| By Author | [ A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z | Other Symbols ] |
| By Title | [ A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z | Other Symbols ] |
| By Language |
|
Download this book: [ ASCII ] Look for this book on Amazon Tweet |
Title: Bismarck: some secret pages of his history (Vol. 1 of 3)
Author: Busch, Moritz
Language: English
As this book started as an ASCII text book there are no pictures available.
*** Start of this LibraryBlog Digital Book "Bismarck: some secret pages of his history (Vol. 1 of 3)" ***
This book is indexed by ISYS Web Indexing system to allow the reader find any word or number within the document.
OF HIS HISTORY (VOL. 1 OF 3) ***
Transcriber's note: Italic font is indicated by _underscores_.
Bolded and underlined words are indicated by =equals=.
BISMARCK
SOME SECRET PAGES OF HIS HISTORY
[Illustration]
BISMARCK
SOME SECRET PAGES OF HIS HISTORY
BEING A DIARY KEPT BY
DR. MORITZ BUSCH
DURING TWENTY-FIVE YEARS OFFICIAL AND PRIVATE
INTERCOURSE WITH THE GREAT CHANCELLOR
_IN THREE VOLUMES_
VOL. I
=London=
MACMILLAN AND CO., LIMITED
NEW YORK: THE MACMILLAN COMPANY
1898
_All rights reserved_
RICHARD CLAY AND SONS, LIMITED,
LONDON AND BUNGAY.
_Copyright in the United States of America._
NOTE
The English edition of Dr. Busch’s work which we publish to-day has
been translated from the original German text in the possession of the
publishers. A few passages have, however, been omitted as defamatory,
or otherwise unsuitable for publication. Dr. Busch contemplated
incorporating bodily in the first volume a reproduction of his earlier
work: _Prince Bismarck and his People during the Franco-German War_;
but while the many valuable additions which he made to it have been
preserved, such portions as would no longer have presented any special
interest for English readers have been considerably abridged.
PREFACE
The work which I now present to the German people contains a
complete[1] account of all the events of which I was a witness during
my intercourse of over twenty years with Prince Bismarck and his
entourage. Part of it is not entirely new, as I have embodied in it
portions of the book published by me in 1878, under the title: _Prince
Bismarck and his People during the Franco-German War_. I have, however,
restored the numerous passages which it was then deemed expedient to
omit, and I have also dispensed with the many modifications by which,
at that time, certain asperities of language had to be toned down.
The bulk of the present work consists of a detailed narrative of the
whole period of my intercourse with the Prince both before and after
the French campaign. I collected and noted down all these particulars
respecting Prince Bismarck and his immediate supporters and assistants,
in the first place for my own use, and secondly as a contribution to
the character and history of the Political Regenerator of Germany.
The sole object of the diary which forms the basis of this work was
to serve as a record of the whole truth so far as I had been able to
ascertain it with my own eyes and ears. Any other object was out of
the question, as it was impossible that I could desire to deceive
myself. Subsequently, when I thought of publishing my notes, I was
fully conscious of my responsibility towards history, the interests
of which could not be promoted by material that had been coloured or
garbled for party purposes. I wished neither to be an eulogist nor a
censor. To my mind, panegyric was superfluous, and fault-finding was
for me an impossibility. A tendency to the sensational is foreign to my
nature, and I leave the pleasure to be derived from grand spectacular
shows to lovers of the theatre. I desired to record the mental and
other characteristics which our first Chancellor presented to me under
such and such circumstances, thus helping to complete, and at times to
rectify, the conception of his whole nature that has been formed in
the public mind from his political activity. The profound reverence
which I feel for the genius of the hero, and my patriotic gratitude
for his achievements, have not deterred me from communicating numerous
details which will be displeasing to many persons. These particulars,
however, are part of the historic character of the personality whom I
am describing. The gods alone are free from error, passion, and changes
of disposition. They alone have no seamy side and no contradictions.
Even the sun and moon show spots and blemishes, but notwithstanding
these they remain magnificent celestial orbs. The picture produced
out of the materials which I have here brought together may present
harsh and rough features, but it has hardly a single ignoble trait.
Its crudeness only adds to its truth to nature, its individuality, and
its clearness of outline. This figure does not float in an ethereal
atmosphere, it is firmly rooted in earth and breathes of real life,
yet it conveys a sense of something superhuman. It must furthermore be
remembered that many of the bitter remarks, such as those made previous
to March, 1890, were the result of temporary irritation, while others
were perfectly justified. The strong self-confidence manifested in
some of these utterances, and the angry expression of that need for
greater power and more liberty of action, common to all men of genius
and energetic character, arose from the consciousness that, while he
alone knew the true object to be pursued and the fitting means for its
achievement, his knowledge could not be applied because the right of
final decision on all occasions belonged by hereditary privilege to
more or less mediocre and narrow minds.
I will allow the Prince himself to answer the question as to my
authority for communicating to others without any reserve all that
I ascertained during my intercourse with him. “Once I am dead you
can tell everything you like, absolutely everything you know,” said
Prince Bismarck to me in the course of a conversation I had with him
on the 24th of February, 1879. I saw clearly in the way in which
he looked at me that, in addition to the permission I had already
received on previous occasions, he wished that I should then consider
myself entirely free and expressly released from certain former
engagements, some of which had been assumed by myself, while others
had been imposed upon me. Since then my knowledge increased owing to
his growing confidence in me, while his authorisation and the desire
that I should use what I knew to the advantage of his memory remained
undiminished. On the 21st of March, 1891, during one of my last visits
to Friedrichsruh, the Prince--apparently prompted by a notice which he
had read in the newspapers--remarked, “Little Busch (Büschlein) will
one day, long after my death, write the secret history of our time
from the best sources of information.” I answered “Yes, Prince; but it
will not be a history, properly speaking, as I am not capable of that.
Nor will it be _long_ after your death--which we naturally pray to be
deferred as long as possible--but on the contrary very soon after,
without any delay. In these corrupt times, the truth cannot be known
too soon.” The Prince made no answer, but I understood his silence
to indicate approval. Finally, in the preceding year he had affirmed
the absolutely unrestricted character of my authority. On the 15th
of March, 1890, when the measures for his dismissal were already in
progress, and he himself was engaged in packing up a variety of papers
preparatory to his journey (a work in which I was allowed to assist
him), he asked me to copy a number of important documents for him and
to retain the originals and copies in my possession. On his remarking
that I could get these documents copied, I called his attention to the
fact that a stranger might betray their contents to third parties. He
replied, “Oh, I am not afraid of that! He can if he likes! I have no
secrets amongst them--absolutely none.” That statement, “I have no
secrets,” gave me liberty, at least for a later time, to publish those
State papers the contents of which I had hitherto kept secret, as he
must unquestionably have known better than I or the rest of the world
who may have held other views on the subject.
So far respecting the essential point. That he whom I honour as the
first of men sanctioned my undertaking is entirely sufficient for me.
I do not ask whether others give it their blessing. The great majority
of those referred to have since departed from this life and taken
their places in the domain of history, where the claim for indulgent
treatment is no longer valid. Those who are still with us may believe
me when I assure them that in now publishing these pages I have no
thought of causing them pain or of injuring them in any way. I simply
consider that I am not at liberty to preserve silence on those matters
which may prove unpleasant to them in view both of my own duty to tell
the whole truth, and of the desire expressed by the Chancellor (to
whom I still feel myself bound in obedience) that nothing should be
concealed. The diplomatic world, in particular, must be represented
here as it really is. In that respect this book may be described as a
mirror for diplomatists.
I must leave the reader to form his own opinion as to my capacity
for observation and the discovery of the truth. I may, however, be
allowed to say that several long journeys in America and the East, a
lengthy tour in Schleswig-Holstein during the Danish rule, undertaken
for the purpose of reconnoitring that country, and a period of rather
confidential intercourse with the Augustenburg Court at Kiel were
calculated to sharpen my wits. A mission which I filled at Hanover
during the year of transition, and, above all, my position in the
Foreign Office in Berlin and the intimate relations in which I stood
towards its Chief during the war with France, together with the
renewal of that intercourse from 1877 onwards, gave me exceptional
opportunities of developing both my memory and power of observation.
For several years I was acquainted with everything that went on in the
Central Bureau of the German Foreign Office, and later, in addition to
what I ascertained through the confidence of the Prince, I obtained not
a little information from Lothar Bucher which remained a secret, not
only for private persons, but often for high officials of the Ministry.
The diary on which my work is based, and which is often reproduced
literally, gives the truest possible account of the events and
expressions which I have personally seen and heard in the presence
and immediate vicinity of the Prince. The latter is everywhere the
leading figure around which all the others are grouped. The task I
set myself, as a close observer and chronicler who conscientiously
sifted his facts, was to give a true account of what I had been
commissioned to do as the Prince’s Secretary in connection with press
matters, and to describe how he and his entourage conducted themselves
during the campaign in France, how he lived and worked, the opinions
he expressed at the dinner and tea table, and on other occasions,
respecting persons and things of that time, what he related of his
past experiences, and finally, after our return from the great war,
what I ascertained respecting the progress of diplomatic negotiations
from the despatches which were then exchanged and of which I was at
liberty to make use either immediately or at a later period. I was
assisted in the fulfilment of this task by my faculty of concentration,
which my reverence for the Prince and the practice which I had in the
course of my official duties rendered gradually more intense, and
by a memory which although not naturally above the average was also
developed by constant exercise to such a degree that in a short time
it enabled me to retain all the main points of long explanations and
stories, both serious and humorous, from the Chancellor’s lips almost
literally, until such time as I could commit them to paper--that is to
say, unless anything special intervened, a mishap which I was usually
able to avert. The particulars here given were accordingly, almost
without exception, written down within an hour after the conversations
therein referred to occurred. For the most part they were jotted down
immediately on small slips of paper, only the points and principal
catchwords being noted, but which made it easy, however, to complete
the whole entry later on.
