us like a flood."

DESPERATE STATE OF IRELAND

He was not long is discovering the gravity of the situation, of
which the House had been warned by Mr. Parnell. The famine had
brought its crop of misery, and, while the charitable were
seeking to relieve the distress, many of the landlords were
turning adrift their tenants for non-payment of rents. The Irish
party brought in a Bill for the Suspension of Evictions, which
the government replaced by a similar one for Compensation for
Disturbance. This was passed with a large majority by the
Commons, but was rejected by the Lords, and Ireland was left to
face its misery without relief.

The state of Ireland at that moment was too critical to be dealt
with in this manner. The rejection of the Compensation for
Disturbance Bill was, to the peasantry whom it had been intended
to protect, a message of despair, and it was followed by the
usual symptom of despair in Ireland, an outbreak of agrarian
crime. On the one hand over 17,000 persons were evicted; on the
other there was a dreadful crop of murders and outrages. The Land
League sought to do what Parliament did not; but in doing so it
came in contact with the law. Moreover, the revolution - for
revolution it seemed to be - grew too formidable for its control;
the utmost it succeeded in doing was in some sense to ride
without directing the storm. The first decisive step of Mr.
Forster, the chief secretary for Ireland, was to strike a blow at
the Land League. In November he ordered the prosecution of Mr.
Parnell, Mr. Biggar, and several of the officials of the
organization, and before the year was out he announced his
intention of introducing a Coercion Bill. This step threw the
Irish members under Mr. Parnell and the Liberal Government into
relations of definitive antagonism.

THE COERCION BILL

Mr. Forster introduced his Coercion Bill on January 24, 1881. It
was a formidable measure, which enabled the chief secretary, by
signing a warrant, to arrest any man on suspicion of having
committed a given offense, and to imprison him without trial at
the pleasure of the government. It practically suspended the
liberties of Ireland. The Irish members exhausted every resource
of parliamentary action in resisting it, and their tactics
resulted in several scenes unprecedented in parliamentary
history. In order to pass the bill it was necessary to suspend
them in a body several times. Mr. Gladstone, with manifest pain,
found himself, as leader of the House, the agent by whom this
extreme resolve had to be executed.

The Coercion Bill passed, Mr. Gladstone introduced his Land Bill
of 1881, which was the measure of conciliation intended to
balance the measure of repression. This was really a great and
sweeping reform, whose dominant feature was the introduction of
the novel and far-reaching principle of the state stepping in
between landlord and tenant and fixing the rents. The bill had
some defects, as a series of amending acts, which were
subsequently passed by both Liberal and Tory governments, proved;
but, apart from these, it was on the whole the greatest measure
of land reform ever passed for Ireland by the Imperial
Parliament.

But Ireland was not yet satisfied. Parnell had no confidence in
the good intentions of the government, and took steps to test its
honesty, which so angered Mr. Forster that he arrested Mr.
Parnell and several other leaders and pronounced the Land League
an illegal body. Forster was well-meaning but mistaken. He
fancied that by locking up the ring-leaders he could bring quiet
to the country. On the contrary, affairs were soon far worse than
ever, crime and outrage spreading widely. In despair, Mr. Forster
released Parnell and resigned. All now seemed hopeful; coercion
had proved a failure; peace and quiet were looked for; when, four
days afterward, the whole country was horrified by a terrible
crime. The new Secretary for Ireland, Lord Cavendish, and the
under-secretary, Mr. Burke, were attacked and hacked to death
with knives in Phoenix Park. Everywhere panic and indignation
arose. A new Coercion Act was passed without delay. It was
vigorously put into effect, and a state of virtual war between
England and Ireland again came into existence.

WARS IN AFRICA

Meanwhile Great Britain had been brought back into the tide of
foreign affairs. Events were taking place abroad which must here
be dealt with briefly. The ambitious Briton, who loves to
carry the world on his shoulders, had made the control of the
Suez Canal an excuse for meddling with the government of Egypt.
The immediate results were a revolution that drove Ismail Pasha
from this throne, and a revolt of the people under an ambitious
leader named Arabi Pasha, who seized Alexandria and drove out the
British, many of whom were killed.

Gladstone, who deprecated war, now found himself with a conflict
thrust upon his hands. The British fleet bombarded Alexandria,
and the British army occupied it after it had been half reduced
to ashes. Soon after General Wolseley defeated Arabi and his army
and the insurrection ended. A sequel to this affair was a
formidable outbreak in the Soudan, under El Mahdi, a Mohammedan
fanatic, who captured the city of Khartoum and killed the famous
General Gordon. Years passed before Upper Egypt was reconquered,
it being recovered only at the close of the century. Since then
Egypt has remained under British control.

There were serious troubles also in South Africa. The British of
Cape Colony had pushed their way into the Boer settlement of the
Transvaal, claiming jurisdiction over it. The valiant Dutch
settlers broke into war, and dealt the invaders a signal defeat
at Majuba Hill. This was the opening step in a series of
occurrences which led to the later Boer war, in which the
British, with great loss, conquered the Boers, followed in later
years by a practical reconquest of the country by its Boer
inhabitants in peaceful ways.

Such were the wars of the Gladstone administration, events of
which he did not approve, but into which he was irresistibly
drawn. At home the Irish question continued in the forefront. The
African wars having weakened the administration, a vigorous
assault was made on it by the Irish party in 1885, and it fell.
But its demise was a very brief one. After a short experience of
a Tory ministry under Lord Salisbury, Parnell's party rallied to
Gladstone's side, the new government was defeated, and on
February 1, 1886, Gladstone became Prime Minister for the third
time.

HOME RULE FOR IRELAND

During the brief interval his opinions had suffered a great
revolution. He no longer thought that Ireland had all it could
justly demand. He returned to power as an advocate of a most
radical measure, that of Home Rule for Ireland, a restoration of
that separate Parliament which it had lost in 1800. He also had a
scheme to buy out the Irish landlords and establish a peasant
proprietary by state aid. His new views were revolutionary in
character, but he did not hesitate - he never hesitated to do
what his conscience told him was right. On April 8, 1886, he
introduced to Parliament his Home Rule Bill.

The scene that afternoon was one of the most remarkable in
Parliamentary history. Never before was such interest manifested
in a debate by either the public or the members of the House. In
order to secure their places, members arrived at St. Stephen's at
six o'clock in the morning, and spent the day on the premises;
and, a thing quite unprecedented, members who could not find
places on the benches filled up the floor of the House with rows
of chairs. The strangers', diplomats', peers', and ladies'
galleries were filled to overflowing. Men begged even to be
admitted to the ventilating passages beneath the floor of the
chamber that they might in some sense be witnesses of the
greatest feat in the lifetime of an illustrious old man of
eighty. Around Palace Yard an enormous crowd surged, waiting to
give the veteran a welcome as he drove up from Downing Street.

Mr. Gladstone arrived in the House, pale and still panting from
the excitement of his reception in the streets. As he sat there
the entire Liberal party - with the exception of Lord Hartington,
Sir Henry James, Mr. Chamberlain and Sir George Trevelyan - and
the Nationalist members, by a spontaneous impulse, sprang to
their feet and cheered him again and again. The speech which he
delivered was in every way worthy of the occasion. It expounded,
with marvelous lucidity and a noble eloquence, a tremendous
scheme of constructive legislation - the re-establishment of a
legislature in Ireland, but one subordinate to the Imperial
Parliament, and hedged round with every safeguard which could
protect the unity of the Empire. It took three hours in delivery,
and was listened to throughout with the utmost attention on every
side of the House. At its close all parties united in a tribute
of admiration for the genius which had astonished them with such
an exhibition of its powers.

Yet it is one thing to cheer an orator, another thing to vote for
a revolution. The bill was defeated - as it was almost sure to
be. Mr. Gladstone at once dissolved Parliament and appealed to
the country in a new election, with the result that he was
decisively defeated. His bold declaration that the contest was
one between the classes and the masses turned the aristocracy
against him, while he had again roused the bitter hatred of his
opponents.

Gladstone, the "Grand Old Man," a title which he had nobly won,
returned to power in 1892, after a period of wholesale coercion
in Ireland. He was not to remain there long. He brought in a new
Home Rule Bill, supported it with much of his old vigor, and had
the intense satisfaction of having it passed, with a majority of
thirty-four. It was defeated in the House of Lords, and Home
Rule, still remains the prominent issue in Ireland, which it has
divided into two camps, Protestant Ulster being in revolt against
the Catholic provinces.

With this great event the public career of the Grand Old Man came
to an end. The burden had grown too heavy for his reduced
strength. In March, 1894, to the consternation of his party, he
announced his intention of retiring from public life. The Queen
offered, as she had done once before, to raise him to the peerage
as an earl, but he declined the proffer. His own plain name was a
title higher than that of any earldom in the kingdom.

On May 19, 1898, William Ewart Gladstone laid down the burden of
his life as he had already done that of labor. The noblest figure
in legislative life of the nineteenth century had passed away
from earth.


Chapter XIV. THE FRENCH REPUBLIC

Struggles of a New Nation

The Republic Organized - The Commune of Paris - Instability of
the Government - Thiers Proclaimed President - Punishment of the
Unsuccessful Generals - MacMahon a Royalist President - Bazaine's
Sentence and Escape - Grevy, Gambetta and Boulanger - The Panama
Canal Scandal - Despotism of the Army Leaders - The Dreyfus Case
- Church and State - The Moroccan Controversy

It has been already told how the capitulation of the French army
at Sedan and the captivity of Louis Napoleon were followed in
Paris by the overthrow of the empire and the formation of a
republic, the third in the history of French political changes. A
provisional government was formed, the legislative assembly was
dissolved, and all the court paraphernalia of the imperial
establishment disappeared. The new government was called in Paris
the "Government of Lawyers," most of its members and officials
belonging to that profession. At its head was General Trochu, in
command of the army in Paris; among its chief members were Jules
Favre and Gambetta. While upright in its membership and honorable
in its purposes, it was an arbitrary body, formed by a coup
d'etat like that by which Napoleon had seized the reins of power,
and not destined for a long existence.

THE REPUBLIC ORGANIZED

The news of the fall of Metz and the surrender of Bazaine and his
army served as a fresh spark to the inflammable public feeling of
France. In Paris the Red Republic raised the banner of
insurrection against the government of the national defense and
endeavored to revive the spirit of the Commmune of 1793. The
insurgents marched to the senate-house, demanded the election of
a municipal council which should share power with the government,
and proceeded to imprison Trochu, Jules Favre, and their
associates. This, however, was but a temporary success of the
Commune, and the provisional government continued in existence
until the end of the war, when a national assembly was elected by
the people and the temporary government was set aside. Gambetta,
the dictator, "the organizer of defeats," as he was sarcastically
entitled, lost his power, and the aged statesman and historian,
Louis Thiers, was chosen as chief of the executive department of
the new government.

The treaty of peace with Germany, including, as it did, the loss
of Alsace and Lorraine and the payment of an indemnity of
$1,000,000,000, roused once more the fierce passions of the
radicals and the masses of the great cities, who passionately
denounced the treaty as due to cowardice and treason. The
dethroned emperor added to the excitement by a manifesto, in
which he protested against his deposition by the assembly and
called for a fresh election. The final incitement to insurrection
came when the Assembly decided to hold its sessions at Versailles
instead of in Paris, whose unruly populace it feared.

THE COMMUNE OF PARIS

In a moment all the revolutionary elements of the great city were
in a blaze. The social democratic "Commune," elected from the
central committee of the National Guard, renounced obedience to
the government and the National Assembly, and broke into open
revolt. An attempt to repress the movement merely added to its
violence, and all the riotous populace of Paris sprang to arms. A
new war was about to be inaugurated in that city which had just
suffered so severely from the guns of the Germans, and around
which German troops were still encamped.

The government had neglected to take possession of the cannon
Montmartre; and now, when the troops of the line, instead of
firing on the insurrectionists, went over in crowds to their
side, the supremacy over Paris fell into the hands of the wildest
demagogues. A fearful civil war commenced, and in the same forts
which the Germans had shortly before evacuated firing once more
resounded; the houses, gardens, and villages around Paris were
again surrendered to destruction; the creations of art, industry,
and civilization were endangered, and the abodes of wealth and
pleasure were transformed into dreary wildernesses.

The wild outbreaks of fanaticism on the part of the Commune
recalled the scenes of the revolution of 1789, and in these
spring days of 1871 Paris added another leaf to its long history
of crime and violence. The insurgents, roused to fury by the
efforts of the government to suppress them, murdered two
generals, Lecomte and Thomas, and fired on the unarmed citizens
who, as the "friends of order," desired a reconciliation with the
authorities at Versailles. They formed a government of their own,
extorted loans from wealthy citizens, confiscated the property of
religious societies, and seized and held as hostages Archbishop
Darboy and many other distinguished clergymen and citizens.

Meanwhile the investing French troops, led by Marshal MacMahon,
gradually fought their way through the defenses and into the
suburbs of the city, and the speedy surrender of the anarchists
in the capital became inevitable. This necessity excited their
passions to the most violent extent, and, with the wild fury of
savages, they set themselves to do all the damage they could to
the historical monuments of Paris. The noble Vendome column, the
symbol of the warlike renown of France, was torn down from its
pedestal and hurled prostrate into the street. The most historic
buildings in the city were set on fire, and either partially or
entirely destroyed. Among these were the Tuileries, a portion of
the Louvre, the Luxembourg, the Palais Royal, the Elysee, etc.;
while several of the imprisoned hostages, foremost among them
Darboy, Archbishop of Paris, and the universally respected
minister Daguerry, were shot by the infuriated mob. Such crimes
excited the Versailles troops to terrible vengeance, when they at
last succeeded in repressing the rebellion. They made their way
along a bloody course; human life was counted as nothing; the
streets were stained with blood and strewn with corpses, and the
Seine once more ran red between its banks. When at last the
Commune surrendered, the judicial courts at Versailles began
their work of retribution. The leaders and participators in the
rebellion who could not save themselves by flight were shot by
hundreds, confined in fortresses, or transported to the colonies.
For more than a year the imprisonments, trials, and executions
continued, military courts being established which excited the
world for months by their wholesale condemnations to exile and to
death. The carnival of anarchy was followed by one of pitiless
revenge.

INSTABILITY OF THE GOVERNMENT

The Republican government of France, which had been accepted in
an emergency, was far from carrying with it the support of the
whole of the Assembly or of the people, and the aged, but active
and keen-witted Thiers had to steer through a medley of opposing
interests and sentiments. His government was considered, alike by
the Monarchists and the Jacobins, as only provisional, and the
Bourbons and Napoleonists on the one hand and the advocates of
"liberty, equality and fraternity" on the other, intrigued for
its overthrow. But the German armies still remained on French
soil, pending the payment of the costs of the war; and the astute
chief of the executive power possessed moderation enough to
pacify the passions of the people, to restrain their hatred of
the Germans, which was so boldly exhibited in the streets and in
the courts of justice, and to quiet the clamor for a war of
revenge.

The position of parties at home was confused and distracted, and
a disturbance of the existing order could only lead to anarchy
and civil war. Thiers was thus the indispensable man of the
moment, and so much was he himself impressed by the consciousness
of this fact, that many times, by the threat of resignation, he
brought the opposing elements in the Assembly to harmony and
compliance.

This occurred even during the siege of Paris, when the forces of
the government were in conflict with the Commune. In the Assembly
there was shown an inclination to moderate or break through the
sharp centralization of the government, and to procure some
autonomy for the provinces and towns. When, therefore, a new
scheme was discussed, a large part of the Assembly demanded that
the mayors should not, as formerly, be appointed by the
government, but be elected by the town councils. Only with
difficulty was Thiers able to effect a compromise, on the
strength of which the government was permitted the right of
appointment for all towns numbering over twenty thousand.

In the elections for the councils the moderate Republicans proved
triumphant. With a supple dexterity, Thiers knew how to steer
between the Democratic-Republican party and the Monarchists. When
Gambetta endeavored to establish a "league of Republican towns,"
the attempt was forbidden as illegal; and when the decree of
banishment against the Bourbon and Orleans princes was set aside,
and the latter returned to France, Thiers knew how to postpone
the entrance of the Duc d'Aumale and Prince de Joinville, who had
been elected deputies, into the Assembly at least until the end
of the year.

THIERS PROCLAIMED PRESIDENT

The brilliant success of the national loan went far to strengthen
the position of Thiers. The high offers for a share in this loan,
which indicated the inexhaustible wealth of the nation and the
solid credit of France abroad, promised a rapid payment of the
war indemnity, the consequent evacuation of the country by the
German army of occupation, and a restoration of the disturbed
finances of the state. The foolish manifesto of the Count de
Chambord, who declared that he had only to return with the white
banner to be made sovereign of France, brought all practical men
to the side of Thiers, and he had, during the last days of
August, 1871, the triumph of being proclaimed "President of the
French Republic."

The new president aimed, next to the liberation of the garrisoned
provinces from the German troops of occupation, at the
reorganization of the French army. Yet he could not bring himself
to the decision of enforcing in its entirety the principle of
general armed service, such as had raised Prussia from a state of
depression to one of military regeneration. Universal military
service in France was, it is true, adopted in name, and the army
was increased to an immense extent, but under such conditions and
limitations that the richer and more educated classes could
exempt themselves from service in the army; and thus the active
forces, as before, consisted of professional soldiers. And when
the minister for education, Jules Simon, introduced an
educational law based on liberal principles, he experienced on
the part of the clergy such violent opposition that the
government dropped the measure.

In order to place the army in the condition which Thiers desired,
an increase in the military budget was necessary, and
consequently an enhancement of the general revenues of the state.
For this purpose a return to the tariff system, which had been
abolished under the empire, was proposed, but excited so great an
opposition in the Assembly that six months passed before it could
be carried. The new organization of the army, undertaken with a
view of placing France on a level in military strength with her
late conqueror, was now eagerly undertaken by the president. An
active army, with five year's service, was to be added to a
"territorial army," a kind of militia. And so great was the
demand on the portion of the nation capable of bearing arms that
the new French army exceeded in numbers that of any other nation.

But all the statesmanship of Thiers could not overcome the
anarchy in the Assembly, where the forces for monarchy and
republicanism were bitterly opposed to each other. Gambetta, in
order to rouse public opinion in favor of democracy, made several
tours through the country, his extravagance of language giving
deep offense to the Monarchists, while the opposed sections of
the Assembly grew wider and more violent in their breach.

PUNISHMENT OF THE UNSUCCESSFUL GENERALS

Indisputable as were the valuable services which Thiers had
rendered to France, by the foundation of public order and
authority, the creation of a regular army, and the restoration of
a solid financial system, yet all these services met with no
recognition in the face of the party jealousy and political
passions prevailing among the people's representatives at
Versailles. More and more did the Royalist reaction gain ground,
and, aided by the priests and by various national discontents,
endeavor to bring about the destruction of its opponents. Against
the Radicals and Liberals, among whom even the Voltairean Thiers
was included, superstition and fanaticism were let loose, and
against the Bonapartists was directed the terrorism of
courts-martial.

The French could not rest with the thought that their military
supremacy had been broken by the superiority of the Prusso-German
arms; their defeats could have proceeded only from the treachery
or incapacity of their leaders. To this national prejudice the
Government decided to bow, and to offer a sacrifice to the
popular passion. And thus the world beheld the lamentable
spectacle of the commanders who had surrendered the French
fortresses to the enemy being subjected to a trial by
court-martial under the presidency of Marshal Baraguay
d'Hilliers, and the majority of them, on account of their proved
incapacity or weakness, deprived of their military honors, at a
moment when all had cause to reproach themselves and endeavor to
raise up a new structure on the ruins of the past. Even Ulrich,
the once celebrated commander of Strasbourg, whose name had been
given to a street in Paris, was brought under the censure of the
court-martial. But the chief blow fell upon the
commander-in-chief of Metz, Marshal Bazaine, to whose "treachery"
the whole misfortune of France was attributed. For months he was
retained a prisoner at Versailles, while preparations were made
for the great court-martial spectacle, which, in the following
year, took place under the presidency of the Duc d'Aumale.

MACMAHON A ROYALIST PRESIDENT

The result of the party division in the Assembly was, in May
1873, a vote of censure on the ministry, which induced them to
resign. Their resignation was followed by an offer of resignation
on the part of Thiers, who experienced the unexpected slight of
having it accepted by the majority of the Assembly, the
monarchist MacMahon, Marshal of France and Duke of Magenta, being
elected President in his place. Thiers had just performed one of
his greatest services to France, by paying off the last
instalment of the war indemnity and relieving the soil of his
country of the hated German troops.

The party now in power at once began to lay plans to carry out
their cherished purpose of placing a Legitimist king upon the
throne, this honor being offered to the Count de Chambord,
grandson of Charles X. He, an old man, unfitted for the thorny
seat offered him, and out of all accord with the spirit of the
times, put a sudden end to the hopes of his partisans by his
medieval conservatism. Their purpose was to establish a
constitutional government, under the tri-colored flag of
revolutionary France; but the old Bourbon gave them to understand
that he would not consent to reign under the Tricolor, but must
remain steadfast to the white banner of his ancestors; he had no
desire to be "the legitimate king of revolution."

This letter shattered the plans of his supporters. No man with
idea like these would be tolerated on the French throne. There
was never to be in France a King Henry V. The Monarchists, in
disgust at the failure of their schemes, elected MacMahon
president of the republic for a term of seven years, and for the
time being the reign of republicanism in France was made secure.

While MacMahon was thus being raised to the pinnacle of honor,
his former comrade Bazaine was imprisoned in another part of the
palace at Versailles, awaiting trial on the charge of treason for
the surrender of Metz. In the trial, in which the whole world
took a deep interest, the efforts of the prosecution were
directed to prove that the conquest of France was solely due to
the treachery of the Bonapartist marshal. Despite all that could
be said in his defense, he was found guilty by the court martial,
sentenced to degradation from his rank in the army, and to death.

BAZAINE'S SENTENCE AND ESCAPE

A letter which Prince Frederick Charles wrote in his favor only
added to the wrath of the people, who cried aloud for his
execution. But, as though the judges themselves felt a twinge of
conscience at the sentence, they at the same time signed a
petition for pardon to the president of the republic. MacMahon
thereupon commuted the punishment of death into a twenty years'
imprisonment, remitted the disgrace of the formalities of a
military degradation, without canceling its operation, and
appointed as the prisoner's place of confinement the fortress on
the island of St. Marguerite, opposite Cannes, known in
connection with the "iron mask." Bazaine's wealthy Mexican wife
obtained permission to reside near him, with her family and
servants, in a pavilion of the sea-fortress. This afforded her an
opportunity of bringing about the freedom of her husband in the
following year with the aid of her brother. After an adventurous
escape, by letting himself down with a rope to a Genoese vessel,
Bazaine fled to Holland, and then offered his services to the
republican government of Spain.

In 1875 the constitution under which France is now governed was
adopted by the republicans. It provides for a legislature of two
chambers; one a chamber of deputies elected by the people, the
other a senate of 300 members, 75 of whom are elected by the
National Assembly and the others by electoral colleges in the
departments of France. The two chambers unite to elect a
president, who has a term of seven years. He is
commander-in-chief of the army, appoints all officers, receives
all ambassadors, executes the laws, and appoints the cabinet,
which is responsible to the Senate and House of Deputies - thus
resembling the cabinet of Great Britain instead of that of the
United States.

This constitution was soon ignored by the arbitrary president,
who forced the resignation of a cabinet which he could not
control, and replaced it by another responsible to himself
instead of to the Assembly. His act of autocracy roused a violent
opposition. Gambetta moved that the representatives of the people
had no confidence in a cabinet which was not free in its actions
and not republican in its principles. The sudden death of Thiers,
whose last writing was a defense of the republic, stirred the
heart of the nation and added to the excitement, which soon
reached fever heat. In the election that followed the republicans
were in so great a majority over the conservatives that the
president was compelled either to resign or to govern according
to the constitution. He accepted the latter and appointed a
cabinet composed of republicans. But the acts of the legislature,
which passed laws to prevent arbitrary action by the executive
and to secularize education, so exasperated the old soldier that
he finally resigned from his high office.

GREVY, GAMBETTA AND BOULANGER

Jules Grevy was elected president in his place, and Gambetta was
made president of the House of Deputies. Subsequently he was
chosen presiding minister in a cabinet composed wholly of his own
creatures. His career in this high office was a brief one. The
chambers refused to support him in his arbitrary measures and he
resigned in disgust. Soon after the self-appointed dictator, who
had played so prominent a part in the war with Germany, died from
a wound whose origin remained a mystery.

The constitution was revised in 1884, the republic now declared
permanent and final, and Grevy again elected president. General
Boulanger, the minister of war in the new government, succeeded
in making himself highly popular, many looking upon him as a
coming Napoleon, by whose genius the republic would be
overthrown.

In 1887 Grevy resigned, in consequence of a scandal in high
circles, and was succeeded hy Sadi-Carnot, grandson of a famous
general of the first republic. Under the new president two
striking events took place. General Boulanger managed to lift
himself into great prominence, and gain a powerful following in
France. Carried away by self-esteem, he defied his superiors, and
when tried and found guilty of the offense, was strong enough in
France to overthrow the ministry, to gain re-election to the
Chamber of Deputies, and to defeat a second ministry.

But his reputation was declining. It received a serious blow
through a duel he fought with a lawyer, in which the soldier was
wounded and the lawyer escaped unhurt. The next cabinet was
hostile to his intrigues, and he fled to Brussels to escape
arrest. Tried by the Senate, sitting as a High Court of Justice,
he was found guilty of plotting against the state and sentenced
to imprisonment for life. His career soon after ended in suicide
and his party disappeared.

THE PANAMA CANAL SCANDAL

The second event spoken of was the Panama Canal affair. De
Lesseps, the maker of the Suez Canal, had undertaken to excavate
a similar one across the Isthmus of Panama, but the work was
managed with such wild extravagance that vast sums were spent and
the poor investors widely ruined, while the canal remained a
half-dug ditch. At a later date this affair became a great
scandal, dishonest bargains in connection with it were abundantly
unearthed, bribery was shown to have been common in high places,
and France was shaken to its center by the startling exposure. De
Lesseps, fortunately for him, escaped imprisonment by death, but
others of the leaders in the enterprise were condemned and
punished.

In the succeeding years perils manifold threatened the existence
of the French Republic. A moral decline seemed to have sapped the
foundations of public virtue, and the new military organization
rose to a dangerous height of power, becoming a possible
instrument of ambition which overshadowed and portended evil to
the state. The spirit of anarchy, which had been so strikingly
displayed in the excesses of the Parisian Commune, was shown
later in various instances of death and destruction by the use of
dynamite bombs, exploded in Paris and elsewhere. But its most
striking example was in the murder of President Carnot, who was
stabbed by an anarchist in the streets of Lyons. This
assassination, and the disheartening exposures of dishonesty in
the Panama Canal case trials, stirred the moral sentiment of
France to its depths, and made many of the best citizens despair
of the permanency of the republic.

DESPOTISM OF THE ARMY LEADERS

But the most alarming threat came from the army, which had grown
in power and prominence until it fairly overtopped the state,
while its leaders felt competent to set at defiance the civil
authorities. This despotic army was an outgrowth of the
Franco-Prussian war. The terrible punishment which the French had
received in that war and in particular the loss of Alsace and
Lorraine, filled them with bitter hatred of Germany and a burning
desire for revenge. Yet it was evident that their military
organization was so imperfect as to leave them helpless before
the army of Germany, and the first thing to be done was to place
themselves on a level in military strength with their foe. To
this President Thiers had earnestly devoted himself, and the work
of army organization went on until all France was virtually
converted into a great camp, defended by powerful fortresses, and
the whole male population of the country were practically made
part of the army.

The final result of this was the development of one of the most
complete and well-appointed military establishments in Europe.
The immediate cause of the reorganization of the army gradually
passed away. As time went on the intense feeling against Germany
softened and the danger of war decreased. But the army became
more and more dominant in France, and, as the century neared its
end, the autocratic position of its leaders was revealed by a
startling event, which was claimed to prove the moral decadence
of France and the controlling influence and dominating power of
the members of the General Staff. This was the celebrated Dreyfus
Case, the CAUSE CELEBRE of the period. At the time concerned it
excited the utmost interest, stirring France to its center, and
attracting the earnest attention of the world. It aroused
indignation as well as interest, and years passed before it lost
its hold on public attention. It can be dealt with here only with
great brevity.

THE DREYFUS CASE

Albert Dreyfus, an Alsatian Jew and a captain in the Fourteenth
Regiment of Artillery of the French army, detailed for service at
the Information Bureau of the Minister of War, was arrested
October 15, 1894, on charge of having sold military secrets to a
foreign power. The following letter was said to have been found
at the German embassy by a French detective, in what was declared
to be the handwriting of Dreyfus:

"Having no news from you I do not know what to do. I send you in
the meantime the condition of the forts. I also hand you the
principal instructions as to firing. If you desire the rest I
shall have them copied. The document is precious. The
instructions have been given only to the officers of the General
Staff. I leave for the maneuvers."

Previous to the arrest of Dreyfus, the editor of the LIBRE
PAROLE, had been carrying on a violent anti-Semitic agitation in
his paper. He now raved about the Jews in general, declared
Dreyfus guilty of selling army secrets to the Germans, and by his
crusade turned public opinion in Paris strongly against the
accused.

As a result of this assault and the statement that the letter was
in the handwriting of the accused, he was tried before a military
court, which sat behind closed doors, kept parts of the
indictment from the knowledge of the prisoner and his lawyer, and
in other ways manifested a lack of fairness.

As a result of this secret trial the accused was found guilty and
condemned to be degraded from his military rank, and by a special
act of the Chamber of Deputies was ordered to be imprisoned for
life in a penal settlement on Devil's Island, off the coast of
French Guiana, a tropical region, desolate and malarious in
character. The sentence was executed with the most cruel
harshness. During part of his detention Dreyfus was locked in a
hut, surrounded by an iron cage, on the island. This was done on
the plea of possible attempts at rescue. He was allowed to send
and receive only such letters as had been transcribed by one of
his guardians.

He denied, and never ceased to deny, his guilt. The letters he
wrote to his counsel after the trial and after his disgrace are
most pathetic assertions of his innocence, and of the hope that
ultimately justice would be done him. His wife and family
continued to deny his guilt, and used every influence to get his
case reopened.

The whole affair in time excited a strong suspicion that Dreyfus
had been used as a scapegoat for some one higher up and had been
unjustly condemned, the fact of his being a Jew being used to
excite prejudice against him. Many eminent literary men of France
advocated the revision of a sentence which did not appeal to the
sense of justice of the best element of France.

It was declared that military secrets continued to leak out after
Dreyfus's arrest, and that the handwriting of the letter found
was closely similar to that of Count Ferdinand Esterhazy, an
officer in the French army, of noble Hungarian descent. This
matter was so ventilated that some action became necessary and
Esterhazy was tried secretly by court-martial, the trial ending
in acquittal.

At this juncture, Emile Zola, the celebrated novelist, stepped
into the fray as a defender of Dreyfus, writing a notable letter
to President Favre, in which he accused the members of the
court-martial of acquitting Esterhazy under order of their
chiefs, who would not admit that a military court of France could
possibly make a mistake.

This letter led to the arrest and trial of Zola and of the editor
who published it. Their trials were conducted in a secret manner
and they were found guilty and sentenced to a heavy fine and a
year's imprisonment. Zola escaped imprisonment by absenting
himself from France.

By this time the interest of the whole world was enlisted in the
case, the action of the French courts was everywhere condemned,
and in the end it was deemed advisable to bring Dreyfus back to
France and accord him a new trial. This trial, which lasted from
August 7 to September 7, 1899, indicated that he had been
convicted on the most flimsy and uncertain evidence, largely
conjectural in character, while there was strong evidence in his
favor. Yet the judges of the court-martial seemed biased against
him, and by a vote of three judges to two, he was again found
guilty - "of treason, with extenuating circumstances," as if
treason could be extenuated.

The whole affair was a transparent travesty upon justice, and the
method by which it was conducted threw into a strong light the
faulty character of the French method of trial. The result,
indeed, was so flagrantly unsatisfactory that no further
punishment was inflicted upon the accused, and in July, 1906, his
case was brought before the Court of Appeals, with the result
that he was acquitted and restored to his rank in the army.

CHURCH AND STATE

Later events of interest in French history had to do with the
status of the Catholic Church in France and with the relations of
France, Germany and Spain to Morocco, the latter more than once
threatening war. The union of Church and State in France, which
had only before been broken during the turbulent period of the
Revolution, was definitely abrogated by a law of December 19,
1905, proclaiming the separation of Church and State in that
country. By this, and a supplementary act in 1907, the Catholic
church was put on the same footing in the republic as the
Protestant and Jewish congregations. The use of church buildings,
which had been the property of the state since the Revolution,
was granted only under conditions which the Pope refused to
accept, and religious liberty made a radical advance in France.

THE MOROCCO CONTROVERSY

Meanwhile troubles had arisen on the borders of Algeria between
the French army of occupation and the unruly Moroccan tribes
beyond the boundary. The efforts of France to abate these
disturbances, which found support in the British government,
aroused opposition in Germany, which objected to the claim of
France to a predominant interest in Morocco. The affair went so
far that Emperor William II visited Tangier, had a conference
with the representatives of the Sultan, and was reported to have
agreed to enforce the integrity of Morocco. The friction that
resulted was allayed by a conference of the Powers held at
Algeciras, Spain, in 1905, and the trouble was temporarily
settled by a series of resolutions establishing a number of
reforms in Morocco, the privileged position of France along the
Moroccan-Algerian frontier being acknowledged.

Disturbances continued, however, and the murder of a French
doctor by the tribesmen in March, 1907, led to the occupation of
a Moroccan town by French troops. Later in the year a more
serious affair took place at the port of Casablanca, which was
raided by insurgent tribesmen and European laborers and others
were massacred. A French force landed on August 7th and a
desperate fight took place, during which nearly every inhabitant
of the town was killed and wounded or had fled, the dead alone
numbering thousands.

In 1911 matters in Morocco grew serious, there being severe
fighting by Spanish troops in the Spanish concession around
Alcazar, while tribal outbreaks against Fez, the Sultan's
capital, brought a French military expedition to that point. By
this, communication between the capital and the coast was
established, the French government undertaking to organize the
Sultan's army and carry out certain works of public improvement.

These movements revived the suspicions of Germany and that
country took the decisive step of sending a war vessel to Agadir,
a southern port of Morocco, with the ostensible purpose of
protecting the persons and property of German subjects. This act
led to the suspicion in France that Germany meant more than she
said and that her real purpose was to gain a permanent hold on
Moroccan territory. There was heated talk of war, as there
usually is in such cases, but the affair was, in the end,
amicably adjusted.

It became known that France wished to secure a free hand in
Morocco, outside of the coastal provinces held by Spain, and was
willing in return to concede to Germany a considerable amount of
territory in French Congo. The agreement finally reached, with
the assent of the other Powers, especially Spain, which had a
vital interest in the problem, was that France should be given a
protectorate over Morocco, and in return should cede to Germany a
region in French Congo, in equatorial Africa, of about 230,000
square kilometers, containing a population of from 600,000 to
1,000,000, and adjoining the German district of Kamerun, France
retaining certain transit privileges in the region.

Thus ended a source of dispute which had more than once
threatened war and would have so ended at this time but for the
vigorous support of France by Great Britain. It ended greatly to
the advantage of France, whose interests in Morocco far
outweighed any advantages likely to arise from her holdings in
central Africa. Behind all this lay the probability that her
influence in and hold upon Morocco would increase until
eventually it would develop into a virtual, perhaps an actual,
sovereignty over that country.


Chapter XV. RUSSIA IN THE FIELD OF WAR

The Outcome of Slavic Ambition

Siege of Sebastopol - Russia in Asia - The Russo-Japanese War -
Port Arthur Taken - The Russian Fleet Defeated

Among the most interesting phases of nineteenth-century history
is that of the conflict between Russia and Turkey, a struggle for
dominion that came down from the preceding centuries, and still
seems only temporarily laid aside for final settlement in the
years to come. In the eighteenth century the Turks proved quite
able to hold their own against all the power of Russia and all
the armies of Catharine the great, and they entered the
nineteenth century with their ancient dominion largely intact.
But they were declining in strength while Russia was growing, and
long before 1900 the empire of the Sultan would have become the
prey of the Czar had not the other Powers of Europe come to the
rescue. The Czar Nicholas designated the Sultan as the "sick man"
of Europe, and such he and his empire had truly become.

Of the various wars which Russia waged against Turkey, the first
of modern historical importance was that of 1854-55, known as the
"Crimean War" and made notable by the fact that Britain, France
and Sardinia joined the Turks in their struggle against the
Muscovite armies.

The Western powers had long been fearful of letting
Constantinople fall into the hands of Russia. They had interfered
to prevent this after the victory of Russia in 1829, when
Adrianople was taken and Constantinople threatened. War broke out
again in 1853 and Russia seemed likely to triumph. This led
Britain and France to declare war in 1854. Armies were sent by
them to the Black Sea, and in September a strong force was landed
on the coast of the Crimean peninsula.

SIEGE OF SEBASTOPOL

Their purpose in this movement was the capture of the fortress of
Sebastopol and the destruction of the Russian fleet in its
harbor. But the Muscovite defense was vigorous and the stronghold
proved difficult to take. Battles took place on the banks of the
Alma and at Balaclava, in both of which the allies were
successful, the latter being made notable by the heroic British
"Charge of the Light Brigade," which has since been famous in
song and story.

But the fortress held out during the succeeding winter and until
late in 1855, despite the vigor of the siege. After the middle of
August the assault became almost incessant, cannon balls dropping
like an unceasing storm of hail in forts and streets. On the 5th
of September began a terrific bombardment, continuing day and
night for three days, and sweeping down more than 5,000 Russians
on the ramparts. At length, as the hour of noon struck on
September 8th, the attack, of which this play of artillery was
the prelude, began, the French assailing the Malakoff, the
British the Redan, these being the most formidable of the
defensive works of the town. The French assault was successful
and Sebastopol became untenable. That night the Russians blew up
their remaining forts, sunk their ships of war, and marched out
of the town, leaving it as the prize of victory to the allies.

This success put an end to the war. Britain, Sardinia, which had
joined the coalition, and Turkey were eager to continue it, but
Napoleon III had reasons of his own for withdrawing his troops,
and the other allies found it desirable to consent to a treaty of
peace. Russia was far from being conquered, but its finances were
in a deplorable state, and the Czar proved ready to make terms
with his enemies.

This did not end Russia's efforts to win Constantinople. A new
war broke out in 1877, in which none of the Powers came to the
aid of the Turks, and their dominion in Europe would have been
brought to an end but for the jealousy or these Powers, which
forced the conquering Muscovites to withdraw from the hoped-for
prize. The events of this war are given in the following chapter,
as part of the history of the Balkan States.

RUSSIA IN ASIA

Russia, though so often checked in the effort to capture
Constantinople, and with it win an opening to the Mediterranean,
was long more successful in another field of ambition, that of
Asiatic conquest and the expansion of empire over the great
Eastern continent. Here it had gradually won a vast stretch of
territory, including the immense area of Siberia and the realms
of the Caucasus and Turkestan. The result of the Boxer outbreak
in China in 1900 increased the Russian dominion in Asia, giving
the empire a hold upon Manchuria, with control of the fine
seaport of Port Arthur. It began to appear as if this whole
region would become Russian territory, possibly including Korea
and Japan.

THE RUSSO-JAPAN WAR

The danger of this roused Japan to action. When it became evident
that the Russians had no intention to respect the rights of China
in Manchuria, and showed signs of an aggressive movement against
Korea, the island empire lost no time in making war. In February,
1904, Japan withdrew her minister from St. Petersburg and three
days later, without the formality of a declaration of war,
attacked the Russian fleets at Chemulpo and Port Arthur and
landed troops in Korea.

The Japanese quickly proved themselves able warriors. On April
13th admiral Togo drove back the Russian fleet, its flagship, the
PETROPAVLOVSK, striking a mine and sinking with its crew and
admiral. On land the Russians were defeated at the battle of the
Yalu, Manchuria was invaded and Port Arthur invested and
bombarded. Battles followed in rapid succession, with victory for
the island warriors in every instance. General Oka won a fierce
battle on the heights of Nan-Shan and captured the Russian port
of Dalny. General Kuroki fought his way northward to Liao-yang,
where was fought one of the great battles of the war, lasting
seven days and ending in the retreat of the Russians.

The next field of action was at Mukden, the Manchurian capital,
when the armies met in September, and remained face to face until
March of the following year. It was not until then that a
decisive action took place, the armies numbering nearly 500,000
each. The struggle was long continued, but finally ended in a
second retreat of the Russians. There were no further engagements
of importance in this quarter, though the armies remained face to
face for months in a long line south of Harbin.