This sharp ear and faithful memory, joined with a quick eye, stood me
in good stead in the years of welcome service which I undertook as a
private individual for the Prince. To these and to the habit of putting
all that I had experienced, seen, and heard in black on white without
delay, I owe the accurate accounts of the memorable conversation of the
11th of April, 1877, of the visit to Varzin and the statements made by
the Chancellor on that occasion, as well as the long list of detailed
reports of pregnant and characteristic conversations that I had with
him from the year 1878 up to 1890 in the palace and garden at Berlin
when, at times of crisis or under other circumstances, I was either
invited by the Prince or called on him without invitation for the
purpose of obtaining news for the _Grenzboten_ or foreign newspapers.
I kept up the same habit of committing everything of moment to paper
during my various visits of shorter or longer duration between the
years 1883 and 1889 to Friedrichsruh, where in the year last mentioned
I was engaged for several weeks in arranging the Prince’s private
letters and other documents. This custom also served me well in that
ever memorable week in March, 1890, when I spent some of the darkest
days of that period in the Prince’s immediate vicinity, nor did it fail
me when I again greeted him in the Sachsenwald in 1891 and 1893, and
was able to convince myself that in the interval his confidence in me
had as little diminished as had my loyalty towards him.
Whoever is familiar with the style in which the Prince was accustomed
to express his thoughts when in the company of his intimate associates
will be at once impressed with the genuineness of the instructions,
conversations and anecdotes communicated in the following pages. He
will find them almost without exception literally reproduced. In the
anecdotes and stories, in particular, he will nearly always observe
the characteristic ellipses, the unexpressed pre-suppositions, and
the manner in which the Prince was apt to jump from point to point
in his narratives, reminding one of the style of the old ballads. He
will also at times note a humorous vein running through the Prince’s
remarks and frequently become conscious of a thread of semi-naïve self
irony. All these features were characteristic of the Chancellor’s
manner of speaking. It is therefore hardly necessary for me to add
that my reports, with all their roughness and sturdy ruggedness, are
photographs that have not been retouched. In other words, I believe
that I have not only been quick to observe, but I also feel that I
have not intentionally omitted anything that was worth reproducing. I
have neither blurred any features nor brought others into too sharp
relief. I have put in no high lights, and above all I have added
nothing of my own, nor tried to secure a place in history for my own
wisdom by palming it off as Bismarck’s. Any omissions that now remain
(there can hardly be more than a dozen in all of any importance) are
indicated by dots or dashes. In cases where I have not quite understood
a speaker, attention is called to the fact. Should any contradiction
be discovered between earlier and later statements _my_ memory must
not be held responsible for them. If I am blamed for the fragmentary
character of my recital then all memoirs must be rejected. If I am
reproached with not having produced a work of art, I believe I have
already made it sufficiently clear that I never intended anything of
the kind. I desired, on the contrary, so far as it was in my power, to
serve the truth, and that alone. Nevertheless, my work may not only
be utilised by historians, but may also possibly inspire a dramatist
or a poet. Such a writer must, however, be no sentimentalist, and no
idealist. It would be wise for him and for others to let themselves
be guided by some counsels of experience which will be useful as a
warning against certain misunderstandings both as to the sources of
my information and the degree of my credulity. These counsels have
always been present to my mind, although, perhaps, through a sense of
politeness towards the public, or even, it may be, a real confidence
in their common sense, I have rarely thought it necessary to call
attention to the fact. This advice I propose to repeat here in a
general form and without any special application. In the first place,
then, there are people who sometimes really believe that they have
actually said or done that which it was their duty to say or do in
certain circumstances. Others, again, frequently leave their hearers
to judge whether their remarks are meant to be sarcastic or serious.
Furthermore, _inter pocula_ and in foraging for news, the meanings
of words must not be taken in altogether too literal a sense, if one
does not wish to make a fool of himself. Although truth may be found
in the bowl, it usually contains more alcohol than accuracy; and the
scribblers of the press very often thoughtlessly accept appearances for
realities when they come from “well-informed circles.” Finally, even
those who wilfully mislead serve the truth in so far as they enable the
experienced to detect their falsehood.
A good deal of what I report and describe will appear to many persons
trivial and external. My view of the matter, however, is this. The
trifles with which the prætor does not trouble himself often illustrate
the character of a man or his temper for the time being more clearly
than fine speeches or great exploits. Now and then very unimportant
occurrences and situations have been, as it were, the spark which
lit up the mind and revealed a whole train of new and fruitful ideas
pregnant with great consequences. In this connection I may recall the
accidental, and apparently insignificant, origin of many epoch-making
inventions and discoveries, such as the fall of an apple from a tree
that gave Newton the first impulse towards his theory of gravitation,
the greatest discovery of the eighteenth century; the steam from
the boiling kettle which raised its lid and ultimately led to the
transformation of the world by the locomotive; the brilliant reflection
of the sun on a tin vessel which transported Jacob Boehme into a
transcendental vision; and the spot of grease upon our table-cloth at
Ferrières which formed the starting-point of one of Prince Bismarck’s
most remarkable conversations. The morning hours affect nervous
constitutions differently to the evening, and changes of weather
depress or raise the spirits of persons subject to rheumatism. Indeed
it must be remembered that learned theories have been formed which,
expressed in a plain and direct way, amount roughly to this--that a man
is what he eats. However odd that may sound, we really cannot say how
far such ideas are wrong. Finally, it appears to me that everything is
of interest and should receive attention which has any relation to the
prominent central figure of the great movement which resulted in the
political regeneration of our country--to that powerful personality
who, like the angel mentioned in the Scriptures, stirred the stagnant
pool, and gave health and life after the lethargy and decay of
centuries. I followed the Chancellor’s career with the eyes of a future
generation. At great epochs trifles appear smaller than they actually
are. In later decades and centuries the contrary is the case. The great
events of the past bulk still larger in men’s minds, while things which
were regarded as unimportant become full of significance. It is then
often a matter for regret that it is impossible to form as clear and
lifelike a picture of a personality or an event as one could wish for
want of valuable material originally cast aside as of no account. There
was no eye to see and no hand to collect and preserve those materials
while it was yet time. Who would not now be glad to have fuller
details respecting Luther in the great days and hours of his life?
In a hundred years the memory of Prince Bismarck will take a place in
the minds of our people next to that occupied by the Wittenberg doctor.
The liberator of our political life from dependence upon foreigners
will stand by the side of the reformer who freed our consciences from
the oppression of Rome--the founder of the German State by the side
of him who created German Christianity. Our Chancellor already holds
this place in the hearts of many of his countrymen; his portrait adorns
their walls, and they inspire the growing generation with the reverence
which they themselves feel. These will be followed by the masses, and
therefore I imagine I may safely take the risk of being told that I
have preserved, not only the pearls, but also the shells in which they
were found.
Many of the Chancellor’s expressions respecting the French may be
regarded as unfair and even occasionally inhuman. It must not be
forgotten, however, that ordinary warfare is calculated to harden the
feelings, and that Gambetta’s suicidal campaign, conducted with all
the passionate ardour of his nature, the treacherous tactics of his
franctireurs, and the bestiality of his Turcos, was bound to raise a
spirit in our camp in which leniency and consideration could have no
part. Of course, in reproducing and in adding other and still more
bitter instances of this feeling, now that all these things have long
ago passed away, there can be no intention to hurt any one’s feelings.
They are merely vivid contributions to the history of the campaign,
denoting the momentary temper of the Chancellor, who was at that time
sorely tried and deeply wounded by these and other incidents.
I trust my reasons for including a number of newspaper articles will
commend themselves to the reader I do so in the first place to show the
gradual development and change which certain political ideas underwent,
and the forms which they assumed at various times. Furthermore the
greater part of them were directly inspired by Prince Bismarck, and
some were even dictated by him. By mentioning the latter articles I
hope to do the newspapers in question a pleasure in so far as they will
now learn that they once had the honour of having the most eminent
statesman of the century as a contributor. All these articles furnish
material for forming an opinion upon the journalistic activity of the
Prince, which hitherto only Wagener of the _Kreuzzeitung_, Zitelmann,
the Prince’s amanuensis during the years he spent as Ambassador at
Frankfurt, and Lothar Bucher were in a position to do. On the 22nd
of January, 1871, the Chancellor himself remarked, referring to the
importance of the press for historians: “One learns more from the
newspapers than from official despatches, as, of course, Governments
use the press in order frequently to say more clearly what they
really mean. One must, however, know all about the connections of the
different papers.” This knowledge will in great part be found in the
present work.