PORT ARTHUR TAKEN

Meanwhile Port Arthur had become closely invested. One by one the
hills surrounding the harbor were taken by the Japanese, after
stubborn resistance. Big siege guns were dragged up and began to
batter the town and the ships. On August 16th, General Stoessel,
commander at Port Arthur, having refused to surrender, a grand
assault was ordered by Nogi. It proved unsuccessful, while the
assailants lost 14,000 men. The bombardment continued, the
buildings and ships suffering severely. Finally tunnels were cut
through the solid rock and on December 20th the principal
stronghold in the east was carried by storm. Other forts were
soon taken and on January 2, 1905, the place was surrendered, the
Japanese obtaining 40,000 prisoners, 59 forts, about 550 guns,
and other munitions. The fleet captured consisted of four damaged
battleships, two damaged cruisers and a considerable number of
small craft. These ships had been effectually blockaded in the
harbor, lying practically inactive during the siege.

THE RUSSIAN FLEET DEFEATED

Russia, finding its naval force in the Pacific put out of
commission through the activity of the doughty Togo, had
meanwhile despatched another fleet from the Baltic, comprising
nearly forty vessels in all. These made their way through the
Suez Canal and the Indian Ocean and on May 27, 1905, entered the
Strait of Tsushuma, between Korea and Japan. Hitherto not a
hostile vessel had been seen. Togo had held his fleet in ambush,
while keeping scouts on the lookout for the coming Russians.

Suddenly the Russians found themselves surrounded by a long line
of enemies, which had suddenly appeared in their front. The
attack was furious and irresistible; the defense weak and
ineffective. Night was at hand, but before it came five Russian
warships had gone to the bottom. A torpedo attack was made during
the night and the general engagement resumed next morning. When a
halt was called, Admiral Togo had sunk, disabled or captured
eight battleships, nine cruisers, three coast-defense ships, and
a large number of other craft, the great Russian fleet being
practically a total loss, while Togo had lost only three torpedo
boats and 650 men. The losses in men by the Russians was 4,000
killed, and 7,200 prisoners taken. It was a naval victory which
for completeness has rarely been equalled in history.

Russia, beaten on land and sea, was by this time ready to give up
the struggle, and readily accepted President Roosevelt's
suggestion to hold a peace convention in the United States. The
terms of the treaty were very favorable to Russia, all things
considered; but the power of Japan had been strained to the
utmost, and that Power felt little inclined to put obstacles in
the way. The island of Sakhalin was divided between them, both
armies evacuated Manchuria, leaving it to the Chinese, and Port
Arthur and Dalny were transferred to Japan.

Yet though Japan received no indemnity and little in the way of
material acquisitions of any kind, she came out of the war with a
prestige that no one was likely to question, and has since ranked
among the great Powers of the world. And she has added
considerably to her territory by the annexation of Korea, in
which there was no one to question her right.

Since the events here described Japan has entered the concert of
the nations by an alliance with Great Britain for mutual defense
in case of either Power being attacked in the East. And this
treaty bore fruit in 1914 when Japan, as an ally of Great
Britain, took part in the war between the great Powers of Europe
by attacking Kiaochou, a district and fortress held by Germany on
the northern coast of China.

This was in accordance with the Japanese theory of "the Orient
for the Orientals" and its dislike of European aggression upon
the Asiatic coast. Japan went farther than this, taking
possession of all the islands held by Germany in the North
Pacific - afterwards handed over to Australia for administration
- those in the South Pacific being at the same time occupied by
expeditions from New Zealand and Australia. In this way the great
European war was to a minor extent transferred to the waters and
lands of the Far East.


Chapter XVI. GREAT BRITAIN AND HER COLONIES

How England Became Mistress of the Seas

Great Britain as a Colonizing Power - Colonies in the Pacific
Region - Colonization in Africa - British Colonies in Africa -
The Mahdi Rebellion in Egypt - Gordon at Khartoum - Suppression
of the Mahdi Revolt - Colonization in Asia - The British in India
- Colonies in America - Development of Canada - Progress in
Canada

In the era preceding the nineteenth century Spain, France, and
Great Britain were the great colonizing Powers, the last named
being the latest in the field, but rapidly rising to become the
most important.

The active Powers in colonization within the nineteenth century
were the great rivals of the preceding period, Great Britain and
France, though the former gained decidedly the start, and its
colonial empire today surpasses that of any other nation of
mankind. It is so enormous, in fact, as to dwarf the parent
kingdom, which is related to its colonial dominion, so far as
comparative size is concerned, as the small brain of the elephant
is related to its great body.

Other Powers, not heard of as colonizers in the past, have since
come into this field, though too late to obtain any of the great
prizes. These are Germany and Italy, the latter having recently
added to its acquisitions by the conquest of Tripoli. But there
is a great Power still to name, which in its way stands as a
rival to Great Britain, the empire of Russia, whose acquisitions
in Asia have grown enormously in extent. These are not colonies
in the ordinary sense, but rather results of the expansion of an
empire through warlike aggression. Yet they are colonial in the
sense of absorbing the excess population of European Russia. The
great territory of Siberia was gained by Russia before the
nineteenth century, though within recent years the Russian
dominion in Asia has greatly increased, and has now become
enormous, extending from the Arctic Ocean to the borders of
Afghanistan, Persia and the Asiatic empire of Turkey.

GREAT BRITAIN AS A COLONIZING POWER

With this preliminary preview we may proceed to consider the
history of colonization within the recent period. And first we
must take up the results of the colonial enterprise of Great
Britain, as much the most important of the whole. In addition to
Hindustan, in which the dominion of Great Britain now extends to
Afghanistan and Thibet in the north, the British acquisitions in
Asia now include Burmah and the west-coast region of Indo-China,
with the Straits Settlements in the Malay peninsula, and the
island of Ceylon, acquired in 1802 from Holland.

In the eastern seas Great Britain possesses another colony of
vast dimensions, the continental island of Australia, which, with
its area of nearly 3,000,000 square miles, is three-fourths the
size of Europe. The first British settlement was made here in
1788, at Port Jackson, the site of the present thriving city of
Sydney, and a part of the island was maintained as a penal
settlement, convicts being sent there up to 1868. It was the
discovery of gold in 1851 to which Australia owed its great
progress. The incitement of the yellow metal drew the
enterprising thither by thousands, until the population of the
colony is now more than 4,000,000, and is still growing at a
rapid rate. There are other valuable resources besides that of
gold. Of its cities, Melbourne, the capital of Victoria, with its
suburbs, has more than 500,000 population; Sydney, the capital of
New South Wales, 600,000, while there are other cities of rapid
growth. Australia is the one important British colony obtained
without a war. In its human beings, as in its animals generally,
it stood at a low level of development, and it was taken
possession of without a protest from the savage inhabitants.

COLONIES IN THE PACIFIC REGION

The same cannot be said of the inhabitants of New Zealand, an
important group of islands lying southeast of Australia, which
was acquired by Great Britain as a colony in 1840. The Maoris, as
the people of these islands call themselves, are of the bold and
sturdy Polynesian race, a brave, generous, and warlike people. A
series of wars with the natives began in 1843 and continued until
1869, since which time the colony has enjoyed peace. It can have
no more trouble with the Maoris, since there are said to be very
few left. They had vanished before the "white man's face." At
present this colony is one of the most advanced politically of
any region on the face of the earth, so far as attention to the
interests of the masses of the people is concerned, and its laws
and regulations are interesting experiments for the remainder of
the world.

In addition to those great island dominions in the Pacific, Great
Britain possesses the Fiji Islands, the northern part of Borneo,
and a large section of the extensive island of Papua or New
Guinea, the remainder of which is held by Holland and Germany. In
addition there are various coaling stations on the islands and
coasts of Asia. In the Mediterranean its possessions are
Gibraltar, Malta and Cyprus, and in America the great dominion of
Canada, a considerable number of the islands of the West Indies,
and the districts of British Honduras and British Guiana.

The history of colonization in two of the continents, Asia and
Africa, presents certain features of singularity. Though known
from the most ancient times, while America was quite unknown
until four centuries ago, the striking fact presents itself that
at an early date in the nineteenth century the continents of
North and South America had been largely explored from coast to
center, while the interior of Asia and Africa remained in great
part unknown. This fact in regard to Asia was due to the hostile
attitude of its people, which rendered it dangerous for any
European traveler to attempt to penetrate its interior. In the
case of Africa it was due to the inhospitality of nature, which
had placed the most serious obstacles in the way of those who
sought to enter it beyond the coast regions. This state of
affairs continued until the latter half of the century, within
which period there was a remarkable change in the aspect of
affairs, both continents being penetrated in all directions and
their walls of isolation completely broken down.

COLONIZATION IN AFRICA

Africa is not only now well known, but the exploration of its
interior has been followed by political changes of the most
revolutionary character. It presented a virgin field for
colonization, of which the land-hungry nations of Europe hastened
to avail themselves, dividing up the continent between them
until, by the end of the century, the partition of Africa was
practically complete. It is one of the most remarkable
circumstances in history that a well-known continent remained
thus so long unexplored to serve in our own days as a new field
for the outpouring of the nations. The occupation of Africa by
Europeans, indeed, began earlier. The Arabs had held the section
north of the Sahara for many centuries, Portugal claimed - but
scarcely occupied - large sections east and west, and the Dutch
had a thriving settlement in the south. But the exploration and
division of the bulk of the continent waited for the nineteenth
century, and the greater part of the work of partition took place
within the final quarter of that century.

In this work of colonization Great Britain and France stand
foremost in energy and success. Today the British possessions and
protectorates in Africa embrace 2,132,840 square miles; or, if we
add Egypt and the Egyptian Soudan - practically British territory
- the area occupied or claimed amounts to 2,446,040 square miles.
The claims of France, including a large area of the Sahara
desert, are much larger, covering 4,000,000 square miles. Germany
lays claim to 930,000;; Italy, to 59l,000; Portugal, to 800,000;
Spain, to 86,600, the Congo Free State, to 800,000; and Turkey to
the 363,200 square miles of Egypt. The parts of Africa unoccupied
or unclaimed by Europeans are a portion of the Desert of Sahara,
which no one wants; Abyssinia, still independent; Morocco, a
French protectorate; and Liberia, a state over which rests the
shadow of protection of the United States.

BRITISH COLONIES IN AFRICA

Of the British colonial possessions in Africa the most important
is that in the far south, extending now from Cape Town to Lake
Tanganyika, and including an immense area replete with natural
resources and capable of sustaining a very large population. This
region, originally settled in the Cape Town region by the Dutch,
was acquired by the British as a result of an European war.
Subsequently the Boers - descendants of the Dutch settlers - made
their way north, beyond the British jurisdiction, and founded the
new colonies of the Transvaal Republic and the Orange Free State.
The British of Cape Town at a later date followed them north,
settling Natal, defeating the Zulu blacks and acquiring new
territory, and eventually coming into hostile contact with the
Boers.

Defeated at first by the latter, a war of conquest broke out in
1899, ending in 1902 with the overthrow of the Boer republics,
after a brave and vigorous resistance on their part. Under the
ambitious leadership of Cecil Rhodes and others, British dominion
in South Africa was extended northward over the protectorates of
Rhodesia and Basutoland, reaching, as stated, as far north as
Lake Tanganyika and embracing an area of about 1,300,000 square
miles. Other British colonial possessions in that continent
include the large province of British East Africa, covering
520,000 square miles, a large area in Somaliland and possessions
on the west coast of 150,000 square miles area. To these, in a
minor sense of possession, should be added Egypt, now extending
to British East Africa.

We have mentioned the respective regions held by other European
nations in Africa, France surpassing Great Britain in colonial
area though not in population. Among the French African
possessions are included the great island of Madagascar, lying
off the east coast of the continent. Mention should be made here
of the extensive and promising Congo Free State, under the
suzerainty of Belgium. Covering eight hundred thousand square
miles, it comprises the populous and richly agricultural center
of Africa, its vast extension of navigable waters yielding
communication through its every part.

The occupation of Africa, at least that part of it which became
British territory, was not consummated without hostile
activities. The most recent of these was the long war between the
Boer and British armies, the final success being a costly and not
very profitable triumph of the British arms. Of other hostile
relations may be mentioned the invasion of Abyssinia by a British
army in 1867, the suppression of the revolt of Arabi Pasha in
1879, and the series of events arising from the Mahdist outbreak
in 1880.

THE MAHDI REBELLION IN EGYPT

The latter events call for some mention; and need to be preceded
by a statement of how Britain became dominant in Egypt. That
country had broken loose in large measure from the rule of Turkey
during the reign of the able and ambitious Mehemet Ali, who was
made viceroy in 1840. In 1876 the independence of Egypt was much
increased, and its rulers were given the title of khedive, or
king. The powers of the khedives steadily increased, and in
1874-75 Ismail Pasha greatly extended the Egyptian territory,
annexing the Soudan as far as Darfur, and finally to the shores
of the lately discovered Victoria Nyanza. Egypt thus embraced the
valley of the Nile practically to its source, presenting an
aspect of immense length and great narrowness.

Soon after, the finances of the country became so involved that
they were placed under European control, and the growth of
English and French influence led to the revolt of Arabi Pasha.
This was repressed by Great Britain, which bombarded Alexandria
and defeated the Egyptians, France taking no part. As a result
the co-ordinate influence of France ended, and Great Britain was
left as the practical ruler of Egypt, which position she still
maintains.

In 1880 began an important series of events. A Mohammedan prophet
arose in the Soudan, claiming to be the Mahdi, a Messiah of the
Mussulmans. A large body of devoted believers soon gathered
around him, and he set up an independent sultanate in the desert,
defeating four Egyptian expeditions sent against him, and
capturing El Obeid, the chief city of Kordofan, which he made his
capital in 1883.

The effort to subdue the outbreak proved a long and arduous one,
and was accomplished only after many years and much loss to the
British and Egyptian forces. No time was lost in sending an army
against the fanatical Arabs. This was led by an English officer
known as Hicks Pasha. He fell into a Mahdist ambush at El Obeid,
and after a desperate struggle, lasting three days, his force was
almost completely annihilated, Hicks being the last to die. Very
few of his men escaped to tell the tale of their defeat.

Other expeditions of Egyptian troops sent against Osman Digna
("Osman the Ugly"), a lieutenant of the Mahdi, similarly met with
defeat, and the Mahdists invested and besieged the towns of
Sinkat and Tokar.

To relieve these towns, Baker Pasha, a daring and able British
leader, was sent with a force of 3,650 men. Unfortunately, his
troops were mainly Egyptian, and the result of preceding
expeditions had inspired these with a more than wholesome fear of
the Mahdists. They met a party of the latter, only about 1,200
strong, at a point south of Suakim, on the Red Sea. Instantly the
Egyptians broke into a panic of terror and were surrounded and
butchered in a frightful slaughter.

"Inside the square," said an eye-witness, "the state of affairs
was almost indescribable. Cavalry, infantry, mules, camels,
falling baggage and dying men were crushed into a struggling,
surging mass. The Egyptians were shrieking madly, hardly
attempting to run away, but trying to shelter themselves one
behind another." "The conduct of the Egyptians was simply
disgraceful," said another officer. "Armed with rifle and
bayonet, they allowed themselves to be slaughtered, without an
effort at self-defense, by savages inferior to them in numbers
and armed only with spears and swords."

Baker and his staff officers, seeing affairs were hopeless,
charged the enemy and cut their way through to the shore, but of
the total force two-thirds were left dead or wounded on the
field. Such was the "massacre" of El Teb, which was followed four
days afterwards by the capture of Sinkat and slaughter of its
garrison.

To avenge this butchery, General Graham was sent from Cairo with
reinforcements of British troops. These advanced upon Osman and
defeated him in two engagements, the last a crushing one, in
which the British lost only 200 men, while the Arab loss, in
killed alone, numbered over 2,000.

GORDON AT KHARTOUM

These events took place in 1884 and in the same year General
Charles Gordon - the famous Chinese Gordon - ascended the Nile to
Khartoum, to relieve the Egyptian garrison of that city. He
failed in this, the Arabs of the Soudan flocking to the standard
of the Mahdi in such multitudes that Khartoum was cut off from
all communication with the north, leaving Gordon and the garrison
in a position of dire peril.

It became necessary to send an expedition for their relief, this
being led by Lord Wolseley, the hero of the Zulu and Ashanti
wars. This advanced in two sections, a desert and a river column.
Two furious attacks were made by the Mahdists on the desert
troops, both being repulsed with heavy loss. On reaching the
river, they proceeded in steamers which Gordon had sent down the
Nile to meet them. But there was unavoidable delay, and when the
vicinity of Khartoum was reached, on January 28, 1885, it was
learned that the town had been taken and Gordon killed two days
before. All his men, 4,000 in number, were killed with him.

SUPPRESSION OF THE MAHDI REVOLT

After this misfortune the Arabs were left in possession for
nearly twelve years, no other expedition being sent until 1896,
while it was not until 1898 that the Anglo-Egyptian forces
reached the vicinity of Khartoum. They were commanded by General
Kitchener, one of the ablest of British soldiers. His men were
well drilled and very different in character from those led by
Baker Pasha. They met the Arabs at Omdurman, near Khartoum, and
gave them a crushing defeat, more than 10,000 of them falling,
while the British loss was only about 200. This ended the Arab
resistance and the Soudan was restored to Egypt, fourteen years
after it had been taken by the Mahdi.

Brief mention of the holdings of other nations in Africa must
suffice. Germany has large areas in East Africa and Southwest
Africa, with smaller holdings elsewhere. The possessions of
France extend from Algeria and Tunis southward over the Sahara
and the Soudan, with holdings on the east and west coasts.
Portugal has large, feebly held districts in the south-central
coast region, and Italy holds small districts on the Red Sea and
Somaliland and the recently acquired Tripoli. Spain's holdings
are on the coast of Morocco and the Sahara.

COLONIZATION IN ASIA

The colonizing enterprise in Asia within recent years has been
confined to Great Britain, France and Russia, which nations have
gained large possessions in that great continent. Russia has made
its way during several centuries of conquest over Siberia and
Central Asia, until its immense possessions have encroached upon
Persia and Afghanistan in the south and China in the east. At
present, while the dominion of Russia in Europe comprises about
2,000,000 square miles, that in Asia is more than 6,500,000
square miles, the total area of this colossal empire being more
than equal in area to the entire continent of North America.

The possessions of other nations in Asia are, aside from small
holdings on the Chinese coast, in the south of that continent.
Holland has a group of rich islands in the Indian Ocean, Portugal
some small holdings, and France a large area in Indo-China,
gained by invasion and conquest. This includes Cambodia,
Cochin-China and Tonquin, won by hard fighting since 1862.

Great Britain, in addition to the extensive peninsula of India,
with the neighboring rich island of Ceylon, has of late years
acquired the fertile plains of Burmah, now included in its Empire
of India, the whole covering an area of nearly 2,000,000 square
miles. Its other Asiatic possessions include Hong Kong, in China;
the Straits Settlements and other Malay states; Borneo and
Sarawak, ad Aden and Socotra, in Arabia.

THE BRITISH IN INDIA

The British control of India began with the founding of
commercial settlements early in the seventeenth century. Areas of
land were gradually acquired, and rivalry began later between
England and France for the control of Indian territory. The power
of the British East India Company in India was largely extended
by the military operations of the famous Lord Clive, and under
Warren Hastings, a later governor of ambitious character,
received new accessions.

During the nineteenth century many accessions of territory were
made, the one threat to British dominion in the peninsula being
the great Sepoy rebellion, or Indian Mutiny, which needed all the
resources of the Company to overcome. The most important event
that succeeded was the taking over the powers of government, so
far exercised by the East India Company, and vesting them in the
Crown, which assumed full control of the now immense holdings of
the Company. Subsequently came the raising of India to the
dignity of an empire, and the adding to the title of Queen
Victoria the further title of Empress of India. Since that period
the establishment of British dominion in India has become almost
complete, extending to the Himalayas in the north, and over
Baluchistan in the west and Burmah in the east. As a result
India, Canada and Australia have become the great trio of
semi-continental British colonial possessions, India being far
the richest and most populous of them all.

COLONIES IN AMERICA

We have next to deal with the British colonial possessions in
America, including the great Dominion of Canada and Newfoundland,
and the minor holdings of British Guiana, British Honduras, and
the several islands of Jamaica, Trinidad, Barbadoes, the Bahamas
and the Bermudas. Of these Canada is the only one that calls for
notice here.