The reason for reproducing certain portions of my previous writings
in this book is that they are essential for the purpose of completing
the character portrait given in the diary. Without them it would
be deficient in some parts, and unintelligible in others. The
reproductions referred to are in almost every instance considerably
altered and supplemented with additional matter, and they now occupy a
more suitable position in the work than before.
MORITZ BUSCH.
LEIPZIG, _July 30, 1898_.
CONTENTS
CHAPTER I
PAGE
MY APPOINTMENT AS AN OFFICIAL IN THE FOREIGN OFFICE, AND MY
FIRST AUDIENCE WITH BISMARCK--WORK AND OBSERVATIONS UP
TO THE OUTBREAK OF THE WAR WITH FRANCE 1
CHAPTER II
DEPARTURE OF THE CHANCELLOR FOR THE SEAT OF WAR--I FOLLOW
HIM, AT FIRST TO SAARBRÜCKEN--JOURNEY FROM THERE TO THE
FRENCH FRONTIER--THE FOREIGN OFFICE FLYING COLUMN 64
CHAPTER III
FROM THE FRONTIER TO GRAVELOTTE 76
CHAPTER IV
COMMERCY--BAR LE DUC--CLERMONT EN ARGONNE 103
CHAPTER V
WE TURN TOWARDS THE NORTH--THE CHANCELLOR OF THE CONFEDERATION
AT REZONVILLE--THE BATTLE AND BATTLEFIELD OF BEAUMONT 126
CHAPTER VI
SEDAN--BISMARCK AND NAPOLEON AT DONCHERY 141
CHAPTER VII
FROM THE MEUSE TO THE MARNE 163
CHAPTER VIII
BISMARCK AND FAVRE AT HAUTE-MAISON--A FORTNIGHT IN ROTHSCHILD’S
CHÂTEAU 191
CHAPTER IX
THE JOURNEY TO VERSAILLES--MADAME JESSE’S HOUSE, AND OUR LIFE
THERE 227
CHAPTER X
AUTUMN DAYS AT VERSAILLES 235
CHAPTER XI
THIERS AND THE FIRST NEGOTIATIONS FOR AN ARMISTICE AT VERSAILLES 274
CHAPTER XII
GROWING DESIRE FOR A DECISION IN VARIOUS DIRECTIONS 310
CHAPTER XIII
REMOVAL OF THE ANXIETY RESPECTING THE BAVARIAN TREATY IN THE
REICHSTAG--THE BOMBARDMENT FURTHER POSTPONED 330
CHAPTER XIV
THE PROSPECTS OUTSIDE PARIS IMPROVE 373
CHAPTER XV
CHAUDORDY AND THE TRUTH--OFFICERS OF BAD FAITH--FRENCH
GARBLING--THE CROWN PRINCE DINES WITH THE CHIEF 392
CHAPTER XVI
FIRST WEEK OF THE BOMBARDMENT 427
CHAPTER XVII
LAST WEEKS BEFORE THE CAPITULATION OF PARIS 460
CHAPTER XVIII
DURING THE NEGOTIATIONS RESPECTING THE CAPITULATION OF PARIS 492
CHAPTER XIX
FROM GAMBETTA’S RESIGNATION TO THE CONCLUSION OF THE PRELIMINARIES
OF PEACE 553
BISMARCK
SOME SECRET PAGES OF HIS HISTORY
CHAPTER I
MY APPOINTMENT AS AN OFFICIAL IN THE FOREIGN OFFICE, AND MY FIRST
AUDIENCE WITH BISMARCK--WORK AND OBSERVATIONS UP TO THE OUTBREAK OF
THE WAR WITH FRANCE
On February 1st, 1870, while living in Leipzig and engaged in literary
work, I received--quite unexpectedly--from Dr. Metzler, Secretary in
the Foreign Office of the North German Confederation, who was at that
time occupied principally with press matters and with whom I had been
in communication since 1867, a short note requesting me to come to
Berlin in order to have a talk with him. On my arrival I ascertained,
to my great surprise, that Dr. Metzler had recommended me to Herr von
Keudell, Councillor of Embassy, who was then in charge of personal and
finance matters in the Foreign Office, for a confidential position
under the Chancellor of the Confederation, which he, Metzler himself,
had previously held, and in which my chief duty would be to carry out
the instructions of the Chancellor in press matters. I was to be in
immediate communication with the Chancellor. My position for the time
being would be what was called “diätarisch,” that is to say without
any claim to a pension and without a title. Further details were to be
arranged with Herr von Keudell on his return from his honeymoon. For
the moment I was only required to declare my readiness in general to
accept the offer, and later on I was to formulate my wishes and lay
them in writing before Herr von Keudell.
This I did in a letter dated February 4th, in which I emphasised as
the most important condition that I should be entirely independent of
the Literary or Press Bureau, and that if my capacity for the position
should not prove equal to the expectations formed of it I should not be
appointed an official in that department. On February 19th I heard from
Metzler that my conditions had been in the main agreed to, and that no
objections had been raised with regard to that respecting the Literary
Bureau. I was to discuss the further arrangements with Keudell himself,
and to be prepared to enter upon my duties at once. On February 21st I
had a satisfactory interview with the latter, in the course of which
we came to an understanding as to terms. On the 23rd I was informed by
Keudell that the Chancellor had agreed to my conditions, and that he
had arranged for me to call upon Bismarck on the following evening.
Next day I took the official oath, and on the same evening, shortly
after 8 o’clock, I found myself in the presence of the Chancellor,
whom I had only seen at a distance once before, namely, from the Press
Gallery of the Reichstag. Now, two years later, I saw him again as
he sat in a military uniform at his writing table with a bundle of
documents before him. I was quite close to him this time, and felt as
if I stood before the altar.
He gave me his hand, and motioned me to take a seat opposite him. He
began by saying that although he desired to have a talk with me, he
must for the moment content himself with just making my acquaintance,
as he had very little time to spare. “I have been kept in the Reichstag
to-day longer than I expected by a number of lengthy and tiresome
speeches; then I have here (pointing to the documents before him)
despatches to read, also as a rule not very amusing; and at 9 o’clock
I must go to the palace, and that is not particularly entertaining
either. What have you been doing up to the present?” I replied that I
had edited the _Grenzboten_, an organ of practically National Liberal
views, which I left, however, on one of the proprietors showing a
disposition to adopt a Progressist policy on the Schleswig-Holstein
question. The Chancellor: “Yes, I know that paper.” I then went on to
say that I had at the instance of the Government taken a position at
Hanover, where I assisted the Civil Commissioner, Herr von Hardenberg,
in representing Prussian interests in the local press during the year
of transition. I had subsequently, on instructions received from the
Foreign Office, written a number of articles for different political
journals, amongst others for the _Preussische Jahrbuecher_, to which
I had also previously contributed. Bismarck: “Then you understand our
politics and the German question in particular. I intend to get you
to write notes and articles for the papers from such particulars and
instructions as I may give you, for of course I cannot myself write
leaders. You will also arrange for others doing so. At first these
will naturally be by way of trial. I must have some one especially
for this purpose, and not merely occasional assistance as at present,
especially as I also receive very little useful help from the Literary
Bureau. But how long do you remain here?” and as he looked at his
watch I thought he desired to bring the conversation to a close. I
replied that I had arranged to remain in Berlin. Bismarck: “Ah, very
well then, I shall have a long talk with you one of these days. In the
meantime see Herr von Keudell, and also Herr Bucher, Councillor of
Embassy, who is well acquainted with all these matters.” I understood
that I was now at liberty to go, and was about to rise from my seat
when the Chancellor said: “Of course you know the question which was
before the House to-day?” I replied in the negative, explaining that
I had been too busy to read the reports in the newspapers. “Well,” he
said, “it was respecting the admission of Baden into the North German
Confederation. It is a pity that people cannot manage to wait, and
that they treat everything from a party standpoint, and as furnishing
opportunities for speech-making. Disagreeable business to have to
answer such speeches, not to say such twaddle! These eloquent gentlemen
are really like ladies with small feet. They force them into shoes that
are too tight for them, and push them under our noses on all occasions
in order that we may admire them. It is just the same with a man who
has the misfortune to be eloquent. He speaks too often and too long.
The question of German unity is making good progress; but it requires
time--one year perhaps, or five, or indeed possibly even ten years. I
cannot make it go any faster, nor can these gentlemen either. But they
have no patience to wait.” With these words he rose, and again shaking
hands I took leave of him for the time.
I was thus enlisted in the ranks of Bismarck’s fellow-workers. An
opportunity for the general instructions which he proposed to give me
never occurred. I had to enter upon my work at once. Next evening I
was twice called in to him to receive instructions for articles. Later
on I sometimes saw him still more frequently, and occasionally in the
forenoon also--now and then as often as five or even eight times in one
day. At these interviews I had to take good care to keep my ears well
open, and to note everything with the closest attention, so that two
pieces of information or two sets of instructions should not get mixed
up. However, I soon found myself equal to this unusually trying task,
as Bismarck’s opinions and instructions were always given in a striking
form, which it was easy to remember. Besides, he was accustomed to
repeat his principal points in other words. Then, again, I made myself
all ears, so that, through practice, I gradually succeeded in retaining
long sentences, and even whole speeches, practically without omissions,
until I had an opportunity of committing them to paper. Bismarck used
also to send me, by one of the messengers, documents and newspapers
marked with the letter V and a cross, signs which indicated “Press
Instructions.” When I found such papers on my desk I looked them
through, and subsequently obtained the Chancellor’s directions with
regard to them. Furthermore, when I had anything of importance to ask
or to submit for his approval, I was allowed to call upon him without
previous invitation. I thus practically occupied the position of a
“Vortragender Rath” (_i.e._, an official having direct access to the
Chancellor), excepting only that I had neither the title nor the sense
of infallibility common to all such Councillors.