Occupying the northern section of the western hemisphere lies
Great Britain's most extended colony, the vast Dominion of
Canada, which covers an immense area of the earth's surface,
surpassing that of the United States, and nearly equal to the
whole of Europe. Its population, however, is not in accordance
with its dimensions, though of late it is growing rapidly, being
now over 7,000,000. The bleak and inhospitable character of the
far northern section of its area is likely to debar that region
from ever having any other than a scanty nomad population, fur
animals being its principal useful product. It is, however,
always unsafe to predict. The recent discovery of gold in an
arctic country traversed by the Klondike river, brought miners by
the thousands to that wintry realm, and it would be very unwise
to declare that the remainder of the great northern region
contains no treasures for the craving hands of man. So far as the
fertile regions of Manitoba, Alberta and Saskatchewan are
concerned, the recent demonstration of their great availability
as wheat-producing territory has added immensely to our
conception of the national wealth of Canada, which promises to
become one of the great wheat-growing regions of the earth.

First settled by the French in the seventeenth century, this
country came under British control in 1763, as a result of the
great struggle between the two active colonizing powers for
dominion in America. The outcome of this conquest is the fact
that Canada, like the other colonies of Great Britain, possesses
a large alien population, in this case of French origin.

DEVELOPMENT OF CANADA

At the opening of the nineteenth century the population of Canada
was small, and its resources were only slightly developed. Its
people did not reach the million mark until about 1840, though
after that date the tide of immigration flowed thither with
considerable strength and the population grew with some rapidity.
In 1791 the original province of Quebec had been divided into
Upper and Lower Canada, and racial and religious conditions of
the next fifty years led to severe political conflicts. As a
result an act of union took place, the provinces being reunited
in 1840.

Upper Canada, at the opening of the eighteenth century, was only
slightly developed, the country being a vast forest, without
towns, without roads, and practically shut out from the remainder
of the world. The sparse population was made up largely of United
Empire Loyalists - refugees from the successful revolution in the
Thirteen Colonies. But it began to grow with the new century,
numbers crossed the Niagara River from the States to the fertile
lands beyond, immigrants crossed the waters from Great Britain
and France, Toronto was made the capital city, ad the population
of the province soon rose to 30,000 in number. Lower Canada,
however, with its old cities of Quebec and Montreal, and its
flourishing settlements along the St. Lawrence River, continued
the most populous section of the country, though its people were
almost exclusively of French origin. The strength of the British
population lay in the upper province.

In time the union which existed between the two larger provinces
of Canada became unfitted to serve the purposes of the entire
colony. The maritime provinces began to discuss the question of
local federation, and it was finally proposed to unite all
British North America into one general union. This was done in
1867, the British Parliament passing an act which created the
"Dominion of Canada." The new confederation included Ontario
(Upper Canada), Quebec (Lower Canada), New Brunswick and Nova
Scotia. Four years later Manitoba and British Columbia were
included, and Prince Edward Island in 1874. Since then other
additions have been made. A parliament was formed consisting of a
Senate of life members appointed by the Crown and an Assembly
elected by the people.

Some important questions which have arisen in Canada since the
dates above given had largely to do with its relations to the
United States and its people. One of the most troublesome of
these was that relating to the productive fisheries on the banks
of Newfoundland and the coasts of Nova Scotia and New Brunswick.
For years the problem of the rights of American fishermen in
these regions excited controversy. Several partial settlements
have been made and in 1877 the sum of $5,000,000 was awarded to
Great Britain in payment for the privileges granted to the United
States. A treaty was signed in 1888 for the settlement of other
branches of this vexatious question.

The discovery of gold on the Klondike River in 1896 developed
another problem, that of the true boundary between Alaska and
Canada. At first, under the belief that the gold region was in
Alaska, it brought a rush of American miners to that region. But
it was soon found that the mining region was in Canada and the
mining laws imposed by the Canadian authorities were bitterly
objected to by the American miners. The question of boundary has
since been definitely settled by an international tribunal of
British and American jurists and the present boundary line marked
out by a scientific commission.

The industrial development of the Dominion within recent years
has been great. Agriculturally the development of the fertile
wheat fields of the middle west is of the most promising
character, while railway progress has been highly encouraging.
The building of the Canadian Pacific Railway was a remarkable
enterprise at the time of its construction. Recently Canada is
approaching a position of rivalry with the United States in this
particular, a new transcontinental line, the Grand Trunk Pacific,
having been completed in 1914, while the Canadian Northern is
rapidly progressing.

PROGRESS IN CANADA

Railways have spread like a network over the rich agricultural
territory along the southern border land of the Dominion, from
ocean to ocean, and are now pushing into the deep forest land and
rich mineral and agricultural regions of the interior and the
northwest, their total length in 1914 approaching 30,000 miles.

These roads have been built largely under different forms of
government aid, such as land grants, cash subsidies, loans, the
issue of debentures, and the guarantee of interest on bonds.

In manufacturing industry almost every branch of production is to
be found, the progressive enterprise of the people of the
dominion being great, and a large proportion of the goods they
need being made at home. The best evidence of the enterprise of
Canada in manufacture is shown by the fact that she exports many
thousand dollars worth of goods annually more than she buys -
England being her largest customer and the United States second
on the list.

Not only is the outside world largely ignorant of the importance
of Canada, but many of her own people fail to realize the
greatness of the country they possess. Its area of more than
three and one-half millions of square miles - one sixteenth of
the entire land surface of the earth - is great enough to include
an immense variety of natural conditions and products. This area
constitutes forty per cent of the far extended British empire,
while its richness of soil and resources in forest and mineral
wealth are as yet almost untouched, and its promise of future
yield is immense. The dimensions of the dominion guarantee a
great variety of natural attractions. There are vast
grass-covered plains, thousands of square miles of untouched
forest lands, multitudes of lakes and rivers, great and small,
and mountains of the wildest and grandest character, whose
natural beauty equals that of the far-famed Alpine peaks. In
fact, the Canadian Pacific Railway is becoming a route of
pilgrimage for the lovers of the beautiful and sublime, its
mountain scenery being unrivaled upon the continent.

In several conditions the people of Canada, while preserving the
general features of English society, are much more free and
untrammeled. The class system of Great Britain has gained little
footing in this new land, where early every farmer is the owner
of the soil which he tills, and the people have a feeling of
independence unknown to the agricultural population of European
countries. There has been great progress also in many social
questions. The liquor traffic is subject in some Provinces to the
local option restriction; religious liberty prevails; education
is practically free and unsectarian; the franchise is enjoyed by
all citizens; members of parliament are paid for their services;
and though the executive department of the government is under
the control of a governor-general appointed by the Crown, the
laws of Canada are made by its own statesmen, and a state of
practical independence prevails. Recognizing this, and respecting
the liberty-loving spirit of the people, Great Britain is chary
in interfering with any question of Canadian policy, or in any
sense attempting to limit the freedom of her great transatlantic
colony.


Chapter XVII. THE OPEN DOOR IN CHINA AND JAPAN

Development of World Power in the East

Warlike Invasions of China - Commodore Perry and His Treaty -
Japan's Rapid Progress - Origin of the China-Japan War - The
Position of Korea - Li Hung Chang and the Empress - How Japan
Began War - The Chinese and Japanese Fleets - The Battle of the
Yalu - Capture of Wei Hai Wei - Europe Invades China - The Boxer
Outbreak - Russian Designs on Manchuria - Japan Begins War on
Russia - The Armies Meet - China Becomes a Republic

Asia, the greatest of the continents and the seat of the earliest
civilizations, yields us the most remarkable phenomenon in the
history of mankind. In remote ages, while Europe lay plunged in
the deepest barbarism, certain sections of Asia were marked by
surprising activity in thought and progress. In three
far-separated regions - China, India, and Babylonia - and in a
fourth on the borders of Asia - Egypt - civilization rose and
flourished for ages, while the savage and the barbarian roamed
over all other regions of the earth. A still more extraordinary
fact is, that during the more recent era, that of European
civilization, Asia rested in the most sluggish conservatism,
sleeping while Europe and America were actively moving, content
with its ancient knowledge while the people of the West were
pursuing new knowledge into its most secret lurking places.

And this conservatism seemed an almost immovable one. For a
century England has been pouring new thought and new enterprise
into India, yet the Hindus cling stubbornly to their remotely
ancient beliefs and customs, though they show some signs of a
political awakening. For half a century Europe has been
hammering upon the gates of China, but not until recently did
this sleeping nation show any signs of waking to the fact that
the world was moving around it. As regards the other early
civilizations - Babylonia and Egypt - they long ago were utterly
swamped under the tide of Turkish barbarism and exist only in
their ruins. Persia, once a great and flourishing empire,
likewise sank under the flood of Arabian and Turkish invasion,
and today seems in danger of being swallowed up in the tide of
Russian and British ambition. Such was the Asia upon which the
nineteenth century dawned, and such it remains in some measure
today, though in parts of its vast area modern civilization has
gained a firm foothold.

This is especially the case with the island empire of Japan, a
nation the people of which are closely allied in race to those of
China, yet who have displayed a greater progressiveness and a
marked readiness to avail themselves of the resources of modern
civilization. The development of Japan has taken place within a
brief period. Previous to that time it was as resistant to
western influences as China continued until a later date. They
were both closed nations, prohibiting the entrance of modern
ideas and peoples, proud of their own form of civilization and
their own institutions, and sternly resolved to keep out the
disturbing influences of the restless West. As a result, they
remained locked against the new civilization until after the
nineteenth century was well advanced, and China's disposition to
avail itself of the results of modern invention was not
manifested until the century was near its end.

WARLIKE INVASION OF CHINA

China, with its estimated population of 300,000,000, attained to
a considerable measure of civilization at a very remote period,
but until very recently made almost no progress during the
Christian era, being content to retain its old ideas, methods and
institutions, which its people looked upon as far superior to
those of the western nations. Great Britain gained a foothold in
China as early as the seventeenth century, but the persistent
attempt to flood the country with the opium of India, in
disregard of the laws of the land, so angered the emperor that he
had the opium of the British stores at Canton, worth $20,000,000,
seized and destroyed. This led to the "Opium War" of 1840, in
which China was defeated and was forced in consequence to accept
a much greater degree of intercourse with the world, five ports
being made free to the world's commerce and Hong Kong ceded to
Great Britain. In 1856 an arbitrary act of the Chines authorities
at Canton, in forcibly boarding a British vessel in the Canton
River, led to a new war, in which the French joined the British
and the allies gained fresh concessions from China. In 1859 the
war was renewed, and Peking was occupied by the British and
French forces in 1860, the emperor's summer palace being
destroyed.

These wars had their effect in largely breaking down the Chinese
wall of seclusion and opening the empire more fully to foreign
trade and intercourse, and also in compelling the emperor to
receive foreign ambassadors at his court in Peking. In this the
United States was among the most successful of the nations, from
the fact that it had always maintained friendly relations with
China. In 1876 a short railroad was laid, and in 1877 a telegraph
line was established. During the remainder of the century the
telegraph service was widely extended, but the building of
railroads was strongly opposed by the government, and not until
the century had reached its end did the Chinese awaken to the
importance of this method of transportation. They did, however,
admit steam traffic to their rivers, and purchased some powerful
ironclad naval vessels in Europe.

COMMODORE PERRY AND HIS TREATY

The isolation of Japan was maintained longer than that of China,
trade with that country being of less importance, and foreign
nations knowing and caring less about it. The United States has
the credit of breaking down its long and stubborn seclusion and
setting in train the remarkably rapid development of the island
empire. In 1854 Commodore Perry appeared with an American fleet
in the bay of Yeddo, and, by a show of force and a determination
not to be rebuffed, he induced the authorities to make a treaty
of commercial intercourse with the United States. Other nations
quickly demanded similar privileges, and Japan's obstinate
resistance to foreign intercourse was at an end.

The result of this was revolutionary in Japan. For centuries the
Shogun, or Tycoon, the principal military noble, had been
dominant in the empire, and the Mikado, the true emperor,
relegated to a position of obscurity. But the entrance of
foreigners disturbed conditions so greatly - by developing
parties for and against seclusion - that the Mikado was enabled
to regain his long-lost power, and in 1868 the ancient form of
government was restored, the nobles being relegated to their
original rank and their semi-feudal system overthrown.

JAPAN'S RAPID PROGRESS

The Japanese quickly began to show a striking activity in the
acceptance of the results of western civilization, alike in
regard to objects of commerce, inventions, and industries, and to
political organization. The latter advanced so rapidly that in
1889 the old despotic government was, by the voluntary act of the
emperor, set aside and a limited monarchy established, the
country being given a constitution and a legislature, with
universal suffrage for all men over twenty-five. This act is of
remarkable interest, it being doubtful if history records any
similar instance of a monarch decreasing his authority without
appeal or pressure from his people. It indicates a liberal spirit
that could hardly have been looked for in a nation that had so
recently opened its doors. It was, however, probably the result
of a previous compact with the nobles who aided the Mikado to
regain his throne. Today, Japan differs little from the nations
of Europe and America in its institutions and industries, and
from being among the most backward, has taken its place among the
most advanced nations of the world.

The Japanese army has been organized upon the European system,
and armed with the most modern style of weapons, the German
method of drill and organization being adopted. Its navy consists
of about two hundred war vessels, built largely in British
dockyards and manned by sailors trained under British officers. A
number of powerful ships are in process of building. Railroads
have been widely extended; telegraphs run everywhere; education
is in an advancing stage of development, embracing an imperial
university at Tokio, and institutions in which foreign languages
and science are taught; and in a hundred ways Japan is
progressing at a rate which is one of the greatest marvels of the
twentieth century. This is particularly notable in view of the
longer adherence maintained by the neighboring empire of China to
its old customs, and the slowness with which it yielded to the
influx of new ideas.

ORIGIN OF THE CHINA-JAPAN WAR

As a result of this difference in progress between the two
nations we have to describe a remarkable event, one of the most
striking evidences that could be given of the practical advantage
of modern civilization. Near the end of the century war broke out
between China and Japan, and there was shown to the world the
singular circumstance of a nation of 40,000,000 people, armed
with modern implements of war, attacking a nation of 300,000,000
- equally brave, but with its army organized on an ancient system
- and defeating it as quickly and completely as Germany defeated
France in the Franco-German War. This war, which represents a
completely new condition of affairs in the continent of Asia, is
of sufficient interest and importance to speak of at some length.

Between China and Japan lay the kingdom of Korea, separated by
rivers from the former and by a strait of the ocean from the
latter, and claimed as a vassal state by both, yet preserving its
independence as a state against the pair. Japan invaded this
country at two different periods in the past, but failed to
conquer it. China has often invaded it, with the same result.
Thus it remained practically independent until near the end of
the nineteenth century, when the question of predominance in it
became a cause of war between the two rival empires.

Korea long pursued the same policy as China and Japan, locking
its ports against foreigners so closely that it became known as
the Hermit Nation and the Forbidden Land. But it was forced to
give way, like its neighbors. The opening of Korea was due to
Japan. In 1876 the Japanese did to this secluded kingdom what
Commodore Perry had done to Japan twenty-two years before. They
sent a fleet to Seoul, the Korean capital, and by threat of war
forced the government to open to trade the port of Fusan. In 1880
Chemulpo was made an open port. Later on the United States sent a
fleet there which obtained similar privileges. Soon afterwards
most of the nations of Europe were admitted to trade, and the
isolation of the Hermit Nation was at an end. Less than ten years
had sufficed to break down an isolation which had lasted for
centuries. In less than twenty years after - in the year 1899 -
an electric trolley railway was put in operation in the streets
of Seoul - a remarkable evidence of the great change in Korean
policy.

THE POSITION OF KOREA

Korea was no sooner opened to foreign intercourse than China and
Japan became rivals for influence in that country - a rivalry in
which Japan showed itself the more active. The Koreans became
divided into two factions, a progressive one that favored Japan,
and a conservative one that favored China. Japanese and Chinese
soldiers were landed upon its soil, and the Chinese aided their
party, which was in ascendency among the Koreans, to drive out
the Japanese troops. War was threatened, but it was a averted by
a treaty in 1885 under which both nations agreed to withdraw
their troops and to send no officers to drill the Korean
soldiers.

The war, thus for the time averted, came nine years afterwards,
in consequence of an insurrection in Korea. The people of that
country were discontented. They were oppressed with taxes and by
tyranny, and in 1894 the followers of a new religious sect broke
out in open revolt. Their numbers rapidly increased until they
were 20,000 strong, and they defeated the government troops,
captured a provincial city, and put the capital itself in danger.
The Min (or Chinese) faction was then at the head of affairs in
the kingdom and called for aid from China, which responded by
sending some two thousand troops and a number of war vessels to
Korea. Japan, jealous of any such action on the part of China,
responded by surrounding Seoul with soldiers, several thousands
in number.

Disputes followed. China claimed to be suzerain of Korea and
Japan denied it. Both parties refused to withdraw their troops,
and the Japanese, finding that the party in power was acting
against them, advanced on the capital, drove out the officials,
and took possession of the palace and the king. A new government,
made up of the party that favored Japan, was organized, and a
revolution was accomplished in a day. The new authorities
declared that the Chinese were intruders and requested the aid of
the Japanese to expel them. War was close at hand.

LI HUNG CHANG AND THE EMPRESS

China was at that time under the leadership of a statesman of
marked ability, the famous Li Hung Chang, who, from being made
viceroy of a province in 1870, had risen to be the prime minister
of the empire. At the head of the empire was a woman, the Dowager
Empress Tsu Tsi, who had usurped the power of the young emperor
and ruled the state. It was to these two people in power that the
war was due. The dowager empress, blindly ignorant of the power
of the Japanese, decided that these "insolent pigmies" deserved
to be chastised. Li, her right-hand man, was of the same opinion.
At the last moment, indeed, doubts began to assail his mind, into
which came a dim idea that the army and navy of China were not in
shape to meet the forces of Japan. But the empress was resolute.
Her sixtieth birthday was at hand and she proposed to celebrate
it magnificently; and what better decorations could she display
than the captured banners of these insolent islanders? So it was
decided to present a bold front, and, instead of the troops of
China being removed, reinforcements were sent to the force at
Asan.

HOW JAPAN BEGAN WAR

There followed a startling event. On July 25th three Japanese
men-of-war, cruising in the Yellow Sea, came in sight of a
transport loaded with Chinese troops and convoyed by two ships of
the Chinese navy. The Japanese admiral did not know of the
seizure of Seoul by the land forces, but he took it to be his
duty to prevent Chinese troops from reaching Korea, so he at once
attacked the warships of the enemy, with such effect that they
were quickly put to flight. Then he sent orders to the transport
that it should put about and follow his ships.

This the Chinese generals refused to do. They trusted to the fact
that they were on a chartered British vessel and that the British
flag flew over their heads. The daring Japanese admiral troubled
his soul little about this foreign standard, but at once opened
fire on the transport, and with such effect that in half an hour
it went to the bottom, carrying with it one thousand men. Only
about one hundred and seventy escaped.

On the same day that this terrible act took place on the waters
of the sea, the Japanese left Seoul en route for Asan. Reaching
there, they attacked the Chinese in their intrenchments and drove
them out. Three days afterwards, on August 1, 1894, both
countries issued declarations of war.

Of the conflict that followed, the most interesting events were
those that took place on the waters, the land campaigns being an
unbroken series of successes for the well-organized and
amply-armed Japanese troops over the medieval army of China,
which went to war fan and umbrella in hand, with antiquated
weapons and obsolete organization. The principal battle was
fought at Ping Yang on September 15th, the Chinese losing 16,000
killed, wounded and captured, while the Japanese loss was
trifling. In November the powerful fortress of Port Arthur was
attacked by army and fleet, and surrendered after a two days'
siege. Then the armies advanced until they were in the vicinity
of the Great Wall, with the soil and capital of China not far
before them.

THE CHINESE AND JAPANESE FLEETS

With this brief review of the land operations, we must return to
the movements of the fleets. Backward as the Chinese were on
land, they were not so on the sea. Li Hung Chang, a born
progressive, had vainly attempted to introduce railroads into
China, but he had been more successful in regard to ships, and
had purchased a navy more powerful than that of Japan. The
heaviest ships of Japan were cruisers, whose armor consisted of
deck and interior lining of steel. The Chinese possessed two
powerful battleships, with 14-inch iron armor and turrets
defended with 12-inch armor, each carrying four 12-inch guns.
Both navies had the advantage of European teaching in drill,
tactics, and seamanship. The Ting Yuen, the Chinese flagship, had
as virtual commander an experienced German officer named Von
Hanneken; the Chen Yuen, the other big ironclad, was handled by
Commander McGiffen, formerly of the United States navy. Thus
commanded, it was expected in Europe that the superior strength
of the Chinese ships would ensure them an easy victory over those
of Japan. The event showed that this was a decidedly mistaken
view.