The newspapers to which the articles thus prepared were supplied were
the _Norddeutsche Allgemeine Zeitung_, then edited by Brass, which was
the semi-official organ, properly speaking; the _Spenersche Zeitung_,
and the _Neue Preussische Zeitung_. I also frequently sent letters to
the _Kölnische Zeitung_, expressing the Chancellor’s views. During the
first months of my appointment Metzler, who had previously contributed
to that paper, served as the medium for communicating these articles.
Subsequently they were sent direct to the editor, and were always
accepted without alteration. In addition to this work I saw one of the
writers from the Literary Bureau every forenoon, and gave him material
which was sent to the _Magdeburger Zeitung_ and some of the smaller
newspapers; while other members of his department furnished portions of
it to certain Silesian, East Prussian, and South German organs. I had
similar weekly interviews with other, and somewhat more independent,
writers. Amongst these I may mention Dr. Bock, who supplied articles
to the _Augsburger Allgemeine Zeitung_, and a number of papers in
Hanover; Professor Constantine Roeszler, formerly Lecturer at Jena,
who subsequently assisted Richthofen at Hamburg and afterwards edited
the _Staatsanzeiger_; and finally Herr Heide, who had previously
been a missionary in Australia and was at that time working for the
_North German Correspondence_, which had been founded with a view to
influencing the English press.
In addition to this my duties also included the reading of masses of
German, Austrian and French newspapers, which were laid upon my table
three times daily, and the management and purchase of books for the
Ministerial Library. It will therefore be easily understood that while
the Chancellor remained in Berlin I had more than enough to attend
to. I was engaged not only on week-days, but also on Sundays, from
9 in the morning until 3 in the afternoon, and again from 5 till 10
and sometimes 11 o’clock at night. Indeed, it sometimes occurred that
a messenger from the Chancellor came at midnight to call me away
from a party of friends or out of my bed in order to receive pressing
instructions.
I reproduce here in the form in which they appear in my diary the
particulars of a number of more or less characteristic statements and
instructions which I received from the Chancellor at that period. They
show that the statesman whom I had the honour to serve thoroughly
understood the business of journalism, and they further throw a welcome
light upon many of the political events of that time.
Some days after the debate in the Reichstag respecting the entrance
of Baden into the North German Confederation, to which reference has
already been made, and while the matter was still occupying both the
attention of the press and of the Chancellor, I find the following
entry among my notes:--
_February 27th, evening._--Called to see the Minister. I am to
direct special attention to the nonsense written by the National
Liberal Press on the last sitting of the Reichstag. The Chancellor
said:--“The National Liberals are not a united party. They are merely
two fractions. Amongst their leaders Bennigsen and Forckenbeck are
sensible men, and there are also a couple of others. Miguel is inclined
to be theatrical. Loewe, with his deep chest notes, does everything
for effect. He has not made a single practical remark. Lasker is
effective in destructive criticism, but is no politician. It sounded
very odd to hear him declare that they were now too much occupied with
Rome in Paris and Vienna to interfere with us in connection with the
Baden affair. If it were possible to get those of really Progressist
views to act independently, it would make the situation much clearer.
Friedenthal’s speech was excellent. I must ask you also to emphasise
the following points:--1. The unfairness of the _National Zeitung_
in repeating misunderstandings which I explained and disposed of in
my speech. 2. The make-believe support given to my policy by men who
were elected for the express purpose of rendering me real assistance.
3. That such politicians either cannot see or intentionally overlook
my principal motive, viz., that to admit Baden into the Confederation
would bring pressure to bear upon Bavaria, and that it is therefore a
hazardous step. Attention should be paid to the situation in France,
so that nothing should be done which might endanger the Constitutional
evolution of that country, an evolution hitherto promoted in every way
from Berlin, as it signifies peace for us. The French Arcadians” (the
party that supported Napoleon through thick and thin) “are watching the
course of events in Germany, and waiting their opportunity. Napoleon is
now well disposed to us, but he is very changeable. We could now fight
France and beat her too, but that war would give rise to five or six
others; and while we can gain our ends by peaceful means, it would be
foolish, if not criminal, to take such a course. Events in France may
take a warlike or revolutionary turn, which would render the present
brittle metal there more malleable. There was an important point in my
speech, which, however, these good people failed to recognise. That was
the intimation that in certain circumstances we should pay no regard
either to the views of Austria respecting South Germany as a whole, nor
to those of France, who objected to the admission of any single South
German State into the North German Confederation. That was a feeler.
Further measures can only be considered when I know how that hint has
been received in Vienna and Paris.”
_March 1st._--Count Bismarck wishes me to get the following inserted in
the South German newspapers:--“The speech of von Freydorf, the Grand
Ducal Minister, in the Baden Diet on the Jurisdiction Treaty with the
North German Confederation, has been inspired by an absolutely correct
view of the situation. Particular attention should be paid to that
portion in which the Foreign Minister of the Grand Duchy declared the
policy of Baden to be in perfect accord with that of the Chancellor
of the North German Confederation, and also to the manner in which he
defined the position of the South German States towards the Treaty of
Prague. Through the dissolution of the old Germanic Confederacy, those
States have, as a matter of fact, become sovereign States. That treaty
_gives them liberty_ (to me: Underline those words!) to form a new
union amongst themselves, a South German Confederation, by means of
which they may take measures for bringing about a national union with
the united North. That treaty involves no prescription, engagement or
compulsion whatever to adopt such a course. Any insinuation of that
kind with respect to States whose sovereignty has been emphatically
recognised would be something absolutely unheard of. In the Swiss war
of the Sonderbund, and also in the late American civil war, States
were obliged against their own will to remain within a union which
they had previously joined, but no one ever saw a sovereign State or
Prince required to enter into confederation against their own judgment.
The South German States, including half of Hesse, have unquestionably
the right--acting either in concert or singly--to endeavour, in
co-operation with the North, to advance the cause of national unity.
The question is whether the present is a good time to choose. The
Chancellor of the North German Confederation answers this question
in the negative. But it is only possible by the most wilful garbling
of his expressions to maintain that his final aim is not the union of
Germany. Partition of German national territory! Calumny! Not a single
word of the Chancellor’s justifies that conclusion. As Herr Lasker
has not spoken at the instance of the Government of Baden, although
his speech would almost convey the impression that he was a Minister
of that State, it is difficult to understand where he got that idea.
Perhaps it was merely the conceit of the honourable member that led him
to make such a statement.”
_March 3rd._--The Minister wishes the _Kölnische Zeitung_ first, and
afterwards the South German newspapers, to advocate the organisation
into one great party of all men of national views in the South German
States, so as to get rid of the particularism which had hitherto
divided them. “The matter lies much more in their hands,” he said,
“than in those of the North German National Liberals. The North
German Governments will do all that is possible in a reasonable way
in support of the efforts of South Germany. But the South Germans who
wish to unite with us must act together and not singly. I want you to
reiterate this point again and again. The article must then be printed
in the _Spenersche Zeitung_ and in other newspapers to which we have
access, and it should be accompanied by expressions of deep regret at
the particularism which prevents the union of the various Southern
parties that gravitate towards North Germany. A union of the four
Southern States is an impossibility, but there is nothing to hinder the
formation of a Southern League composed of men of national sentiments.
The National party in Baden, the German party in Würtemberg, and the
Bavarian Progressist party are merely different names for the same
thing. These groups have to deal with different Governments, and some
persons maintain that they must consequently adopt different tactics.
Their aims are nevertheless identical in all important points. With
the best will in the world those three parties, while acting singly,
produce but a slight impression. If they desire to go ahead and become
an important factor in public affairs, they must combine to form
a great and homogeneous South German National party which must be
reckoned with on both sides of the Main.”
Read over to the Minister, at his request, an article which he
ordered yesterday and for which he gave me the leading ideas. It was
to be dated from Paris, and published in the _Kölnische Zeitung_. He
said:--“Yes, you have correctly expressed my meaning. The composition
is good both as regards its reasoning and the facts which it contains.
But no Frenchman thinks in such logical and well-ordered fashion, yet
the letter is understood to be written by a Frenchman. It must contain
more gossip, and you must pass more lightly from point to point. In
doing so you must adopt an altogether French standpoint. A Liberal
Parisian writes the letter and gives his opinion as to the position of
his party towards the German question, expressing himself in the manner
usual in statements of that kind.” (Finally Count Bismarck dictated
the greater part of the article, which was forwarded by Metzler in its
altered form to the Rhenish newspaper.)
In connection with this task the Minister said to me the day
before:--“I look at the matter in this way. A correspondent in Paris
must give his opinion of my quarrel with Lasker and the others over
the Baden question, and bring forward arguments which I did not think
it desirable to use at that time. He must say that no one could deem
it advisable in the present state of affairs in Bavaria, when the King
seems to be so well disposed, to do anything calculated on the one
hand to irritate him, and on the other to disturb the Constitutional
movement in France--which movement tended to preserve peace while it
would itself be promoted by the maintenance of peace. Those who desire
to advance the cause of liberty do not wish to go to war with us,
yet they could not swim against the stream if we took any action in
South Germany which public opinion would regard as detrimental to the
interests and prestige of France. Moreover, for the present the course
of the Vatican Council should not be interfered with, as the result for
Germany might possibly be a diversion. We must wait for these things,”
he added. “I cannot explain that to them. If they were politicians they
would see it for themselves. There are reasons for forbearance which
every one should be able to recognise; but Members of Parliament who
cross-question the Government do not usually regard that as their duty.”
The second portion of the article which the Minister dictated runs as
follows:--“Whoever has had an opportunity of observing here in Paris
how difficult the birth of the present Constitutional movement has
been, what obstacles this latest development of French political life
has to overcome if it is to strike deep roots, and how powerful are
the influences of which the guiding spirit only awaits some pretext
for smothering the infant in its cradle, will understand with what
anxiety we watch the horizon abroad and what a profoundly depressing
effect every little cloud there produces upon our hopes of a secure
and peaceful development of the new _régime_. It is the ardent wish of
every sincere adherent of the Constitutional cause in France that there
should now be no diversion abroad, no change on the horizon of foreign
politics, which might serve if not as a real motive at least as a
pretext for crying down the youthful Constitutionalism of France, while
at the same time directing public attention to foreign relations. We
believe that the Emperor is in earnest, but his immediate _entourage_,
and the creatures whom he has to employ, are watching anxiously for
some event which shall enable them to compel the Sovereign to abandon
a course which they resent. These people are very numerous, and have
during the eighteen years of the Emperor’s reign grown more powerful
than is perhaps believed outside France. Whoever has any regard for
the Constitutional development of the country can only hope that no
alteration, however slight, shall occur in the foreign relations of
France to serve as a motive or pretext for that reaction which every
opponent of the Constitution is striving to bring about.”
Between the directions for these articles, which I here bring together
as they relate to the same subject, I received others, some of which I
may also reproduce.
_March 4th._--The _Boersen Zeitung_ contained an article in which it
was alleged that in Germany only nobles were considered competent to
become Ministers. This the Count sent down to me to be refuted in a
short article, expressing surprise at such a statement. “An absurd
electioneering move!” the Chancellor said. “Whoever wishes to persuade
the world that in Prussia the position of Minister is only open to the
aristocracy, and that capable commoners have absolutely no chance of
attaining to it, must have no memory and no eyes. Say that under Count
Bismarck no less than three commoners have, on his recommendation, been
appointed Ministers within a short period, namely Delbrück, Leonhard
and Camphausen. Lasker, it is true, has not yet been appointed.”
I wrote this short article immediately; but the Chancellor was not
pleased with it. “I told you expressly,” he said, “to mention the names
of Delbrück, Leonhard and Camphausen, and that their appointments were
due to my personal influence. Go straight to the point, and don’t
wander round about it in that way! That is no use! A pointless article!
They are just the cleverest of the present Ministers. The attack on
Lasker is also out of place. We must not provoke people unnecessarily.
They are right when they complain of bullying.” The reference to Lasker
consisted merely of his own words as given above.
_March 5th._--The _Vossische Zeitung_ contained a bitter attack, which
culminated in the following remark: “Exceptional circumstances--and
such must be acknowledged to exist when working men are treated to
breech-loaders, and Ministers are hanged on street lamps--cannot be
taken as a rule for the regular conduct of affairs.” The Count received
this article from the Literary Bureau of the Ministry of State (where
extracts from the newspapers were made for him), although it might well
have been withheld, as not much importance attaches to the scoldings
of “Tante Voss.” The Count sent for me, read over the passage in
question, and observed: “They speak of times when Ministers were hanged
on street lamps. Unworthy language! Reply that such a thing never
occurred in Prussia, and that there is no prospect of its occurring. In
the meantime it shows towards what condition of affairs the efforts
of that newspaper are tending, which (under the auspices of Jacoby and
Company) supplies the Progressist middle classes of Berlin with their
politics.”
Called in again later to the Count. I am to go to Geheimrath Hahn
and call his attention to the question of capital punishment, which
in view of the approaching elections should be dealt with in the
_Provinzial-Correspondenz_ in accordance with the policy of the
Government, who desire its retention. The Minister said: “I am firmly
convinced that the majority of the population is opposed to its
abolition. Were it otherwise it would of course be possible to do away
with it. It is a mere theory--the sentimentality of lawyers in the
Reichstag--a party doctrine which has no connection with the life of
the people, although its advocates are constantly referring to the
people. Tell him that, but be cautious in dealing with him. He is
somewhat conceited--bureaucratic. Do it in a diplomatic way. You must
let him think that those are his own ideas. Otherwise we shall not get
anything useful out of him. Let me know afterwards what he says.”
_March 6th._--Have seen Hahn. He is of opinion that it is yet too
early to deal with this matter. It will probably end in a compromise,
capital punishment being only retained for murder. The attitude of the
Liberals in the elections can only be influenced after the decision in
the Reichstag. In the meantime he has instructed the Literary Bureau to
refute the article in the _National Zeitung_, and to show how sterile
the present Parliament would be if it allowed the long wished for
Criminal Code to be wrecked upon this question of capital punishment.
Report this to the Minister. He is of opinion that Hahn is mistaken.
“It is necessary to act in a diplomatic way in this case,” he observed.
“One must present an appearance of determination up to the last moment;
and if one wants to secure a suitable compromise, show no disposition
to give way; besides, Hahn must have no other policy than mine. I shall
speak to Eulenburg, and get him to set Hahn straight. This must be put
down at once. We must think in good time about the elections.”
_March 7th._--Sent Brass (_Norddeutsche Allgemeine Zeitung_) an article
written by Bucher under instructions from the Minister, showing that
the majority in the Reichstag does not represent public opinion nor
the will of the people, but only the opinions and desires of the
Parliamentary party.
Called to the Count in the evening, when he said: “I want you to secure
the insertion in the press of an article somewhat to the following
effect: For some time past vague rumours of war have been current
throughout the world for which no sufficient ground exists in fact,
or can be even suggested. The explanation is probably to be sought in
Stock Exchange speculation for a fall which has been started in Paris.
Confidential whispers are going about with regard to the presence of
Archduke Albrecht in the French capital which are calculated to cause
uneasiness; and then, naturally enough, these rumours are shouted aloud
and multiplied by the windbags of the Guelph press.”
_March 11th._--The Count wants an article in the _National Zeitung_ to
be answered in this sense: “The Liberals in Parliament always identify
themselves with the people. They maintain, like Louis XIV. with his
_L’état c’est moi_, that ‘We are the People.’ There could hardly be
a more absurd piece of boasting and exaggeration. As if the other
representatives, the Conservatives in the country, and the great
numbers who belong to no party, were not also part of the nation, and
had no opinions and interests to which regard should be paid!”
_Evening._--The Minister, referring to a statement in the _Norddeutsche
Allgemeine Zeitung_, remarked: “There is much ado about the decided
attitude taken up by Beust against the Curia. According to the
report published by Brass he has expressed himself very emphatically
respecting its latest action, in a note which the Ambassador read to
the Secretary of State. That must be refuted, weakened. Do it in a
letter from Rome to the _Kölnische Zeitung_. Say: ‘We do not know if
the analysis of the despatch in question (which has made the round
of the papers, and which was first published by _The Times_) is
correct,[2] but we have reason to doubt it.’ Trautmansdorf (the Austrian
Ambassador to the Holy See) has read no note and has received no
instructions to make any positive declaration, but is on the contrary
acting in accordance with his own convictions--and it is known that he
is very clerical and not at all disposed to radical measures. He has
communicated to Cardinal Antonelli such parts of the information that
reached him from Vienna as he thought proper, and he certainly made
that communication in as considerate a form as possible. It cannot
therefore have been very emphatic.”
_Later._--Attention is to be directed, at first in a paper which has no
connection with the Government, to the prolonged sojourn of Archduke
Albrecht in Paris as a suspicious symptom. In connection with it
rumours have been circulated in London of an understanding between
France and Austria. Our papers should afterwards reproduce these hints.
_March 12th._--In the afternoon Bucher gave me the chief’s instructions
to order the Spanish newspaper, _Imparcial_. (This is of some
importance, as it doubtless indicates that even then we had a hand
in the question of electing the new King. On several occasions
subsequently I secured the insertion in non-official German papers of
translations which Bucher brought me of articles in that newspaper
against the candidature of Montpensier.)
_March 13th._--The Chancellor wishes to have it said in one of the
“remote” journals (that is, not notoriously connected with the
Government) that the Pope has paid no regard to the representations
of France and Austria respecting the principal points which should
be decided by the Council. He would not have done so even if those
representations had been expressed in a more emphatic form than they
actually were. Neither Banneville nor Trautmansdorf was inclined to
heartily defend the cause of the State against the Ultramontanes. This
disposes of the news of the _Mémorial Diplomatique_ to the effect
that at the suggestion of Count Daru the Curia has already given an
affirmative answer. That report is absolutely false, as is nearly all
the news published by the paper in question. It is much the same with
Count Beust’s note to the Papal Government. (“Quote the word ‘note,’”
added the Minister.) It was only a despatch, and, doubtless, a very
tame one.