It was the superior speed and the large number of rapid-fire guns
of the Japanese vessels that saved them from defeat. The Chinese
guns were mainly heavy Krupps and Armstrongs. They had also some
machine guns, but only three quick-firers. The Japanese, on the
contrary, had few heavy armor-piercing guns, but were supplied
with a large number of quick-firing cannon, capable of pouring
out shells in an incessant stream. Admiral Ting and his European
officers expected to come at once to close quarters and quickly
destroy the thin-armored Japanese craft. But the shrewd Admiral
Ito, commander of the fleet of Japan, had no intention of being
thus dealt with. The speed of his craft enabled him to keep his
distance and to distract the aim of his foes, and he proposed to
make the best use of this advantage. Thus equipped, the two
fleets came together in the month of September, and an
epoch-making battle in the history of the ancient continent of
Asia was fought.

THE BATTLE OF THE YALU

On the afternoon of Sunday, September 16, 1894, Admiral Ting's
fleet, consisting of 11 warships, 4 gunboats, and 6 torpedo
boats, anchored off the mouth of the Yalu River. They were there
as escorts to some transports, which went up the river to
discharge their troops. Admiral Ito had been engaged in the same
work farther down the coast, and early on Monday morning came
steaming towards the Yalu in search of the enemy. Under him were
in all twelve ships, none of them with heavy armor, one of them
an armed transport. The swiftest ship in the fleet was the
YOSHINO, capable of making twenty-three knots, and armed with 44
quick-firing Armstrongs, which would discharge nearly 4,000
pounds weight of shells every minute. The heaviest guns were long
13-inch cannon, of which four ships possessed one each, protected
by 12-inch shields of steel. Finally, they had an important
advantage over the Chinese in being abundantly supplied with
ammunition.

With this formidable fleet, Ito steamed slowly to the
north-westward. Early on Monday morning he was off the island of
Hai-yun-tao. At 7 A.M. the fleet began steaming north-eastward.
It was a fine autumn morning. The sun shone brightly, and there
was only just enough of a breeze to ripple the surface of the
water. The long line of warships cleaving their way through the
blue waters, all bright with white paint, the chrysanthemum of
Japan shining like a golden shield on every bow, and the same
emblem flying in red and white from every masthead, formed a
striking spectacle. Some miles away to port rose the rocky coast
and the blue hills of Manchuria; on the other side was the Korean
Gulf.

Omitting details of the long and uninteresting fight which
followed it may be said that the most remarkable feature of the
battle of the Yalu was that it took place between two nations
which, had the war broken out forty years earlier, would have
done their fighting with fleets of wooden junks and weapons of
the past centuries. As an object lesson of the progress of China
and Japan in modern ideas it is of the greatest interest, though
results were drawn.

CAPTURE OF WEI HAI WEI

In January, 1895, the Japanese fleet advanced against the
strongly fortified stronghold of Wei Hai Wei, on the northern
coast of China. Here a force of 25,000 men was landed
successfully, and attacked the fort in the rear, quickly
capturing its landward defenses. The stronghold was thereupon
abandoned by its garrison and occupied by the Japanese. The
Chinese fleet lay in the harbor, and surrendered to the Japanese
after several ships had been sunk by torpedo boats.

China was now in a perilous position. Its fleet was lost, its
coast strongholds of Port Arthur and Wei Hai Wei were held by the
enemy, and its capital was threatened from the latter place and
by the army north of the Great Wall. A continuation of the war
promised to bring about the complete conquest of the Chinese
empire, and Li Hung Chang, who had been degraded from his
official rank in consequence of the disasters to the army, was
now restored to all his honors and sent to Japan to sue for
peace. In the treaty obtained China was compelled to acknowledge
the independence of Korea, to cede to Japan the island of Formosa
and the Pescadores group, and that part of Manchuria occupied by
the Japanese army, including Port Arthur, also to pay an
indemnity of 300,000,000 taels and open seven new treaty ports.
This treaty was not fully carried out. The Russian, British, and
French ministers forced Japan, under threat of war, to give up
her claim to the Liao-tung peninsula and Port Arthur, which
stronghold was soon after obtained, under long lease, by the
Russians.

EUROPE INVADES CHINA

The story of China during the few remaining years of the century
may be briefly told. The evidence of its weakness yielded by the
war with Japan was quickly taken advantage of by the great Powers
of Europe, and China was in danger of going to pieces under their
attacks, which grew so decided and ominous that rumors of a
partition between these Powers of the most ancient and populous
empire of the world filled the air.

In 1898 decided steps in this direction were taken. Russia leased
from China for ninety -nine years Port Arthur and Talien Wan, and
took practical possession of Manchuria, through which a railroad
was built connecting with the Trans-Siberian road, while Port
Arthur afforded her an ice-free harbor for her Pacific fleet.
Great Britain, jealous of this movement on the part of Russia,
forced from the unwilling hands of China the port of Wei Hai Wei,
and Germany demanded and obtained the cession of a port at Kiau
Chau, farther down the coast, in retribution for the murder of
some missionaries. France, not to be outdone by her neighbors,
gained concessions of territory in the south, adjoining her
Indo-China possessions, and Italy, last of all, came into the
Eastern market with a demand for a share of the nearly defunct
empire.

The nations appeared to be settling on China in all directions
and to be ready to tear the antique commonwealth to pieces
between them. Within the empire itself revolutionary changes took
place, the dowager empress having first deprived the emperor of
all power and then enforced his abdication.

Meanwhile one important result came from the war. Li Hung Chang
and the other progressive statesmen of the empire, who had long
been convinced that the only hope of China lay in its being
thrown open to Western science and art, found themselves able to
carry out their plans, the conservative opposition having
seriously broken down. The result of this was seen in a dozen
directions. Railroads, long almost completely forbidden, gained
free "right of way," and promised in the near future to traverse
the country far and wide. Steamers ploughed their way for a
thousand miles up the Yang-tse-Kiang; engineers became busy
exploiting the coal and iron mines of the Flowery Kingdom; great
factories, equipped with the best modern machinery, sprang up in
the foreign settlements; foreign books began to be translated and
read; and the empress even went so far as to receive foreign
ambassadors in public audience and on a footing of outward
equality in the "forbidden city" of Peking, long the sacredly
secluded center of an empire locked against the outer world.

The increase of European interference in China, with indications
of a possible intention to dismember that ancient empire and
divide its fragments among the land-hungry nations of the West,
was viewed in China with dread and indignation, the feeling of
hostility extending to the work of the missionaries, who were
probably viewed by many as agents in the movement of invasion.

THE BOXER OUTBREAK

The hostile sentiment thus developed was indicated early in 1900
by the outbreak of a Chinese secret society known by a name
signified in English by the word "boxers." These ultra-patriots
organized an anti-missionary crusade in several provinces of
North China in which many missionaries and native Christians were
killed. The movement extended from the missionary settlements to
include the whole foreign movement in China, and was evidently
encouraged by the dowager empress and her advisers.

As a result the outbreak spread to Peking, where Baron von
Ketteler, the German minister, was killed, several of the
legation buildings were destroyed, and more than two hundred
refugees were besieged within the walls of the British legation.
The danger to which the ministries and their assistants and
families were exposed aroused Europe and America, and as the
Chinese government took no steps to allay the outbreak, a relief
expedition was organized, in which United States, British,
French, German, Russian and Japanese forces took part.

The fleet of the allies bombarded and destroyed the Taku forts,
and heavy fighting took place at Tien-tsin, Pie-tsang and
Yang-tsun. The military expedition reached Peking and rescued the
besieged on August 14, 1906, the empress and her court fleeing
from the capital. A peace treaty was signed on September 7, 1907,
one of the conditions of which was that China should pay an
indemnity of $320,000,000 to the foreign Powers. The share of
this allotted to the United States was $24,440,000, but after a
portion of this had been paid the United States in 1908 remitted
$10,800,000, on the ground that this was in excess over its
actual expense. This act of generosity won the earnest gratitude
of China.

This event, significant of the latent and active hostilities
between the East and the West, was followed by a much greater one
in 1904-05, when Japan had the hardihood to engage in war with
the great European empire of Russia and the unlooked-for ability
and good fortune to defeat its powerful antagonist.

RUSSIAN DESIGNS ON MANCHURIA

This contest, which takes its place among the great wars of
modern times, must be dealt with briefly here, as it belongs to
European history only in the minor sense of a European country
being engaged in it. It arose from the encroachments of Russia in
the Chinese province of Manchuria and fears on the part of Japan
that the scope of Russian designs might include the invasion and
conquest of that country.

As already stated, Russia secured a lease of Port Arthur, at the
southern extremity of Manchuria, from China in 1896. Subsequently
the Siberian Railway was extended southward from Harbin to this
place, the harbor was deepened, and building operations were
begun at a new town named Dalny, which was to be made Asia's
greatest port. The line of the railway was strongly guarded with
Russian troops.

These movements of Russia excited suspicion in Great Britain and
Japan, which countries so strongly opposed the military
occupation by Russia of Chinese territory that in 1901 Russia
agreed to withdraw her troops within the following year, to
restore the railway to China, and subsequently to give up all
occupation of Chinese territory.

Of these agreements only the first was kept, and that only
temporarily. In 1903 Japan proposed an agreement with Russia to
the effect that both parties should respect the integrity of
China and Korea, while the interest of Japan in Korea and that of
Russia in Manchuria should be recognized. The refusal of Russia
to accept this proposition overcame the patience of Japan, whose
rulers saw clearly that Russia had no intention of withdrawing
from the country occupied or of hampering her future purposes
with agreements. In fact Japan's own independence seemed
threatened.

JAPAN BEGINS WAR ON RUSSIA

The result was in consonance with the Japanese character. In
February, 1904, Japan withdrew her minister from the capital of
Russia and three days later, without the formality of a
declaration of war, attacked the Russian fleets at Chemulpo and
Port Arthur. The result was the sinking of two Russian ships in
Chemulpo harbor, and the disabling of a number of vessels at Port
Arthur.

Troops were landed at the same time. Seoul, the capital of Korea,
was occupied, and an army marched north to Ping-Yang. The first
land engagement took place on the Yalu on April 30th, the
Japanese forces under General Kuroki attacking and defeating the
Russians at that point, and making a rapid advance into
Manchuria.

Meanwhile Admiral Togo had been busy at Port Arthur. On April
13th he sent boats in shore to plant mines. Makharov, the Russian
admiral, followed these boats out until he found Togo awaiting
him with a fleet too strong for him to attack. On his return his
flag-ship, the PETROPAVLOVSK, struck one of the mines and went
down with her crew of 750 and Makharov himself. The smaller ships
reached harbor in bad shape from their experience of Togo's big
guns. On August 10th, the Port Harbor fleet was again roughly
handled by the Japanese, and some days later a Vladivostock
squadron, steaming southward to reinforce the Port Arthur fleet,
was met and defeated. This ended the naval warfare for that
period, all the ships which Russia had on the Pacific being
destroyed or seriously injured.

THE ARMIES MEET

On land the Japanese made successful movements to the north and
south. An army under General Oku landed in the Liao-tung
peninsula early in May, cut the railway to Port Arthur, and
captured Kin-chau, nearly forty miles from that port. There
followed a terrible struggle on the heights of Nan-Shan, ending
in the repulse of the Russian garrison, with a loss of eighty
guns. This success gave the Japanese control of Dalny, which
formed for them a new base. General Nogi soon after landed with a
strong force and took command of the operation against Port
Arthur.

The northern army met with similar success, General Kuroki
fighting his way to the vicinity of Liao-yang, where he soon had
the support of General Nozdu, who had landed an army in May. Oku,
marching north from the peninsula, also supported him, the three
generals forcing Kuropatkin, the Russian commander-in-chief, back
upon his base. Marshal Oyama, a veteran of former wars, was made
commander-in-chief of the Japanese armies.

Liao-tung became the seat of one of the greatest battles of the
war, lasting seven days, the number of dead and wounded being
over 30,000. It ended in the retreat of Kuropatkin's army, which
fell back upon the line of defenses covering Mukden, the
Manchurian capital. Here he was again attacked by Kuroki, who
captured the key of the Russian position on the 1st of September,
and held it until reinforcements arrived.

For a month the armies faced each other south of Mukden, the
resting spell ending in a general advance of the Russian army,
which had been largely reinforced. In the battle that followed
the Russians lost heavily, but failed to break the Japanese
lines, and after a fortnight of hard fighting both sides desisted
from active hostilities, holding their positions with little
change.

PORT ARTHUR TAKEN

Meanwhile Port Arthur had become closely invested. One by one the
hills surrounding the harbor were taken by the Japanese, after
stubborn resistance. Big siege guns were dragged up and began to
batter the town and the ships. On August 16th, General Stoessel,
commander at Fort Arthur, having refused to surrender, a grand
assault was ordered by Nogi. It proved unsuccessful, while the
assailants lost 14,000 men. The bombardment continued, the
buildings and ships suffering severely. Finally tunnels were cut
through the solid rock and on December 20th the principal
stronghold in the east was carried by storm. Other forts were
soon taken and on January 2, 1905, the port was surrendered, the
Japanese obtaining 40,000 prisoners, 59 forts, about 550 guns,
and other munitions. The fleet captured consisted of four damaged
battleships, two damaged cruisers and a considerable number of
smaller craft.

We left the armies facing each other at Mukden in late September.
They remained there until February, 1905, without again coming
into contact, and no decisive action took place until March.
Kuropatkin's force had meanwhile been largely reinforced, through
the difficult aid of the one-tracked Siberian railway, and was
now divided into three armies or approximately 150,000 each.
Oyama had also received large reinforcements and now had 500,000
men under his command. These consisted of the armies under
Kuroki, Nozdu and Oku, and the force of Nogi released by the
capture of Port Arthur.

General Grippenburg had command of one of the Russian armies and
on January 25th took position on the left bank of the Hun River.
Here, in the month following, he lost 10,000 of his men, and then
threw up his post, declaring that his chief had not properly
supported him. On January 19th, a Japanese advance in force
began, attacking with energy and forcing Kuropatkin to withdraw
his center and left behind the line of the Hun. Here he fiercely
attacked Oku and Nogi, for the time checking their advance. But
Bilderling and Linievitch just then fell into difficulties and it
became necessary to retreat, leaving Mukden to the enemy.

There were no further engagements of importance between the
armies, though they remained face to face for months in a long
line south of Harbin. Kuropatkin during this time was relieved
from command, Linievitch being appointed to succeed him. The
remaining conflict of the war was a naval one, of remarkable
character.

RUSSIAN FLEET DEFEATED

Russia, finding its Pacific fleet put out of commission, and
quite unable to face the doughty Togo, had despatched a second
fleet from the Baltic, comprising nearly forty vessels in all.
These made their way through the Suez Canal and Indian Ocean and
moved upward through the Chinese and Japanese Seas, finding
themselves on May 27, 1905, in the strait of Tsushuma, between
Korea and Japan. Hitherto not a hostile vessel had been seen.
Togo had held his fleet in ambush, while keeping scouts on the
lookout for the coming Russians.

Suddenly the Russians found themselves surrounded by a long line
of enemies, which had suddenly appeared in their front. The
attack was furious and irresistible; the defense weak and
ineffective. Night was at hand, but before it came five Russian
warships had gone to the bottom. A torpedo attack was made during
the night and the general engagement resumed next morning. When a
halt was called, Admiral Togo had sunk, disabled or captured
eight battleships, nine cruisers, three coast-defense ships, and
a large number of other craft, the great Russian fleet being
practically a total loss, while Togo had lost only three torpedo
boats and 650 men. The losses in men by the Russians was 4,000
killed, and 7,300 prisoners taken. Altogether it was a naval
victory which for completeness has rarely been equaled in
history.

Russia, beaten on land and sea, was by this time ready to give up
the struggle, and readily accepted President Roosevelt's
suggestion to hold a peace convention in the United States. The
terms of the treaty were very favorable to Russia, all things
considered; but the power of Japan had been strained to the
utmost, and that Power felt little inclined to put obstacles in
the way. The island of Sakhalin was divided between them, both
armies evacuated Manchuria, leaving it to the Chinese, and Port
Arthur and Dalny were transferred to Japan.

Yet though Japan received no indemnity and little in the way of
material acquisitions of any kind, she came out of the war with a
prestige that no one was likely to question, and has since ranked
among the great Powers of the world. And she has added
considerably to her territory by the annexation of Korea, in
which there was no one to question her right.

CHINA BECOMES A REPUBLIC

While Japan was manifesting this progress in the arts of war,
China was making as great a progress in the arts of peace. The
building of railroads, telegraphs, modern factories, and other
western innovations proceeded apace, modern literature and
systems of education were introduced, and the old competitive
examinations for office, in the Confucian literature and
philosophy, were replaced by examinations in modern science and
general knowledge. Yet most surprising of all was the great
political revolution which converted an autocratic empire which
had existed for four or five thousand years into a modern
constitutional republic of advanced type. This is the most
surprising political overturn that history anywhere presents.

For many years a spirit of opposition to the Manchu rulers had
existed and had led more than once to rebellions of great scope.
The success of Japan in war was followed in China by a
revolutionary movement whose first demand was for a
constitutional government, this leading, on September 20, 1907,
to an imperial decree outlining a plan for a national assembly.
On July 22, 1908, another decree provided for provincial
assemblies to serve as a basis for a future parliament. Later the
government promised to introduce a parliamentary system within
nine years.

The idea of such a government spread rapidly throughout the
country, and the demand arose for an immediate parliament. As the
government resisted this demand, the revolutionary sentiment
grew, and in October, 1911, a rebellious movement took place at
Wuchang which rapidly spread, the rebels declaring that the
Manchu dynasty must be overthrown.

Soon the movement became so threatening that the emperor issued a
decree appealing to the mercy of the people, and abjectly
acknowledging that the government had done wrong in many
particulars. Yuan Shi-Kai, a prominent revolutionary statesman,
was made prime minister and a national assembly convened. It had
become too late, however, to check the movement, and at the end
of 1911 a new republic was announced at Nanking, under the
provisional presidency of Dr. Sun Yat-Sen, a student of modern
institutions in Europe and America. The abdication of the emperor
quickly followed, in February 12, 1912, ending a Manchu dynasty
which had held the throne for 267 years. Yuan Shi-Kai was later
chosen as president.

This is a very brief account of the radical revolution that took
place and we cannot go into the details of what succeeded. It
must suffice to say that the republic has since persisted, Yuan
Shi-Kai still serving as president. The republic has a parliament
of its own; a president and cabinet and all the official
furniture of a republican government. There is only needed an
education of the people into the principles of free government
"of the people, for the people, and by the people" to complete
the most remarkable political revolution the world has yet known.


Chapter XVIII. TURKEY AND THE BALKAN STATES

Checking the Dominion of the Turk in Europe

The Story of Servia - Turkey in Europe - The Bulgarian Horrors -
The Defense of Plevna - The Congress of Berlin - Hostile
Sentiments in the Balkans - Incitement to War - Fighting Begins -
The Advance on Adrianople - Servian and Greek Victories - The
Bulgarian Successes - Steps toward Peace - The War Resumed -
Siege of Scutari - Treaty of Peace - War between the Allies - The
Final Settlement

In the southeast of Europe lies a group of minor kingdoms, of
little importance in size, but of great importance in the
progress of recent events. Their sudden uprising in 1912, their
conquest of nearly the whole existing remnant of Turkey in
Europe, and the subsequent struggle between them for the spoils
are specially important from the fact that Servia, one of this
group of states, was the ostensible - hardly the actual - cause
of the great European war of 1914.

These, known as the Balkan States from their being traversed by
the Balkan range of mountains, comprise the kingdoms of Roumania,
Bulgaria, Servia, Montenegro, and the recent and highly
artificial kingdom of Albania. Greece is an outlying member of
the group.

THE STORY OF SERVIA

Of these varied states Servia is of especial interest from its
immediate relation to the European contest. Its ancient history,
also, possesses much of interest. Minor in extent at present, it
was once an extensive empire. Under its monarch, Stephen Dushan
(1336-56), it included the whole of Macedonia, Albania, Thessaly,
Bulgaria, and Northern Greece, leaving little of the Balkan
region  beyond its borders. In 1389 its independence ended as a
result of the battle of Kossova, it becoming tributary to the
conquering empire of the Turks. In another half century it became
a province of Turkey in Europe, and so remained for nearly two
hundred years.

Its succeeding history may be rapidly summarized. In 1718 Austria
won the greater part of it, with its capital, Belgrade, from
Turkey, but in 1739 it was regained by the Turks. Barbarous
treatment of the Christian population of Servia by its
half-civilized rulers led to a series of insurrections, ending in
1812 in its independence, by the terms of the Treaty of Bukarest.
The Turks won it back in 1813, but in 1815, under its leader,
Milosh, its complete independence was attained.

After the fall of Plevna in the Russo-Turkish War of 1877-78,
Servia joined its forces to those of Russia, and by the Treaty of
Berlin it obtained an accession of territory and full recognition
by the Powers of Europe of its independence. In 1885 a national
rising took place in Eastern Roumelia, a province of Turkey,
which led to the Turkish governor being expelled and union with
Bulgaria proclaimed. Servia demanded a share of this new
acquisition of territory and went to war with Bulgaria, but met
with a severe defeat. When, in 1908, Austria annexed the former
Turkish provinces of Bosnia and Herzegovina, the people of Servia
were highly indignant, these provinces being largely inhabited by
people of the Servian race. The exasperation thus caused is of
importance, especially as augmented by the agency of Austria in
preventing Servia from obtaining a port on the Adriatic after the
Balkan war of 1912-13. The seething feeling of enmity thus
engendered had its final outcome in the assassination of the
Austrian Crown Prince Ferdinand in 1914, and the subsequent
invasion of Servia by the armies of Austria.

We have here spoken of the stages by which Servia gradually won
its independence from Turkey and its recognition as a
full-fledged member of the European family of nations. There are
several others of the Balkan group which similarly won
independence from Turkey and to the story of which some passing
allusion is desirable.

How Greece won its independence has been already told. Another of
the group, the diminutive mountain state of Montenegro, much the
smallest of them all, has the honor of being the only section of
that region of Europe that maintained its independence during the
long centuries of Turkish domination. Its mountainous character
enabled its hardy inhabitants to hold their own against the Turks
in a series of deadly struggles. In 1876-78 its ruler, Prince
Nicholas, joined in the war of Servia and Russia against Turkey,
the result being that 1,900 square miles was changed from a
principality into a kingdom, Prince Nicholas gaining the title of
King Nicholas. A second acquisition of territory succeeded the
Balkan War of 1913, the adjoining Turkish province of Novibazar
being divided between it and Servia.

TURKEY IN EUROPE

With this summary of the story of the Balkans we shall proceed to
give in more detail its recent history, comprising the wars of
1876-78 and of 1912-13. As for the relations between Turkey and
the Balkan peninsula, it is well known how the Asiatic conquerors
known as Turks, having subdued Asia Minor, invaded Europe in
1355, overran most of the Balkan country, and attacked and took
Constantinople in 1453. Servia, Bosnia, Albania, and Greece were
added to the Ottoman Empire, which subdued half of Hungary and
received its first check on land before the walls of Vienna in
1529, and on the ocean at the battle of Lepanto in 1571. Vienna
was again besieged by the Turks in 1683, and was then saved from
capture by Sobieski of Poland and Charles of Lorraine.

This was the end of Turkish advance in Europe. Since that date it
has been gradually yielding to European assault, Russia beginning
its persistent attacks upon Turkey about the middle of the
eighteenth century. At that time Turkey occupied a considerable
section of Southern Russia, but by the end of the century much of
this had been regained. In 1812 Russia won that part of Moldavia
and Bessarabia which lies beyond the Pruth, in 1828 it gained the
principal mouth of the Danube, and in 1829 it crossed the Balkans
and took Adrianople. The independence of Greece was acknowledged
the same year.

The next important event in the history of Turkey in Europe was
the Crimean War, the story of which has been told in an earlier
chapter. The chief results of it were a weakening of Russian
influence in Turkey, the abolition of the Russian protectorate
over Moldavia and Wallachia (united in 1861 as the principality
of Roumania), and the cession to Turkey of part of Bessarabia.

Turkey also came out of the Crimean War weakened and shorn of
territory. But the Turkish idea of government remained unchanged,
and in twenty years' time Russia was fairly goaded into another
war. In 1875 Bosnia rebelled in consequence of the insufferable
oppression of the Turkish tax-collectors. The brave Bosnians
maintained themselves so sturdily in their mountain fastnesses
that the Turks almost despaired of subduing them, and the
Christian subjects of the Sultan in all quarters became so
stirred up that a general revolt was threatened.

THE BULGARIAN HORRORS

The Turks undertook to prevent this in their usual fashion.
Irregular troops were sent into Christian Bulgaria with orders to
kill all they met. It was an order to the Mohammedan taste. The
defenseless villages of Bulgaria were entered and their
inhabitants slaughtered in cold blood, till thousands of men,
women, and children had been slain.

When tidings of these atrocities reached Europe the nations were
filled with horror. The Sultan made smooth excuses, and diplomacy
sought to settle the affair, but it became evident that a
massacre so terrible as this could not be condoned so easily.
Disraeli, then prime minister of Great Britain, sought to
minimize these reports so as to avert a great war in which
England might be plunged. But Gladstone, at that time in
retirement, arose, and by his pamphlet on the "Bulgarian Horrors"
aroused a fierce public sentiment in England. His denunciation
rang out like a trumpet-call. "Let the Turks now carry away their
abuses in the only possible manner - by carrying off themselves,"
he wrote. "Their Zaptiehs and their Mudirs, their Bimbashis and
their Yuzbachis, shall, I hope, clear out from the province they
have desolated and profaned."

He followed up this pamphlet by a series of speeches, delivered
to great meetings and to the House of Commons, with which for
four years he sought, as he expressed it, "night and day to
counterwork the purpose of Lord Beaconsfield." He succeeded;
England was prevented by his eloquence from actively resisting
Russia; and he excited the fury of the war party to such an
extent that at one time it was not safe for him to appear in the
streets of London.

Hostilities were soon proclaimed. The Russians, of the same race
and religious sect as the Bulgarians, were excited beyond
control, and in April 1877, Alexander II declared war against
Turkey. The outrages of the Turks had been so flagrant that no
allies came to their aid, while the rottenness of their empire
was shown by the rapid advance of the Russian armies. They
crossed the Danube in June. In a month later, they had occupied
the principal passes of the Balkan mountains and were in position
to descend on the broad plain that led to Constantinople. But at
this point in their career they met with a serious check. Osman
Pasha, the single Turkish commander of ability that the war
developed, occupied the town of Plevna with such forces as he
could gather, fortified it as strongly as possible, and from its
walls defied the Russians.

THE DEFENSE OF PLEVNA

The invaders dared not advance and leave this stronghold in their
rear. For five months all the power of Russia and the skill of
its generals were held in check by this brave man and his
followers, until Europe and America alike looked on with
admiration at his remarkable defense, in view of which the cause
of the war was almost forgotten. The Russian general Kudener was
repulsed with the loss of 8,000 men. The daring Skobeleff strove
in vain to launch his troops over Osman's walls. At length
General Todleben undertook the siege, adopting the slow but safe
method of starving out the defenders. Osman Pasha now showed his
courage, as he had already shown his endurance. When hunger and
disease began to reduce the strength of his men, he resolved on a
final desperate effort. At the head of his brave garrison the
"Lion of Plevna" sallied from the city, and fought with desperate
courage to break through the circle of his foes. He was finally
driven back into the city and compelled to surrender.

Osman had won glory, and his fall was the fall of the Turkish
cause. The Russians crossed the Balkans, capturing in the Schipka
Pass a Turkish army of 30,000 men. Adrianople was taken, and the
Turkish line of retreat cut off. The Russians marched to the
Bosporus, and the Sultan was compelled to sue for peace to save
his capital from falling into the hands of the Christians, as it
had fallen into those of the Turks four centuries before.

Russia had won the game for which she had made so long a
struggle. The treaty of San Stefano practically decreed the
dissolution of the Turkish Empire. But at this juncture the other
nations of Europe took part. They were not content to see the
balance of power destroyed by Russia becoming master of
Constantinople, and England demanded that the treaty should be
revised by the European Powers in order to guard her own route to
India. Russia protested, but Beaconsfield threatened war, and the
Czar gave way.

THE CONGRESS OF BERLIN

The Congress of Berlin, to which the treaty was referred, settled
the question in the following manner: Montenegro, Roumania, and
Servia were declared independent, and Bulgaria became free,
except that it had to pay an annual tribute to the Sultan. The
part of old Bulgaria that lay south of the Balkan Mountains was
named Eastern Roumelia and given its own civil government, but
was left under the military control of Turkey. Bosnia and
Herzegovina were placed under the control of Austria. All that
Russia obtained for her victories were some provinces in Asia
Minor. Turkey was terribly shorn, and since then her power has
been further reduced, for Eastern Roumelia has broken loose from
her control and united itself again to Bulgaria.

Another twenty years passed, and Turkey found itself at war
again. It was the old story, the oppression of the Christians.
This time the trouble began in Armenia, a part of Turkey in Asia,
where in 1895 and 1896 terrible massacres took place. Indignation
reigned in Europe, but fears of a general war kept the Powers
from using force, and the Sultan paid no heed to the reforms he
had promised to make.

In 1896 the Christians (Greeks) of the island of Crete broke out
in revolt against the oppression and tyranny of Turkish rule. Of
all the Powers of Europe little Greece was the only one that came
to their aid, and the great nations, still inspired with the fear
of a general war, sent their fleets and threatened Greece with
blockade unless she would withdraw her troops.

The result was one scarcely expected. Greece was persistent, and
gathered a threatening army on the frontier of Turkey, and war
broke out in 1897 between the two states. The Turks now, under an
able commander, showed much of their ancient valor and
intrepidity, crossing the frontier, defeating the Greeks in a
rapid series of engagements, and occupying Thessaly, while the
Greek army was driven back in a state of utter demoralization. At
this juncture, when Greece lay at the mercy of Turkey, as Turkey
had lain at that of Russia twenty years before, the Powers, which
had refused to aid Greece in her generous but hopeless effort,
stepped in to save her from ruin. Turkey was bidden to call a
halt, and the Sultan reluctantly stopped the march of his army.
He demanded the whole of Thessaly and a large indemnity in money.
The former the Powers refused to grant, and reduced the indemnity
to a sum within the power of Greece to pay. Thus the affair
ended, and such was the status of the Eastern Question until the
hatred of the Balkan States again leaped into flame in the
memorable Balkan War of 1912.

HOSTILE SENTIMENTS OF THE BALKANS

As may be seen from what has been said, the sentiment of
hostility between the Christian States of the Balkan region and
the Mohammedan empire of Turkey was not likely to be easily
allayed. The atrocities of persecution which the Christians had
suffered at the hands of the Turks were unforgotten and
unavenged, and to them was added an ambitious desire to widen
their dominions at the expense of Turkey, if possible to drive
Turkey completely out of Europe and extend their areas of control
to the Mediterranean and the Bosporus. These states consisted of
Servia, made an autonomous principality in 1830, an independent
principality in 1878, and a kingdom in 1882; Bulgaria, an
autonomous principality in 1878, an independent kingdom in 1908;
Roumania, an autonomous principality in 1802, an independent
principality in 1878, a kingdom in 1881; Montenegro, an
independent principality in 1878, a kingdom in 1910; Eastern
Roumelia, autonomous in 1878, annexed to Bulgaria in 1885.
Adjoining these on the south was Greece, an independent kingdom
since 1830. The former provinces of Bosnia and Herzegovina had
been assigned to Austrian administrative control in 1878, and
annexed by Austria-Hungary in 1908, an act which added to the
feeling of unrest in the Balkan States.

The relations existing between the Balkan States and their
neighbors was one of dissatisfaction and hostility which might at
any time break into war, this being especially the case with
those which bordered directly upon Turkey - Servia, Bulgaria,
Montenegro and Greece. Roumania, being removed from contact, had
less occasion to entertain warlike sentiments.

INCITEMENT TO WAR

A fitting time for this indignation and hostile feeling to break
out into war came in 1912, as a result of the invasion and
conquest of Tripoli by Italy in 1911-12. This war, settled by a
protocol in favor of Italy on October 15, 1912, had caused
financial losses and political unrest in Turkey which offered a
promising opportunity for the states to carry into effect their
long-cherished design. They did not act as a unit, the smallest
of them, Montenegro,, declaring war on Turkey on October 8th, and
Greece, on October 17th. In regard to Servia and Bulgaria, Turkey
took the initiative, declaring war on them October 17, 1912.

But acts of war did not wait for a formal declaration. On October
5th, King Peter of Servia thus explained to the National Assembly
of that state his reasons for mobilizing his troops:

"I have applied with friendly counsels to Constantinople
regarding the misery which the Christian nationalities, including
ours, are suffering in Turkey, and it is to be regretted that all
this was of no avail. Instead of the expected reforms we were
surprised a few days ago by the mobilization of the Turkish army
near our frontiers. To this act, by which our safety was
endangered, Servia had only one reply. By my decree our army was
put into a mobile state.

"Our position is clear. Our duty is to undertake measures
insuring our safety. It is our duty, in conformity with other
Christian Balkan states, to do everything in our power to insure
proper conditions for a real and permanent peace in the Balkans."

The first raid into Turkish territory was made by the Bulgarian
bandit Sandansky, who in 1902 had kidnapped Miss Ellen M. Stone,
an American missionary, and held her for a ransom of $65,000 to
procure funds for his campaign. At the head of a band of 2,500
Bulgarians he crossed the frontier and burned the Turkish
blockhouse at Oschumava, afterwards occupying a strategic
position above the Struma River.

FIGHTING BEGINS

The Montenegro army opened the war on October 9th, by attacking a
strong Turkish position opposite Podgoritza, Franz Peter, the
youngest son of King Nicholas, firing the first shot. Bulgaria,
without waiting to declare war, crossed the frontier on October
14th and made a sharp attack on the railway patrols between Sofia
and Uskut. Sharp fighting at the same time took place on the
Greek frontier, the Greeks capturing Malurica Pass, the chief
mountain pass leading from Greece to Turkey on the northern
frontier. As regards the reasons impelling Greece to take an
active part in the war, it must be remembered that the great
majority of Greeks still lived under the Turkish flag, while the
twelve islands in the Aegean Sea seized by Italy during its war
with Turkey were clamoring to be annexed to Greece instead of
being returned to Turkey by the treaty of peace between Italy and
Turkey.

Such were the conditions and events existing at the opening of
the war. It developed with great rapidity, a number of important
battles being fought, in which the Turks were defeated. The
military strength of the combined states exceeded that of Turkey,
and within a month's time they made rapid advances, the goals
sought by them being Constantinople, Adrianople, Salonica and
Scutari.

THE ADVANCE ON ADRIANOPLE

The most important of the Balkan movements was that of the
Bulgarian army upon Adrianople, the second to Constantinople in
importance of Turkish cities. By October 20th the Bulgarian main
army had forced the Turks back upon the outward forts of this
stronghold, while the left wing threatened the important post of
Kirk-Kilisseh, in Thrace, about thirty miles northeast of
Adrianople. This place, regarded as "the Key to Adrianople," was
take on the 24th, after a three days' fight, the Turkish forces,
said to be 150,000 strong, retiring in disorder.

The Bulgarians continued their advance, fighting over a wide
semicircular area before Adrianople, upon which city they
gradually closed, taking some of the outer forts and making their
bombardment felt within the city itself.

SERVIAN AND GREEK VICTORIES

While the Bulgarians were making such vigorous advances towards
the capital of the Turkish empire, their allies were winning
victories in other quarters. Novibazar, capital of the sanjak of
the same name, was taken by the Servians on October 23rd.
Prishtina and other towns and villages of Old Servia were also
taken, the victors being received by the citizens with open arms
of welcome and other demonstrations of joy. Tobacco and
refreshments were pressed upon the soldiers, while the people put
all their possessions at the disposal of the military
authorities.

The Greeks were also successful, an army under the Crown Prince
capturing the town of Monastir, which was garrisoned by a Turkish
force estimated at 40,000. The Montenegrin forces were regarded
as of high importance as a means of widening the area of their
narrow kingdom. Other important towns or Old Servia were taken,
including Kumanova, captured on the 25th, Uskab, captured on the
26th, and Istib, 45 miles to the southwest, occupied without
opposition on the following day. This place, a very strong
natural position in the mountains, was known as the Adrianople of
Macedonia.

THE BULGARIAN SUCCESSES

While these movements were taking place in the west, the siege of
Adrianople was vigorously pushed. It was completely surrounded
by Bulgarian troops by the 29th, and its commander formally
summoned to surrender the city. The besiegers, however, had
great difficulties to overcome, the country around being
inundated by the rivers Maretza and Arda in consequence of heavy
rains. These floods at the same time impeded the movements of
the Turks.

On October 31st, after another three-day fight, the Bulgarians
achieved the great success of the war, defeating a Turkish army
of 200,000 men. Only a fortnight had passed since Turkey
declared war. The first week of the campaign closed with the
dramatic fall of Kirk-Kilesseh, fully revealing for the first
time the disorganization, bad morale and inefficient commissariat
of the Turkish army. Ten days later that army was defeated and
routed, within fifty miles from Constantinople, forcing it to
retreat within the capital's line of defenses.

Apparently Nazim Pasha had been completely outmaneuvered by
Savoff's generalship. The Bulgarian turning movement along the
Black Sea coast appears to have been a feint, which induced the
Turkish commander to throw his main army to the eastward, to such
effect that the Bulgarian force on this side had the greatest
difficulty in holding the Turks in check.

In fact, the Bulgarians gave way, and thus enabled Nazim Pasha to
report to Constantinople some success in this direction. In the
meantime, however, General Savoff hurled his great strength
against the Turks' weakened left wing, which he crushed in at
Lule Burgas. The fighting along the whole front, which evidently
was of the most stubborn and determined character, was carried on
day and night without intermission, and both sides lost heavily.

The final result was to force the Turks within the defensive
lines of Tchatalja, the only remaining fortified position
protecting Constantinople. These lines lie twenty-five miles to
the northwest of the capital.

The seat of war between Bulgaria and Turkey, aside from the
continued siege of Adrianople, was by this success transferred to
the Tchatalja lines, along which the opposing armies lay
stretched during the week succeeding the Lule Burgas victory.
Here siege operations were vigorously prosecuted, but the Turks,
though weakened by an outbreak of cholera in their ranks,
succeeded in maintaining their position.

STEPS TOWARD PEACE

Elsewhere victory followed the banners of the allies. On
November 8th the important port of Salonica was taken by the
Greeks, and on the 18th the Servians captured Monastir, the
remaining Turkish stronghold in Macedonia. The fighting here was
desperate, lasting three days, the Turkish losses amounting to
about 20,000 men. In Albania the Montenegrin siege of Scutari
continued, though so far without success.

Turkey had now enough of the war. On November 3d she had asked a
mediation of the Powers, but these replied that she must treat
directly with the Balkan nations. This caused delay until the
end of the month, the protocol of an armistice being approved by
the Turkish cabinet on November 30th, and signed by
representatives of Turkey, Bulgaria, Servia and Montenegro on
December 3d. Greece refused to sign, but at a later date agreed
to take part in a conference to meet in London on December 16th.

This peace conference continued in session until January 6, 1913,
without reaching any conclusions, Turkey refusing to accept the
Balkan demands that she should yield practically the whole of her
territory in Europe. At the final session of the conference she
renounced her claim to the island of Crete, and promised to
rectify her Thracian frontier, but insisted upon the retention of
Adrianople. This place, the original capital of the Ottoman
Empire in Europe, and containing the splendid mosque of Sultan
Selim, was highly esteemed by the Mohammedans, who clung to it as
a sacred city.

War seemed likely to be resumed, though the European Powers
strongly suggested to Turkey the advisability of yielding on this
point, and leaving the question of the fate of the Aegean Islands
to the Powers, which promised also to guard Mussulman interests
in Adrianople. Finally, on January 22d, the Porte consented to
this request of the Powers, a decision which was vigorously
resented by the warlike party known as Young Turks.

Demonstrations at once broke out in Constantinople, leading to
the overthrow of the cabinet and the murder of Nazim Pasha,
former minister of war and commander-in-chief of the Turkish
army. He was succeeded by Enver Bey, the most spirited leader of
the Young Turks, who became chief of staff of the army.

On January 30th the Balkan allies denounced their armistice and a
renewed war seemed imminent. On the same day the Ottoman
government offered a compromise, agreeing to divide Adrianople
between the contestants in such a way that they might retain the
mosques and the historic monuments. As for the Aegean Islands,
they would leave these to the disposition of the Powers.