_March 16th, evening._--Called up to the Minister, who lay on the sofa
in his study. “Here,” he said (pointing to a newspaper). “They complain
of the accumulation of labour imposed upon Parliament. Already eight
months’ hard work! That must be answered. It is true that members of
Parliament have a great deal to do, but Ministers are still worse off.
In addition to their work in the two Diets the latter have an immense
amount of business to transact for the King and the country both while
Parliament is sitting and during the recess. Moreover, members have
the remedy in their own hands. If those who do not belong to the Upper
Chamber will abstain from standing for election both to the Prussian
and the Federal Diet they will lighten their task sufficiently. They
are not obliged to sit in both Houses.”
_March 21st._--I am to call attention in the semi-official organs
to the fact that the Reichstag is discussing the Criminal Code far
too minutely and slowly. “The speakers,” observed the Count, “show
too great a desire for mere talk, and are too fond of details and
hair-splitting. If this continues the Bills will not be disposed of
in the present Session, especially as the Budget has still to be
discussed. The President might well exercise stricter control. Another
unsatisfactory feature is that so many members absent themselves from
the sittings. Our newspapers ought to publish regularly lists of such
absentees. Please see that is done.”
Called up again later and commissioned to explain in the press the
attitude of Prussia towards those Prelates who oppose the Curia in
Rome. The Chancellor said: “The newspapers express a desire that the
Government should support the German Bishops on the Council. You
should ask if those writers have formed a clear idea as to how we
should set about that task. Should Prussia perhaps send a Note to the
Council, or to Antonelli, the Papal Minister, who does not belong
to that body? or is she to secure representation in that assembly of
Prelates, and protest (of course in vain) against what she objects to?
Prussia will not desert those Bishops who do not submit themselves to
the yoke, but it is for the Prelates in the first place to maintain a
determined attitude. We cannot take preventive measures, as they would
be of no value, but it is open to us to adopt a repressive policy in
case a decision is come to in opposition to our wishes. If, after that
decision has been arrived at, it should prove to be incompatible with
the mission and interests of the State, then existing legislation, if
found inadequate, can be easily supplemented and altered. The demand
that the Prussian Government should support the more moderate Bishops
is a mere empty phrase so long as no practical means of giving effect
to it can be discovered. Moreover, the course which I now indicate will
in any case be ultimately successful, although success may not at once
be completely achieved.”
_March 25th._--The Chief wishes Klaczko’s appointment in Vienna to
be discussed. He said to me: “Beust intends in that way to revive
the Polish question. Point to the journalistic activity of that
indefatigable agitator, and to his bitter hatred both of ourselves and
Russia. Quote Rechenberg’s confidential despatch of the 2nd of March
from Warsaw, where he says that the Polish secret political societies
which are engaged at Lemberg in preparing for a revolution, with the
object of restoring Polish independence, have sent a deputation to
Klaczko congratulating him on his appointment to a position where he
is in direct communication with the Chancellor of the Empire. Send the
article first to the _Kölnische Zeitung_, and afterwards arrange for
similar articles in the provincial newspapers. We must finally see
that this reaches Reuss (the Ambassador in St. Petersburg), in order
that he may get it reproduced in the Russian press. It can also appear
in the _Kreuzzeitung_, and it must be brought up again time after time
in another form.”
_Afternoon._--Geheimrath Abeken desires me, on the instructions of the
Minister, to take note of the following document, which is apparently
based on a despatch: “It is becoming more and more difficult to
understand the attitude of the Austrian Government towards the Council.
All the organs of public opinion are on the side of the Austrian
Bishops, who are making such a dignified and decisive stand in Rome.
The reports which the Government thought well to allow the press to
publish respecting the steps which they have taken in Rome were in
harmony with this attitude. The news from Rome, however, speaks only of
the tameness and indecision with which the Government’s policy is being
carried into execution. The most contradictory accounts are now coming
in. It is said that the Austrian Ambassador has supported the action of
the French Ambassador, which is known not to have been very effective.
Expressions have been attributed to Count Beust showing that, in his
opinion, the only effectual course would be for all the Powers to
take common or collective action. On the other hand, it is asserted
that he gave a negative answer, reciting different objections, to the
proposal of another Catholic State (Bavaria) to join it in a decisive
declaration in Rome. In presence of this indecision on the part of the
Catholic Powers the Bishops will doubtless be obliged to follow their
own consciences and decide for themselves what their course of action
is to be. We are convinced however that if the Prelates themselves
resolved to make a determined stand on behalf of their consciences the
situation would immediately undergo a change in their favour, and that
ultimately no Government would desert its own Bishops even if they were
in a minority.
“Bismarck has already explained to the Prussian Ambassador in Paris
that he is prepared to support every initiative taken on the Catholic
side in the matter of the Council. He at the same time discussed the
subject with Benedetti, expressing himself in a similar sense, but in
the meantime making no positive proposal. On the other hand, he asked
incidentally whether it might not be desirable to consider in a general
conference the attitude to be adopted by the various Governments
towards the Council. Benedetti replied that such a course would only
hasten the Council’s decision. Bismarck urged that a conference might
be useful, even were it no longer possible to influence the Council,
and were the question to be considered merely how far the injurious
effects of its decisions on the peace of Church and State could be
minimised.
“Benedetti sent a report of this informal conversation to Paris,
representing it as a proposal to hold a conference. Daru replied in a
despatch which pointed out the difficulty of carrying that idea into
execution. Who should take part in the conference? Russia maintained
such an unfriendly attitude towards the Catholic Church, and Italy
was so hostile to the Curia that they could hardly join in any common
action. Spain wished to confine herself to the repression of any
eventual breach of the laws of the country, and England ignored the
official declarations of the Roman Church. Many Powers had Concordats,
while others occupied a more independent position towards the Curia,
therefore, in that respect also, an understanding would be difficult.
Finally, Daru feared that Rome, on hearing of an intended conference,
would reply with a _fait accompli_. For these reasons he declined
the proposal. He would, however, like to afford the other Powers
an opportunity of supporting the measures taken by France on her
own initiative. In case he received a negative answer to his demand
that France should be represented on the Council he would officially
communicate to the other Governments his declaration to the Secretary
of State, Cardinal Antonelli, that the rights and interests of the
State would be defended against any encroachment on the part of the
Spiritual Power, and urge them to support his action in Rome. Bismarck
thanked Daru for this communication, and said that the Government at
Berlin (when it had satisfied itself that such a course on the part of
France was calculated to promote the interests of Prussian Catholics)
would endeavour to strengthen the impression made thereby; and that
further communications were awaited with interest.
“The French Government looks forward with anxiety to the consequences
of the Council, but hesitates to take any serious and decisive
measures, and is not disposed to enter upon any common action with
the other Powers. Bray, at Munich, seemed less disinclined to such
a course. He thought a declaration might possibly be made that the
Government considered the œcumenical and authoritative character
of the Council to be affected by the promulgation of the dogma of
infallibility notwithstanding the opposition of a minority of the
Bishops, as also the legal position assured to the Prelates under
the Concordats, and that the dogma in question was to be regarded as
null and void. Bray was anxious that Austria should join in this
declaration. Beust, however, would not consent, as he believed that
such a declaration would merely induce the Council to come to an
unanimous decision which would then be binding upon the Governments. An
unequivocal attitude of any kind is not to be expected from Vienna.
“If the Catholic Governments will not take the initiative the question
remains what course the Bishops themselves will adopt. We hold to the
principle of not acting directly and in our own name with the Roman
See, while at the same time powerfully and steadfastly supporting every
effort made by the Catholics themselves, and particularly by the German
Bishops to prevent illegal changes being made in the constitution
of the Catholic Church, and to preserve both Church and State from
a disturbance of the peace. We do not find ourselves called upon to
take up a prominent attitude towards the Council; but our readiness to
support energetically every well-meant effort of the Catholic Powers,
whose duty it is to intervene in the first place, or of the Bishops
within the Council, remains unaltered.”
_Evening._--I am to refer to England and the way in which the press is
treated there. “The Liberals always appeal to English example when they
want to secure some fresh liberty for the press. Such appeals, it is
well known, rest largely upon mistaken notions. It would be desirable
to examine more closely the Bill which has just been passed for the
preservation of order in Ireland. What would public opinion in Germany,
and particularly what would the people of Berlin say, if our Government
could proceed against any of our democratic journals, even against
the most violent, according to the following provisions, and that too
without even a state of minor siege? Then quote the provisions, and
add that the Bill was carried by a large majority.”[3]
_March 28th._--The Chancellor desires that the question of the Council
should be again dealt with somewhat to the following effect: “The
press has repeatedly expressed a desire to know what position will be
taken by Prussia towards the policy of the majority of the Council,
and several proposals have been made in this connection. In our
opinion the answer to that question is to be found in the character
of Prussia as a Protestant Power. In that capacity Prussia must leave
the initiative in this matter to the Catholic Governments who are more
directly threatened. If these do not take action the question remains
what course the Bishops who form the minority in the Council will
adopt, a question which will be answered by the immediate future. If
the Catholic Governments decide to take steps against the majority of
the Council, Prussia ought to join in that action if she considers it
to be in the interests of her Catholic subjects. But it is less the
duty of Prussia than of any other State to rush into the breach.... If
the Bishops defend the constitution of their Church, their episcopal
rights, and peace between Church and State in a fearless and determined
protest against the encroachments of the Ultramontane party in the
Council, it may then be confidently hoped that the Prussian Government
will extend to them a powerful support.”