THE WAR RESUMED

To this compromise the Balkan allies refused to agree and on
February 3d hostile operations were resumed. The investment of
Adrianople had remained intact during the interval, and on the
4th a vigorous bombardment took place, the Turkish response being
weak. Forty Servian seven-inch guns had been mounted, their
shells falling into the town, part of which again broke into
flames. At points the lines of besiegers and besieged were only
200 yards apart. An attempt was made also to capture the
peninsula of Gallipoli, which commands the Dardanelles, and thus
take the Turkish force in the rear. Fifty thousand Bulgarians
had been landed on this coast in November, and the Greek fleet in
the Gulf of Saros supported the attack. If successful, there
would be nothing to prevent this fleet from passing the straits,
defeating the inferior Turkish war vessels and attacking
Constantinople from the rear. Fighting in this region continued
for several days, the Turkish forces being driven back, but still
holding their forts.

SIEGE OF SCUTARI

In the west the most important operation at this period was that
of the Montenegrins, led by King Nicholas in person, against
Scutari, an Albanian stronghold which they were eager to possess.

Servian artillery aided in the assault, and on February 8th the
important outwork on Muselim Hill was taken by an impulsive
bayonet charge. The city was not captured, however, until April
23d, when an entire day's ceaseless fighting ended in the
yielding of the garrison, the climax of a six-month siege.

An energetic attack had been made by the Bulgarians and Serbs on
Adrianople on March 14th, ending in a repulse, and on the 22d
another vigorous assault was begun, continuing with terrific
fighting for four days. It ended in a surrender of the city on
the 26th. The siege had continued for 152 days. Before
yielding, the Turks blew up the arsenal and set fire to the city
at several points. At the same time Tchatalja, which had been
actively assailed, fell into the hands of the allies and
Constantinople lay open to assault.

Meanwhile the Powers of Europe had again offered their good
services to mediate between the warring forces, and a conditional
mediation was agreed to by the Balkan allies. Movements towards
peace, however, proceeded slowly, the most interesting event of
the period being a demand by Austria, backed by Italy, that
Montenegro should give up the city of Scutari. Earnest protests
were made against this by King Nicholas, but the despatch of an
Austrian naval division on April 27th to occupy his ports and
march upon Cettinje, his capital, obliged him reluctantly to
yield and on May 5th Scutari was given up to Austria, to form
part of a projected Albanian kingdom.

TREATY OF PEACE

Peace between the warring nations was finally concluded on May
30, 1913, the treaty providing that Turkey should cede to her
allied foes all territory west of a line drawn from Enos on the
Aegean coast to Media on the coast of the Black Sea. This left
Adrianople in the hands of the Bulgarians and gave Turkey only a
narrow strip of territory west of Constantinople, the meager
remnant of her once great holdings upon the continent of Europe.
The victors desired to divide the conquered territory upon a plan
arranged between them before the war, but the purposes of Austria
and Italy were out of agreement with this design and the Powers
insisted in forming out of the districts assigned to Servia and
Greece a new principality to be named Albania, embracing the
region occupied by the unruly Albanian tribes.

This plan gave intense dissatisfaction to the allies. It seemed
designed to cut off Servia from an opening upon the
Mediterranean, which that inland state ardently desired and
Austria strongly opposed. Montenegro was also deprived of the
warmly craved city of Scutari, which she had won after so
vigorous a strife. Bulgaria also was dissatisfied with this new
project and opposed the demands of Servia and Greece for
compensation in land for the loss of Albania or for their support
of the Bulgarian operations.

WAR BETWEEN THE ALLIES

Thus the result of this creation of a new and needless state out
of the conquered territory by the peace-making Powers roused
hostilities among the allies which speedily flung them into a new
war. Bulgaria refused to yield any of the territory held by it
to the Servians and Greeks, and Greece in consequence made a
secret league with Servia against Bulgaria.

It was the old story of a fight over the division of the spoils.
It is doubtful which of the contestants began hostile operations,
but Bulgaria lost no time in marching upon Salonica, held by
Greece, and in attacking the Greek and Servian outposts in
Macedonia. The plans of General Savoff, who had led the
Bulgarians to victory in the late war and who commanded in this
new outbreak, in some way fell into the hands of the Greeks and
gave them an important advantage. They at once, in junction with
the Servians, attacked the Bulgarians and drove them back. From
the accounts of the war, probably exaggerated, this struggle was
accompanied by revolting barbarities upon the inhabitants of the
country invaded, each country accusing the other of shameful
indignities.

What would have been the result of the war, if fought out between
the original contestants, it is impossible to say, for at this
juncture a new Balkan State, which had taken no part in the
Turkish war, came into the field. This was Roumania, lying north
of Bulgaria and removed from any contact with Turkey. It had had
a quarrel with Bulgaria, dating back to 1878, concerning certain
territory to which it laid claim. This was a strip of land on
the south side of the Danube near its mouth and containing
Silistria and some other cities.

THE FINAL SETTLEMENT

King Charles of Roumania now took the opportunity to demand this
territory, and when his demand was refused by Ferdinand of
Bulgaria he marched an army across the Danube and took the
Bulgarians, exhausted by their recent struggle, in the rear. No
battles were fought. The Roumanian army advanced until within
thirty miles of Sofia, the Bulgarian capital, and Ferdinand was
obliged to appeal for peace, and in the subsequent treaty yielded
to Roumania the tract desired, which served to round out the
frontier on the Black Sea.

Another unexpected event took place. While her late foes were
struggling in a war of their own, Turkey quietly stepped into the
arena, and on July 20th retook possession, without opposition, of
Adrianople, Bulgaria's great prize in the late war.

A peace conference was held at Bukarest, capital of Roumania,
beginning July 30th, and framing a treaty, signed on August 10th.

This provided for the evacuation of Bulgaria by the invading
armies, and also for a division of the conquered territory.
Bulgaria gained the largest amount of territory, though less than
she had claimed. Greece retained the important seaport of
Salonica, the possession of which had been hotly disputed, and
gained the largest sea front. Montenegro, though deprived of the
much-coveted Scutari, was assigned part of northern Albania and
the Turkish sanjak of Novibazar, adjoining on the east,
considerably increasing her diminutive territory.

Servia had most reason to be dissatisfied with the result, in
view of her craving for an opening to the sea. Cut off by
Albania on the west, it sought an opening on the south, demanding
the city of Kavala, on the Aegean Sea. But to this Greece
strongly objected, as that city, one of the great tobacco marts
of the world, was inhabited almost wholly by Greeks. Servia,
however, extended southward far over its old territory, gaining
Uskub, its old capital. And the Powers also agreed that it
should have commercial rights on the Mediterranean, thorough
railroad connection with Salonica.

As regards Turkey's shrewd advantage of the opportunity to retake
Adrianople, it proved a successful move. The Russian press
strongly advocated that the Turks should be ejected, but the
jealousy of the Powers prevented any agreement as to who should
do this and in the end the Turks remained, with a considerable
widening of the tract of land before assigned to them.

In these wars it is estimated that 358,000 persons died, and that
the cost of the two wars, to the several nations involved,
reached a total of $1,200,000,000. Its general result was almost
to complete the work of expelling the Turks from Europe, the
territory lost by them being divided up between the several
Balkan nations.


Chapter XIX. METHODS IN MODERN WARFARE

Ancient and Modern Weapons - New Types of Weapons - The Ironclad
Warship - The Balloon in War - Tennyson's Foresight - Gunning for
Airships - The Submarine - Under-Water Warfare - The New Type of
Battleship - Mobilization - The Waste of War

One hundred years ago the Battle of Waterloo had just been fought
and Napoleon's star had set never to rise again. For years he
had swept Europe with his armies, rending the nations into
fragments, and winning world-famous victories with weapons that
no one would look for today except in a military museum, weapons
antiquated beyond all possible utility on a modern field of
battle.

ANCIENT AND MODERN WEAPONS

Every fresh modern war has been fought with new weapons, and
during the past century there have been countless inventions for
the carrying on of warfare in a more destructive manner,
apparently on the philanthropic theory that war should be made so
terrible that it must quickly pass away.

But it has happened that as soon as a particularly horrible
contrivance was invented and introduced into armies and navies,
other inventors immediately set themselves to offset and discount
its probable effect. Consequently war not only has not passed
away, but we have it with us in more frightful form that ever
before. Thus it is that each big war, after being heralded as
the world's last conflagration, has proved but the herald of
another war, bigger and more death-dealing still.

Since the Civil War in the United States, in which probably more
new features in modes of fighting were introduced than in any
conflict that had preceded it, there have been immense
improvements in arms, in armament and in general efficiency of
both armies and navies. It was the Civil War that brought into
being the turreted MONITOR, one of the greatest contributions to
naval architecture the navies of the world had then known. While
the turrets on the modern battleship are very different in
design, in armor and in arrangement from those on the old
monitors, they are nothing more than an adaptation of the
original devices.

The same is the case with the small arms and the field guns of
the modern armies, these having been greatly improved since the
period of the Civil war. The breech-loading and even the
magazine rifle are now in use in every army, while the smallest
field piece of today is almost as efficient as the most powerful
gun in use fifty years ago.

The first attempt to use a torpedo boat dates back to the Civil
War. A primitive contrivance it was, but it showed a possibility
in naval warfare which speedily led to the general building of
torpedo boats, and to the invention of the highly efficient
Whitehead torpedo.

THE IRONCLAD WARSHIP

Another lesson in warfare was taught when the ironclad MERRIMAC
and MONITOR met and fought for mastery in Hampton Roads. The
ironclad vessel was not then a new idea in naval architecture,
but its efficiency as a fighting machine was then first
demonstrated. Iron for armor soon gave way to thick and tough
steel, while each improvement in armor led to a corresponding
improvement in guns and projectiles, until now a battle at sea
has grown to be a remarkably different affair from the great
ocean combats of Nelson's time.

But development in the art of war has not ceased with the
improvement in older types of weapons. New devices, scarcely
thought of in former wars, have been introduced. These include
the use of the balloon and aeroplane as scouting devices, of the
bomb filled with explosives of frightful rending power, and of
the submarine naval shark, designed to attack the mighty
battleships from under water.

THE BALLOON IN WAR

Of recent years the balloon has been developed into the
dirigible, the flying machine that can be steered and directed.
Made effective by Count Zeppelin and others, its possibilities as
an aid in war were quickly perceived. Then came the notable
invention of the Wright Brothers, and after 1904 the aeroplane
quickly expanded into an effective aerial instrument, the
probably serviceableness of which in war was evident to all.
Here we are tempted to stop and quote the remarkable prediction
from Tennyson's "Locksley Hall," the truth of which is now being
so strikingly verified:

"For I dipt into the future, far as human eye could see,
Saw the vision of the world and all the wonder that would be;
Saw the heavens fill with commerce, argosies of magic sails,
Pilots of the purple twilight, dropping down with costly bales;
Heard the heavens fill with shouting, and there rained a ghastly
dew
From the nations' airy navies grappling in the central blue;
Far along the world-wide whisper of the south-wind rushing warm,
With the standards of the peoples plunging through the thunder
storm;
Till the war drum throbbed no longer, and the battle flags were
furled
In the parliament of man, the federation of the world."

GUNNING FOR AIRSHIPS

The airship does not float safely in the cental blue, aside from
attacks by flying foes. Guns pointing upward have been devised
to attack the daring aviator from the ground and flying machines
can thus be swiftly brought down, like war eagles shot in the
sky. Several types of guns for this purpose are in use, some to
be employed on warships or fortifications, others, mounted on
automobile trucks, for use in the field.

The Ehrhardt gun, a German weapon, which is designed to be
mounted on an auto-truck, weighs nearly 1700 pounds. The car
carries 140 rounds of ammunition and the whole equipment in
service condition weighs more than six tons. The gun has an
extreme range at 45 degrees elevation of 12,029 yards, or more
than six miles. The sights are telescopic, a moving object can
be followed with ease, and the gun is capable of being fired very
rapidly. The British are provided with the Vickers gun, which is
mainly intended for naval use, but the military arm is also
provided with anti-balloon guns, which have great range and can
throw a three-pound shell at any high angle. Some of these guns
use incendiary shells, intended to ignite the gas in dirigibles.
There is another type that explodes shrapnel. In addition to
these, rifle fire is apt to be effective, in case of airships
coming within its range.

Jules Vedrines, a well-known French aviator, tells this story of
his experience while doing scout duty for the French army:

"Those German gunners surely have tried their best to get me," he
wrote. "Each night when I come back to headquarters my machine
looks more and more like a sieve because of the numerous bullet
holes in the wings.

"I have been keeping tab on the number of new bullet holes in my
machine each day, marking each with red chalk, so that I won't
include any of the old ones in the next day's count. My best
record so far for one day is thirty-seven holes. That shows how
close the enemy has come to hitting me. My duties as scout
require me to cover various distances each day. The best record
so far in one day is 600 miles."

THE SUBMARINE

The submarine is another type of war apparatus, one the utility
of which promises to be very great. It is of recent origin. At
the time of the Spanish-American War there were only five
submarines in all the navies of the world, and of this number
three were in the French navy, one in Italy and one in Portugal.
The United States was building its first one, and had not decided
what type to select. At the outbreak of the Russo-Japanese War
Great Britain had nine of the American (Holland) type of
submarines and was building twenty more, while France had
accumulated thirty-six of various types and of various grades of
reported efficiency, while Germany had none. In 1914 there were
nearly four hundred vessels of this type in the world's navies,
France standing first with 173.

It was believed that the moral effect of the submarine would be
almost as important as its physical effect in dealing with an
enemy's warship, and this idea has been justified. Some persons
maintained that fights of submarines with each other might take
place, each, like the Kilkenny cats, devouring the other. But
the fact is that when submerged the submarine is as blind as the
traditional bat. Its crew cannot see any object under water, and
is compelled to resort to the use of the periscope, which emerges
unostentatiously above the water, in order to see its own course.

It is known that the periscope is the eye of the submarine, and
naturally attention has been paid to the best way of destroying
this vital part of such boats. Recently, grappling irons have
been devised for use from dirigibles, which are expected to drag
out the periscope as the dirigible flies above it. Careful plans
for torpedoing submarines also have been made, but their
effectiveness likewise remains to be demonstrated.

Submarine builders have naturally held the view that the
submerged boat could not be seen. But it has been discovered
that from a certain height an observer may trace the course of a
submerged submarine with as great accuracy as if it were running
on the surface. It is found that the submerged boat can readily
be seen from the dirigible and the aeroplane. On the other hand
an anti-balloon gun has been devised which can be raised from the
submarine when it comes to the surface, and used against the
hostile airship.

UNDER-WATER WARFARE

The submarine is supposed to have its most important field of
operation against a fleet of battleships and cruisers besieging a
seaport city. These great war craft, covered above the water-
line with thick steel armor, are vulnerable below, and a torpedo
discharged from a torpedo boat or an explosive bomb attached to
the lower hull by a submarine may send the largest and mightiest
ship to the bottom, stung to death from below.

With this idea in view torpedo boars, destroyers   designed to
attack torpedo boats   and submarines have been multiplied in
modern navies. We have just begun to appreciate the
effectiveness of this type of vessels. Their possibilities are
enormous and their latent power renders the bombardment from sea
of town or fort a far more perilous operation than of old. Fired
at by the great guns of the fort capable of effective work at
eight or ten miles distance, exposed to explosive bombs dropped
from soaring airships, made a target for the deadly weapon of the
torpedo boat, and in constant risk of being stung by the
submarine wasp, these great war ships, built at a cost of ten or
more millions and peopled by hundreds of mariners, are in
constant danger of being sent to the bottom with all on board   a
contingency likely to shake the nerves of the steadiest Jack Tar
or admiral on board.

A typical submarine has a length of about 150 feet and diameter
of 15 feet, with a speed of eleven knots on the surface and five
knots when submerged. Some of the more recent have a radius of
navigation of 4,500 miles without need of a new supply of stores
and fuel. On the surface they are propelled by gasoline engines,
but when submerged they use electric motors driven by storage
batteries. If the weather should grow too rough they can sink
below the waves.

THE NEW TYPE OF BATTLESHIP

While the peril of the big ship has thus been increased, the size
and fighting capacity of those ships have steadily grown   and at
the same time their cost, which is becoming almost prohibitive.
Taking the British navy, the leader in this field, the size of
battleships was yearly augmented until in 1907 the famous
Dreadnought appeared, looked upon at the time as the last word in
naval architecture. This great ship was of 17,900 tons
displacement and 23,000 horse-power, its armor belt eleven inches
thick, its major armament composed of ten twelve-inch guns.
There are now twenty British battleships of larger size, some
much larger.

On shore a similar increase may be seen in the size and
effectiveness of armies and the strength of fortifications. In
all the larger nations of Europe except Great Britain the whole
able-bodied male population are now obliged to spend several
years in the army, and to be ready at a moment's notice to drop
all the avocations of peace and march to the front, ready to risk
their lives in their country's service or at the command of the
autocrat under whom they live.

MOBILIZATION

Mobilization is a word with strenuous significance. When it is
put into effect every able-bodied man must report without delay
for service. His name is on the army lists; if he fails to
report he is branded as a deserter. In Germany, the order to
mobilize is issued by the Emperor and is immediately sent out by
all military and civil authorities, at home or abroad. Every
person knows at once what he is required to do. Skeleton
regiments are filled out and additional regiments formed.
Simultaneously there is a levy of horses. The order reaches into
every household; into the factories, the shipyards, the hotels,
the farms, river boats, everywhere. Almost instantly the male
individuals within the prescribed ages must at once report to the
barracks to come under military discipline. Infantry, cavalry
and artillery units double and triple at once.

This is the first step in mobilization. The second is the
transportation and concentration of forces. The railways are
seized, the telegraph and telephone systems. Mail, military,
aerial and railway services are assigned. The commissary lines
are laid and transportation provided for. With marvelous
efficiency the full fighting strength, in front and rear, is made
ready and co-ordinated.

The psychological effect of mobilization is tremendous. In every
household home-ties are broken. The fields are stripped of men.
Industry stops. Artillery rolls through the streets, bands play.
An atmosphere of apprehension settles down on the country.

THE WASTE OF WAR

And the waste of it all; the criminal, unbelievable waste!
Consider the vast loss of products that is due, not only to
actual war, but to unceasing and universal preparation for war.

It has been stated on the highest authority that during the last
decade forty per cent of the total outlay of European states has
been absorbed by the armies and navies which, when war arises,
seek in every way to destroy as much as they can of the
remainder. Commenting on this state of affairs, Count Sergius
Witte, the ablest of Russian statesmen and financiers, said in
London not long ago:

"Sketch a picture in your mind's eye of all that those sums, if
properly spent, could effect for the nations who now waste them
on heavy guns, rifles, dreadnaughts, fortresses and barracks. If
this money were laid out on improving the material lot of the
people, in housing them hygienically, in procuring for them
healthier air, medical aid and needful periodical rest, they
would live longer and work to better purpose, and enjoy some of
the happiness or contentment which at present is the prerogative
of the few.

"Again, all the best brain work of the most eminent men is
focused on efforts to create new lethal weapons, or to make the
old ones more deadly. For one of the arts in which cultured
nations have made most progress is warfare. The noblest efforts
of the greatest thinkers are wasted on inventions to destroy
human life.

"When I call to mind the gold and the work thus dissipated in
smoke and sound and compare that picture with this other
villagers with drawn, sallow faces, men and women and dimly
conscious children perishing slowly and painfully of hunger   I
begin to ask myself whether human culture and the white man who
personifies it are not wending toward the abyss."

In "War and Waste" Dr. David Starr Jordan quotes the table of
Richet to show the cost of a general European war.

Per day the French statistician figures the war's cost thus:

Feed of men ........................................ $12,600,000
Feed of horses ...................................... 1,000,000
Pay (European rates) ................................ 4,250,000
Pay of workmen in arsenals and ports ................ 1,000.000
Transportation (sixty miles, ten days) .............. 2,100,000
Transportation of provisions ........................ 4,200,000
Munitions
Infantry, ten cartridges a day ................. 4,200,000
Artillery, ten shots per day ................... 1,200,000
Marine, two shots per day ...................... 400,000
Equipment ........................................... 4,200,000
Ambulances, 500,000 wounded or ill ($1 per day) ..... 500,000
Armature ............................................ 500,000
Reduction of imports ................................ 5,000,000
Help to the poor (20 cents per day to one in ten) ... 6,800,000
Destruction of towns, etc ........................... 2,000,000

TOTAL PER DAY ................. $49,950,000



Chapter XX. CANADA'S PART IN THE WORLD WAR

New Relations Toward the Empire - Military Preparations - The
Great camp at Valcartier - The Canadian Expeditionary Force -
Political Effect of Canada's Action on Future of the Dominion

The sailing of the First Canadian Contingent on October 2, 1914,
for England, en route to the theater of war, marked a noteworthy
epoch in Canadian history. For the first time the Dominion took
her place, not as a British colony, but as a component part of
the British Empire. This position was established by the
voluntary offer of expeditionary troops to be raised, equipped,
and paid by Canada for the defense of the British empire.

For many years a movement had been on foot to bring about this
attitude on the part of the Dominion by His Majesty's government.

No such action was taken by the Dominion in the South African
War, though a Canadian regiment was raised for the guarding of
Halifax so that the regiment of British soldiers doing garrison
duty there might be released for service at the front, and all
other troops who left Canada went simply as volunteers to join
the British army, though raised by the Dominion government.

When the situation in South Africa reached a critical stage and
there were fears of German interference on behalf of the Boers it
became clear that the British government strongly desired a
helping hand from Canada for political reasons. It seemed a good
time to show a solid front and a united Empire. Later, on
October 3d, there came a request for 500 men from the British
Colonial Secretary. No immediate action was taken on this, but
on October 13th, the government passed an Order-in-Council for
the raising of 1,000 volunteers and providing for their equipment
and transportation. But these men were really British
volunteers, not Canadian troops, as once at the front they became
British soldiers under British pay. This contingent was known as
a "Special Service Battalion of the Royal Canadian Regiment of
Infantry," and did not belong in any sense to the organized
troops of the Dominion, either regular or militia, although they
approached more nearly to that status than in any previous case
of assistance given by the Dominion to the Empire.

In the Indian Mutiny in 1857 a regiment was raised in Canada by
the British government known as the 100th Prince of Wales Royal
Canadian Regiment" and in the Empire's other wars, such as the
Crimean and the Soudanese, there were always Canadian volunteers
in the British forces.

MILITARY PREPARATIONS

The declaration of war by Great Britain on Germany made on the
night of August 4, 1914, found the people of the Dominion not
wholly unprepared for the situation. For some time ways of
helping the mother country had been the chief topic both in
government circles and among the people at large. This is best
instanced by the following telegram sent by His Royal Highness,
the governor-General, to the Secretary of State for the colonies,
Rt. Hon. Lewis Harcourt.

"Ottawa, August 1, 1914

In view of the impending danger of war involving the Empire my
advisers are anxiously considering the most effective means of
rendering every possible aid, and will welcome any suggestions
and advice which Imperial naval and military authorities may deem
it expedient to offer. They are confident that a considerable
force would be available for service abroad, as under section
sixty-nine of Canadian Militia Act the active militia can only be
placed on active service beyond Canada for the defense thereof.
It has been suggested that regiments might enlist as Imperial
troops for a stated period, Canadian Government undertaking to
pay all necessary financial provisions for their equipment, pay
and maintenance. This proposal has not yet been maturely
considered here and my advisers would be glad to have views of
Imperial Government thereon. Arthur"

This offer from Canada preceded similar offers from Australia,
India, South Africa and Egypt.

The response to this came in the following cable from His
Majesty.

"London, August 4, 1914

Please communicate to your ministers following message from His
Majesty the king and publish:

'I desire to express to my people of the Overseas Dominions with
what appreciation and pride I have received the messages from
their respective governments during the last few days. These
spontaneous assurances of their fullest support recalled to me
the generous self-sacrificing help given by them in the past to
the Mother country. I shall be strengthened in the discharge of
the great responsibilities which rest upon me by the confident
belief that in this time of trial my Empire will stand united,
calm, resolute, and trusting in God. George R.I. Harcourt"

Mr. Harcourt also cabled advising that although there was not
immediately need for an expeditionary force it would be advisable
to take all legislative and other steps necessary to the
providing of such a force in case it should be required later.

The declaration of the war by Great Britain was officially
recognized in Canada on August 5th, in a message from the
Governor-General, beginning:

"Whereas a state of war now exists between this country and
Germany."

On the following day came a call to the militia for active
service and Canada had gone on record as having accepted her
responsibilities as an integral part of the Empire. She was
sending troops to help England not as volunteers who were to
become British soldiers, but as Canadian soldiers, enlisted,
clothed, armed, equipped and paid by Canadian dollars.

Shortly after this came another cablegram from Mr. Harcourt
gratefully accepting the offer of the expeditionary force and
requesting that it be sent forward as quickly as possible. This
cablegram was supplemented by another suggesting one army
division as a suitable composition for this expeditionary force.
The terms of enlistment were to be as follows:

"(a) For a term of one year unless war lasts longer than one
year, in which case they will be retained until war is over. If
employed with hospitals, depots of mounted units, and as clerks,
et cetera, they may be retained after termination of hostilities
until services can be dispensed with, but such retention shall in
no case exceed six months.

"(b) To be attached to any arm of service should it be required
of them."

An army division of war strength consists of about 22,500 men
composing all branches of the service.

While the call to arms found Canada prepared morally and
financially, it found the country sadly unprepared from the
standpoint of equipment. It was necessary to buy or make rifles,
uniforms, guns and equipment of every description to increase the
limited supply on hand to the necessary point. The quantity and
variety of supplies required by an army division seems
mountainous to the civilian. They ran the entire gamut from shoe
laces to motor trucks, and these had to be purchased at the high
prices caused by sudden demand wherever it was possible to obtain
them in quantities with the greatest speed.

In this great work of mobilization Canada's fine railway
organizations played a great and necessary part. With their aid
and that of many prominent men in Canadian affairs the question
of the gathering of materials at selected points went ahead
rapidly.

The matter of enlistments held equally important sway. An order
in council authorized an army of 22,218 officers and men and the
recruiting officers wasted no time in setting about their work.
All over the Dominion men had been drilling ever since the danger
of war became acute. The organized militia was hard at work.
Volunteers were being rapidly gathered and after a thorough
medical examination were put in charge of a drill sergeant.
There was no difficulty in getting men and the recruiting
officers from the first were overwhelmed with applications.
Canada was going to the aid of the mother country, not
unwillingly, not with hesitancy, not with parsimony, but with a
great rush of enthusiasm to save the Empire, Our Empire!

THE GREAT CAMP AT VALCARTIER

The problem of concentrating this huge body of men soon became a
real one. A great mobilization camp was needed. A place not too
far from the Atlantic, with ample railroad facilities, large and
roomy enough for the maneuvering of large bodies of men as well
as their housing in tents, must be found. A further
qualification was that this great camp should be located in a
position of strategic importance and one which could be defended
should the necessity arise.

Such a place was found at Valcartier, a small village some
sixteen miles from the City of Quebec on the line of the Canadian
Northern Railway.

When the war was declared the government did not own Valcartier
and few people had ever heard of it. Soon, however, the name
began to grow more familiar with the newspapers and in a day or
two the place became government property. For the purpose it
proved ideal.

Great expanse of level country provided an ideal maneuvering
ground. The site of the camp itself was high enough for good
drainage and the Jacques Cartier River provided an abundance of
good water.

But with the acquisition of the ground the work had just begun.
It was necessary to erect tents for the housing of 30,000 men. A
commissary for their subsistence must be provided. Stores and
storehouses had to be rushed to the spot and there was a huge
amount of work of a more or less permanent character in the shape
of water works with many miles of piping, shower baths, drinking
troughs, an electric light plant and the like. The engineers
were called upon immediately to lay out the camp and its many
auxiliary features. A rifle range, the largest in the world, was
immediately planned and put in operation for the training of the
soldiers, for few men unacquainted with military life are able to
handle modern high-powered military rifles with any degree of
success, although the average man, under capable instructors,
rapidly becomes proficient. Artillery ranges in the Laurentian
Hills were established for the training of the field artillery.
Here the big sixty-pounders, which throw a shell for nearly five
miles, first woke the echoes.

A great bridge-building record was made by the men of the Royal
Canadian Engineers under the direction of Major W. Bethune
Lindsay of Winnipeg. The Jacques Cartier River separates the
main camp from the artillery practice grounds at the base of
Mounts Ileene and Irene. Across this 350 feet of waterway the
Royal Canadian Engineers built within four hours a barrel-pier
pontoon bridge capable of carrying heavy batteries. The Major
and his three hundred men worked with that well-ordered
efficiency which characterizes the efforts of the British bred.
The race for the record started with the Canadian Northern
Railway. The materials   barrels, planking, etc. were
freighted on to the ground with remarkable dispatch. The casks
were made watertight, the timber was made ready, the twenty-foot
bank cut down to provide an easy grade for traffic, and the
actual test was on.

There was never a hitch. One party of men lashed the barrels to
the heavy planks, and, as soon as that operation was complete,
another party lifted the pier and carried it down the bank.
Another squad of men conveyed it on to the water, where it was
taken in charge by still another party and floated out to the
front line. The pier was drawn quickly into position, and as
many men as could work with freedom soon had the flooring spiked
down. The actual bridging commenced at eight o'clock; the span
was complete at ten minutes after twelve. The extra ten minutes
were accounted for by the fact that on one or two occasions
passing bodies of other troops necessitated a temporary cessation
of carrying operations.

Col. Burstall, Director of Artillery at the Camp, visited the
work during the morning and expressed his astonishment at the
progress effected. Ordinarily it is a good day's work to throw a
bridge of this class across a three-hundred foot stream. Col. G.
F. Maunsell, Director General of Engineering Service in Canada,
who is attached to headquarters at Ottawa, also paid close
attention to the task and was vastly pleased with the result.
Col. Morrison, Ottawa, of the Artillery Service, hurried a gun
across the bridge when completed, establishing its efficiency at
once. Without doubt the brother officers of Major Lindsay, in
all branches of the service, were extremely gratified at the
efficiency and despatch of the men making up the Royal Canadian
Engineers at the big camp.

Of course, the railway problem of moving the thousand or more
troop trains which were rushing from all parts of Canada to
Valcartier was a huge one. In this they had to cope with the
great quantity of supplies and equipment which was daily
forwarded. At Valcartier it was necessary for the Canadian
Northern to form a loop for the rapid handling of these trains so
that a constant stream of trains was kept continually moving in
both directions without interruption.

Great hardships and inconveniences resulted in many cases from
the lack of proper equipment. It was colder down in Quebec than
in many other parts of the Dominion and a great many men were
without sufficient blankets to keep them warm. Uniforms were
scarce and army shoes fit for the work of drills and maneuvers
even scarcer. Gradually, however, these deficiencies were
supplied, recruits began to show amazing progress in the art of
soldiering and little by little the great camp lost its motley
appearance and became an efficient military organization in which
rigid discipline and high efficiency prevailed. In six weeks
Valcartier's 30,000 were ready, ready for England and the final
polish which was to fit them for the test of battle. They could
even have been sent to the front. It seemed that this was not
yet necessary.

THE CANADIAN EXPEDITIONARY FORCE

But it was decided that the time had come for this great body of
troops to leave. The original plan of sending a division of
22,500 men was supplemented by the dispatch of the remaining
7,500 as a reserve to prevent the delay in getting them to the
front should the necessity arise suddenly. Members of the
government spoke of a possible second or third contingent, as
experience had taught them that it would be as easy to raise
100,000 men as it had been to raise 30,000. At a given time the
evacuation of Valcartier began. Thirty-two transports lay in the
St. Lawrence prepared to take the division to England, and soon
the first contingent began to move toward the sea. The British
fleet had cleared the ocean of all but a few scattered German
cruisers, and these were amply guarded against by the warships
which acted as escorts. And so, on the second day of October
Canada's first great pledge of loyalty left the shores of the
Dominion to go to the defense of the Empire.

On October 15th the transports reached Plymouth, England, and
were received with greatest enthusiasm. An English newspaper,
The Western Morning News, spoke of the arrival the next morning
in the following terms:

"The arrival of the fleet of transports with the first contingent
of Canadian forces on board was an event of good augury for the
future of the war. These splendid men have come, some of them
nearly 6,000 miles, to testify to the unity of the Empire and
take their share of the burden which rests upon Britons the world
over of being the stoutest champions of justice and liberty.
Even if their numbers were smaller we should hail their arrival
as a symbol of the solidarity of the British race, but they come
a large number in themselves, yet only the earnest of many more
to come if they are needed to help in defeating the imposition of
German tyranny and militancy on the world. The cheers they
raised for the old country as they steamed into the harbor
yesterday, and the splendid vigor and spirit they displayed,
showed they have both the will and the power to give a good
account of themselves at the front and prove worthy comrades of
the dauntless band of heroes who, under Sir John French, have won
the unstinted admiration of our French and Russian and Belgian
allies and, indeed of the whole world."

Then followed long weeks of hard training on Salisbury Plains.
At last they were considered fit for the front and the contingent
was transported to France. Of their conduct there, under the
baptism of fire, the following letter from General French at
Headquarters of the British Army, dated March 3d, to His Royal
Highness the Duke of Connaught, is an ample testimonial.

"The Canadian troops having arrived at the front, I am anxious to
tell your Royal Highness that they have made the best impression
on all of us.

"I made a careful inspection of the division a week after they
came to the country, and I was very much struck by the excellent
physique which was apparent throughout the ranks. The soldierly
bearing and the steadiness with which the men stood in the ranks
(on a bleak cold snowy day) was most remarkable.

"After two or three weeks preliminary education in the trenches,
attached by unit to the Third corps, they have now taken their
own line on the right of that corps as a complete division
and I have the utmost confidence in their capability to do
valuable and efficient service.

"The Princess Patricia's Regiment arrived with the 27th Division
a month earlier and since then they have performed splendid
service in the trenches.

"When I inspected them (although in pouring rain), it seemed to
me I had never seen a more magnificent looking battalion   Guards
or otherwise.

"Two or three days ago they captured a German trench with great
dash and energy and excellent results.

"I am writing these few lines because I know how deeply we are
all indebted to the untiring and devoted efforts your Royal
Highness has personally made to ensure the despatch in the most
efficient condition of this valuable contingent."

The first contingent had evacuated Valcartier only a short time
when the second contingent began to move toward the great
mobilization camp, for a similar process of training to that
followed in the first case.

When the second contingent sailed away from Canada to take its
place with the allies on the battlefields of Europe, it was
accompanied by a battery of the most complete and efficient
armored motor car rapid-fire machine guns ever devised. Indeed,
they are, so far as is known, the first motor car machine guns in
the ranks of the allies in any way comparing in point of up-to-
dateness and efficiency with those now being employed by the
German army. For up till recently Germany was the only power
which had given any attention to armored motor car machine guns.
The Germans had been experimenting for several years upon this
latest development in field weapons, and when the present war
broke out they had a type of armored motor car rapid-fire gun
that has enabled them to do a kind of work that would not be done
by any other sort of artillery. Great Britain, France and
Belgium began hurriedly experimenting, and hastily put together a
number of machine guns mounted on armored motor cars. These were
but tentative weapons, however, quickly designed to meet an
exigency for which the allies had not, like the Germans, already
prepared. It has remained for Canada to evolve a type of armored
motor car battery that is said to be the most perfect and
effective that has ever been constructed.

This ultra-modern battery of forty guns was a part of Canada's
contribution to the Empire at war. Fifteen of the guns were made
possible by the patriotic generosity of Mr. J. C. Eaton,
Toronto's well known millionaire department store owner, and were
designated as the Eaton Battery. They were completed right in
Toronto, where both the experimenting and designing were carried
on, and the cars and guns put together, under the supervision of
Mr. W. K. McNaught, C.M.G., who undertook the task of directing
the work for the government. The corps of officers and men who
man the battery had a special course of training under Capt. W.
J. Morrison at Exhibition Camp.

It is only necessary to recall to mind certain pictures that have
appeared recently of motor car machine guns in action to realize
with what deadly effectiveness these weapons may be employed in
present-day warfare. They combine all the terrific killing power
of the rapid-fire machine gun with the swift mobility and
tirelessness of the gasoline-driven motor car. Protected behind
almost impregnable steel armor plate, the driver may dash ahead
of the advancing lines and enable the gunner, almost completely
protected, to mow down the ranks of the enemy with a sweeping
stream of rifle bullets, played along a line of men much as one
would play a stream of water from a fire hose. The car may be in
motion all this time, or may stop only for an instant, so that
the enemy has no time to train its artillery upon it. It may
dash into what would be for infantry or cavalry or ordinary
gunners the jaws of death, distribute its deadly sting, and then
dash out again unscathed. Thus it may be of incalculable service
in the field. Or it may be used in a town where whole masses of
defenders may be driven back, and the streets completely cleared
by the rapid sweep of its bullets.

The armored motor car guns which were constructed in Toronto are
built on a motor truck chassis. The wheels are made of pressed
steel, and have heavy tires of solid rubber. All the rest of the
car is effectively covered with Harveyized steel plates, which
were severely tested. This armorplate was rolled in Canada by
Canadian workmen, and was made from iron ore mined in Nova
Scotia.

The distinctive fighting feature of the car is the revolving
turret of this armor-plate in which the offensive apparatus is
situated. This turret rises above the four-foot armored body at
about the center of the car. In it is the new model Maxim rapid-
fire gun, mounted very strongly on an apparatus of steel and
phosphor bronze, the invention of Canadian engineers. This gun
mount really carries the revolving turret which surrounds it, and
which revolves so easily on ball bearings that a mere touch of
the hand will move it. It can make a complete revolution, so
that the gun has a clear sweep. It can be locked by means of a
lever operated by the gunner. The gunner sits on a seat fastened
to the frame which supports the turret. The running machinery of
the car which comes below the floor, is, of course, protected by
a steel skirt, which extends around the car. The machine gun is
aimed through a loop-hole in the steel turret. It can fire from
300 to 600 rifle bullets a minute, and has an effective range of
a mile and a half. The bullets are held in a belt which runs
through the gun automatically. The armor-plate on the rear of
the car is loop-holed so that rifles can be used. Each of the
machine guns has two extra barrels, the reason for this being
that with the bullets passing through the barrel so rapidly it
naturally becomes very hot, and so must be changed frequently.

Another feature of the car is that it is protected overhead as
well as around the sides and front, and rendered immune from
shrapnel fire, missiles from aeroplanes, and dropping bullets, by
the same kind of armor-plate that is used on the sides. Thus the
drivers and all the fighting men are completely protected by
armor-plate.

Each car, in addition to its fighting equipment, carries picks,
shovels, wire rope, repair tools and provisions. Attached to the
battery are two workshop cars, with turning lathes and repair
machines driven by motor spare parts, etc. These stay behind the
firing line. Each car carries a complement of five men,
including the two men who drive and the gunner who operates the
machine gun. The extra two ride in the rear and may use rifles
through the loop-holes. But there is no real specialization, for
each man must be competent not only as a soldier but as a
chauffeur, machinist and gunner. If there is only one man left
in the car, he must be able to operate the machine gun, run the
car, and make repairs if necessary. And he must be a man who can
keep his head, observe intelligently, and plan for himself and
his regiment. Those in charge of the recruiting for the Eaton
Battery expressed themselves as well pleased with the type of men
secured. Many had seen service before; there were several expert
telegraphers, several expert signalers, and one an ex-lieutenant
in the British navy.

POLITICAL EFFECT OF CANADA'S ACTION ON FUTURE OF DOMINION

As had been outlined in the early portion of this chapter, the
World War produced a result in the Dominion long sought by the
British government. From the position of a British Colony
independent in all but name and free to send or withhold military
aid, Canada has voluntarily advanced step by step in the
direction of stronger unification of the British Empire. In each
of the wars fought by Great Britain the part to be taken by
Canadian soldiers has received more and more formal recognition
from the Dominion government, advancing from a mere permission to
volunteer, through various stages to the actual enlistment,
equipment and dispatch of a purely Canadian Contingent under
Canadian officers and Canadian pay to the support of the British
Empire.

Though each step had been in this direction few thought that
Canada would ever take such action. It has been admitted that if
Canada herself was attacked Canadians would, of course, defend
themselves to the last. It was even admitted that aid might be
sent in case of an attack on the British Isles, as a part of the
Empire, but so far as to raise an army to take part in a campaign
in Europe seemed far beyond the range of imagination.

Notwithstanding this, however, the Dominion has made the move
without hesitation and in so doing has established a precedent
which is apt to prove of huge importance in the future history of
the Dominion.

Great Britain's enemies must consider not merely a war on Great
Britain but a war on the British Empire, for Canada as well as
Australia, India, South Africa and Egypt, having once sent aid
could not again refuse it and make their position tenable. The
Empire now presents a solid front to the world and her strength
is vastly increased hy the loyalty and devotion of the Overseas
Dominions.

This military unity must also produce results in other directions
tending toward a closer union between the Dominion and the Mother
country. We venture to predict that the future will witness a
strengthening of the bonds of loyalty, of commercial and
educational ties without the least abatement of the complete
autonomy enjoyed by the great Dominion.



*** End of this LibraryBlog Digital Book "A History of the Nations and Empires Involved and a Study of the Events Culminating in the Great Conflict" ***

Copyright 2023 LibraryBlog. All rights reserved.