Some of the last sentences repeated almost literally the conclusion of
the document brought to me by Abeken.
_March 30th._--The Count sent down a report from Rome for use in the
press. This report says: “The tourists who visited St. Peter’s on the
22nd instant were several times disturbed by a dull noise which rolled
through the aisles like a storm, proceeding from the direction of the
Council Chamber. Those who remained a little longer saw individual
Bishops, with anxious looks, hurriedly leave the church. There had
been a terrible scene amongst the reverend fathers. The theme _de
erroribus_, which was laid before the Council about three weeks ago
and then returned to the Commission, was again being discussed in an
amended form. This discussion had now lasted five or six (eight) days.
Strossmayer criticised one of the paragraphs of the Proemium which
characterised Protestantism as the source of all the evils which now
infect the world in the forms of pantheism, materialism, and atheism.
He declared that this Proemium contained historical untruths, as the
errors of our time were much older than Protestantism. The Humanist
movement, which had been imprudently protected by the highest authority
(Pope Leo X.) was in part responsible for them. The Proemium lacked the
charity due to Protestants. (First uproar.) It was, on the contrary,
amongst Protestants that Christianity had found its most powerful
defenders, such as Leibnitz and Guizot, whose meditations he should
wish to see in the hands of every Christian. (Renewed and increased
uproar, while closed fists are shown at the speaker, and cries are
heard of ‘_Hæreticus es! Taceas! Descendas! Omnes te condemnamus!_’
and now and then ‘_Ego eum non condemno!_’) This storm also subsided,
and Strossmayer was able to proceed to another point, namely, the
question to which the Bishops referred in their protest, that is to
say, that a unanimous vote is indispensable for decisions on dogma.
Strossmayer’s remarks on this theme caused the indignation of the
majority to boil over. Cardinal Capalti interrupted him. The assembly
raged like a hurricane. After a wordy war of a quarter of an hour’s
duration between the speaker and the Legates, Strossmayer retired,
three times repeating the words: ‘_Protestor non est concilium._’ It
is worthy of note that a Congregation has been held to-day at which
the Bishop of Halifax and others are understood to have expressed
views similar to those of Strossmayer and that no attempt was made
to interrupt them. It would therefore appear as if the storm raised
against the Bishop of Bosnia were a party manœuvre with the object of
ruining the most important of the Princes of the Church.”
_March 31st._--Commissioned by the Chief to tell Zitelmann (an official
of the Ministry of State in charge of press matters) that the newspaper
extracts which his office prepares for submission to the King (through
the Minister) should be better sifted and arranged. Those that are
suitable for the King are to be gummed on to separate sheets and
detached from those that are not suitable for him. Particularistic lies
and stupidities, such as those from Kiel of the 25th and Cassel of the
28th, belong to the latter category and must not be laid before him.
If he sees that kind of thing printed in black on white he is apt to
believe it. He does not know the character of those papers.
I am to secure the insertion in the press of the following particulars,
which have reference to a paragraph in a newspaper which the Minister
did not name to me. It is a well-known fact that Howard, the English
representative at Munich, although he is married to a Prussian lady
(Schulenberg), exercises, in opposition to the views of his own
Government, a decidedly anti-Prussian influence, not so much in a
pro-Austrian as in a Guelph sense. He was Minister at Hanover up to the
events of 1866.
_April 1st._--The Minister’s birthday. When I was called to him in
the evening his room was perfumed with flowers presented to him. He
lay on the sofa, booted and spurred, smoking a cigar, and reading
newspaper extracts. After receiving my instructions, I offered my
congratulations, for which he thanked me, reaching me his hand. “I
hope,” he said, “we shall remain together for a very long time.” I
replied that I hoped so too, that I could find no words to say how
happy I felt to be near him, and to be able to work for him. “Well,”
he answered, smiling, “it is not always so pleasant, but you must not
notice every little thing.”
My instructions referred to Lasker and Hoverbeck. They were as
follows:--“Just take Lippe and Lasker as your subject for once. Lasker
has, it is true, been taken to task for one of his latest utterances
by Bennigsen, the chief of his fraction, but it can do no harm to deal
with the affair once more in the press--and repeatedly. He, like Lippe,
wants the Constitution to be placed above our national requirements.
_Les extrêmes se touchent._ Lippe is the representative of the
Particularistic Junkers with the tendency to absolutism, Lasker that
of the Parliamentary Junkers with Particularistic leanings. Vincke,
who was just such another, succeeded, with his eternal dogmatism,
in ruining and nearly destroying a great party in a few months,
notwithstanding favourable circumstances. Please send the article to
the _Norddeutsche Allgemeine Zeitung_ for publication, and let it be
afterwards reproduced in another form by the Literary Bureau.” (...)
_April 4th._--It was well that I carried out the Minister’s orders
at once. On being called to him this morning he received me with the
words: “I asked you recently to write an article on the subject of
Lippe and Lasker. Have you done so?” I replied “Yes, Excellency, and it
has already appeared. I did not submit it to you as I know that you see
the _Norddeutsche_ daily.” He then said, “I have had no time as yet, I
will look it up immediately.”
In a quarter of an hour I was again sent for, and on appearing before
him the Minister said: “I have now read the article--it was amongst
the extracts. It is excellent, exactly what I wished. Let it now be
circulated and reproduced in the provincial journals. In doing so it
may be further remarked that if Count Bismarck were to charge Lasker
and his fraction with Particularism--I do not mean all the National
Liberals, but principally the Prussians, the Lasker group--the
accusation would be well founded. Lippe has also laid down the
principle that the Prussian Diet is independent of the Federal Diet.”
The Minister then continued: “Here is the _Kölnische Zeitung_ talking
of excitability. It alleges that I have manifested an excitability
which recalls the period of ‘conflict.’ That is not true. I have
merely repelled passionate attacks in the same tone in which they were
delivered, according to the usual practice in Parliament. It was
not Bismarck but Lasker and Hoverbeck who took the initiative. They
began again with offensive personal attacks, and I begged of them in
a friendly way not to return to that style. Ask whether the writer
had not read the report of the sitting, as it showed that it was not
Count Bismarck who picked this quarrel. Apart from its pleadings on
behalf of the claims of Denmark, the _Kölnische Zeitung_ was a sensible
newspaper. What had Count Bismarck done to it that it should allow its
correspondents to send such a garbled account of the facts? Moreover,
Bennigsen had reprimanded Lasker. They now themselves recognised that
the tone they adopted was wrong, as Lasker came to me on Saturday to
excuse himself.”
_April 6th._--Under instructions from the Minister I dictated the
following paragraph to Doerr for circulation through the Literary
Bureau: “The position of the Bishops who form the opposition in the
Council does not appear to be satisfactory, if one may judge from the
attitude of the Catholic Governments and particularly of the Vienna
Cabinet. Probably Count Beust has not yet made up his mind in this
matter. He seems to have sent somewhat energetic remonstrances to the
Ambassador in Rome, but it is obvious that Count Trautmansdorf has
delivered them in a very diluted form. According to certain newspapers
the Austrian Chancellor has also endeavoured to bring about a common
action of the Powers, while others report an incident which renders
it doubtful whether any such attempt has been made. The French also
maintain an attitude of exceptional prudence and reserve, and the
Bishops would thus appear to stand well nigh alone.... The initiative
must come from the Bishops themselves.”
Between the 6th and the 10th of April I wrote an article on the
question of North Schleswig from the Minister’s instructions. This
attracted great attention on its publication in the _Norddeutsche
Allgemeine Zeitung_, principally on the ground that there seemed
to be no occasion for its appearance at a time when the political
horizon was absolutely clear. (It may possibly have arisen through a
Russian reminder and approval of the pretended claims of Denmark.)
The article was to the following effect: “It is a wilful falsehood to
maintain that according to the peace of Prague the population of North
Schleswig has to decide the question of the frontier. Prussia alone,
and no one else, is authorised to do that. Moreover, the Treaty of
Prague does not mention North Schleswig at all, but only refers, quite
vaguely, to the northern districts of Schleswig, which is something
quite different. The parties to the treaty were not called upon, and,
as the wording selected by them proves, never intended to deal with
any such conception as ‘North Schleswig,’ and have not even used that
term. But the Danes and their friends have so long and so persistently
endeavoured to make the world believe that paragraph 5 of the treaty
stipulated for the cession of North Schleswig, that they have come to
believe it themselves.
“The Prussians alone have to decide as to the extent of those
districts. Prussia has no further political interest in negotiating
with Denmark if the latter is not content with the concessions which
the former is prepared to make. Finally, only Austria has a right to
demand that the matter shall be settled in any form.... If Prussia
and Austria,” so concluded the Minister’s directions, “now come to an
understanding as to cancelling that paragraph of the treaty--probably
on the basis of further concessions on the part of Prussia--absolutely
no one has any right to object.” Two articles were to be written on
this subject, one for the _Norddeutsche Allgemeine Zeitung_, in which
the reference to Austria was to be omitted, and one for the _Spenersche
Zeitung_, which was to contain it.
_April 12th._--The Count desires to have an article written for the
_Kölnische Zeitung_, part of which he dictated to me. It ran as
follows: “The _Constitutionnel_ speaks of the way in which French
manners are being corrupted by foreign elements, and in this connection
it mentions Princess Metternich and Madame Rimsky-Korsakow. It would
require more space than we can afford to this subject to show in its
true light all the ignorance and prejudice exhibited by the writer of
this article, who has probably never left Paris. Princess Metternich
would not act in Vienna as she is represented by the _Constitutionnel_
to have acted in Paris; and Madame Rimsky-Korsakow is not a leader of
society in St. Petersburg. The contrary must be the case. Paris must
be responsible if the two ladies so conduct themselves, and exercise
such an influence as the French journal asserts they do. As a matter
of fact the idea that Paris is the home and school of good manners is
now only to be met with in other countries, in old novels, and amongst
elderly people in the most remote parts of the provinces. It has
long since been observed, and not in European Courts alone, that the
present generation of Frenchmen do not know how to behave themselves.
In other circles it has also been remarked that the young Frenchman
does not compare favourably with the youth of other nations, or with
those few countrymen of his own who have, far from Paris, preserved
the traditions of good French society. Travellers who have visited the
country at long intervals are agreed in declaring that the forms of
polite intercourse, and even the conventional expressions for which the
French language so long served as a model, are steadily falling into
disuse. It is therefore quite conceivable that the Empress Eugénie,
as a sensitive Spaniard, has been painfully affected by the tone and
character of Parisian society, but it would show a lack of judgment
on her part if, as stated by the _Constitutionnel_, she sought for
the origin of that evil abroad. But we believe we are justified in
directly contradicting that statement, as we know that the Empress has
repeatedly recommended young Germans as models for the youth of France.
The French show themselves to be a decadent nation, and not least in
their manners. It will require generations to recover the ground they
have lost. Unfortunately, so far as manners are concerned, all Europe
has retrograded.”
From the 13th of April to the 28th of May I did not see the Minister.
He was unwell, and left for Varzin on Easter Eve. It was said at the
Ministry that his illness was of a bilious character, and was due
to the mortification he felt at the conduct of the Lasker fraction,
together with the fact that he had spoilt his digestion at a dinner at
Camphausen’s.
On the 21st of May the Minister returned to Berlin, but it was not
until seven days later that I was called to him. He then gave me the
following instructions: “Brass (the _Norddeutsche Allgemeine Zeitung_)
must not plead so strongly for the Austrians nor speak so warmly of
the Government of Napoleon. In the case of Austria we have to adopt a
benevolently expectant attitude, yet the appointment of Klaczko and
his connection with the Ministry is for us a suspicious symptom.
The appointment of Grammont to the French Foreign Office is not
exactly agreeable to us. The Czechs must be treated with all possible
consideration; but, on the other hand, we must deal with the Poles as
with enemies.”
I afterwards asked as to his health. He said he still felt weak, and
would not have left Varzin if things had not looked so critical in
Parliament. As soon as matters were once more in order there, he would
be off again, if possible on an early day, in order to undertake a cure
with Karlsbad water, going to some seaside resort.
On being called to the Count on Whit Sunday I found him highly
indignant at the statement of a correspondent of the _Kölnische
Zeitung_, who reported that there was a scarcity of labour in the
Spandau cartridge factory. “Therefore unusual activity in the
preparation of war material!” he said. “If I were to have paid two
visits to the King at Ems it would not cause so much anxiety abroad
as thoughtless reports of this kind. Please go to Wehrmann and let
him ascertain at the Ministry of War if they are responsible for
that article, and if possible get them to insert a correction in the
_Kölnische Zeitung_ or in the _Norddeutsche_, as it must appear in an
influential paper.”
A diary entry on an undated slip of paper, but written in May: “Bohlen
yesterday bantered Bucher about his ‘Easter mission,’ which appears to
have been to Spain.”
On the 8th of June the Minister again left Berlin for Varzin.
Immediately on the commencement of the difficulties with France
respecting the election to the Spanish throne of the Hereditary Prince
of Hohenzollern, letters and telegrams began to arrive which were
forwarded by Bucher under instructions from the Chief. These consisted
in part of short paragraphs and drafts of articles, as well as some
complete articles which only required to be retouched in the matter
of style, or to have references inserted with regard to matters of
fact. These directions accumulated, but owing to the spirit and energy
inspired by the consciousness that we were on the eve of great events,
and that it was an honour to co-operate in the work, they were promptly
dealt with, almost all being disposed of on the day of their arrival. I
here reproduce some of these instructions, the order of the words and
expressions in the deciphered telegrams being slightly altered, while
the remainder are given exactly as they reached me.
_July 7th, evening._--A telegram to me from Varzin: “The semi-official
organs should indicate that this does not seem to be the proper time
for a discussion of the succession to the Spanish throne, as the
Cortes, who are alone entitled to decide the question, have not yet
spoken. German Governments have always respected Spanish independence
in such matters, and will do so in future, as they have no claim or
authority to interfere and lay down regulations for the Spaniards.
Then, in the non-official press, great surprise should be expressed
at the presumption of the French, who have discussed the question
very fully in the Chamber, speaking as if that assembly had a right
to dispose of the Spanish throne, and apparently forgetting that
such a course was as offensive to Spanish national pride as it was
conducive to the encouragement of Republican tendencies. This may be
safely construed into a further proof of the false direction which the
personal _régime_ is taking. It would appear as if the Emperor, who has
instigated this action, wanted to see the outbreak of a new war of
succession.”
A letter from Bucher, which was handed to me on the evening of the 8th
of July, further developed the idea contained in the last sentence of
the foregoing telegram. This letter ran: “Previous to 1868 Eugénie
was pleased to play the part of an obedient subject to Isabella, and
since the September revolution that of a gracious protectress. She
unquestionably arranged the farce of the abdication, and now, in her
rage, she incites her consort and the Ministers. As a member of a
Spanish party she would sacrifice the peace and welfare of Europe to
the intrigues and aspirations of a corrupt dynasty.
“Please see that this theme, a new war of succession in the nineteenth
century, is thoroughly threshed out in the press. The subject is
inviting, especially in the hands of a correspondent disposed to draw
historical parallels, and more particularly parallels _ex averso_.
Have the French not had experience enough of Spain with Louis XIV. and
Napoleon, and with the Duc d’Angoulême’s campaign for the execution of
the decrees of the Verona Congress? Have they not excited sufficient
hatred by all those wars and by the Spanish marriage of 1846?
“Bring personal influence to bear as far as possible on the editors
who have been intimidated by the Stock Exchange, representing to them
that if the German press takes up a timid and hesitating attitude in
presence of the rhodomontades of the French, the latter will become
more insolent and put forward intolerable demands in other questions
affecting Germany still more closely. A cool and determined attitude,
with a touch of contempt for those excited gentlemen who would like to
slaughter somebody, but do not exactly know whom, would be the most
fitting means for putting an end to this uproar and preventing serious
complications.”
Bucher added: “Protestants were still sent to the galleys under the
Spanish Government which was overthrown in 1868.”
Another communication of Bucher’s from Varzin of the same date runs:
“The precedents furnished by Louis Philippe’s refusal of the Belgian
throne on behalf of the Duc de Nemours in 1831, on the ground that
it would create uneasiness, and by the protest which England would
have entered against the marriage of the Duc de Montpensier to the
sister of Queen Isabella, are neither of them very applicable, as the
Prince of Hohenzollern is not a son of King William, but only a remote
connection, and Spain does not border on Prussia.”
The following was a third subject received from Varzin on the same
day: “Is Spain to inquire submissively at the Tuileries whether the
King whom she desires to take is considered satisfactory? Is the
Spanish throne a French dependency? It has already been stated in the
Prussian speech from the throne that our sole desire in connection
with the events in Spain was that the Spanish people should arrive at
an independent decision for the maintenance of their own prosperity
and power. In France, where on other occasions so much is said of
national independence, the attempt of the Spanish people to decide for
themselves has immediately revived the old diplomatic traditions which
led to the Spanish war of succession 160 years ago.”
On the same day, the 8th of July, a telegram was also received from the
Chancellor by the Secretary of State, and it was handed to me for my
information. It was to the following effect: “I have now before me in
the despatch of Count Solms the official text of the Duc de Grammont’s
speech, and I find his language more brusque and presumptuous than I
had anticipated. I am in doubt whether that is due to stupidity or
the result of a decision taken beforehand. The probability of the
latter alternative seems to be confirmed by the noisy demonstrations
which will most likely render it impossible for them to draw back.
I am reluctant to protest officially against Grammont’s speech on
international grounds, but our press should attack it very severely,
and this should be done in as many newspapers as possible.”
_July 9th._--A telegram from Bucher to the Secretary of State, saying
that the direction to the press to deal with Grammont’s speech in
very strong language is not to apply to the _Norddeutsche Allgemeine
Zeitung_.
Another telegram of the same date to Thile, which he brought to me:
“Any one intending to summon a Congress to deal with a debatable
question ought not first to threaten a warlike solution in case the
opposite party should not agree to his wishes.”
Further, the Secretary of State handed me a telegram from Berlin to
the Chancellor, which was returned by the latter with comments. I was
to get these circulated in the non-official journals. The telegram was
to the effect that Grammont had stated, in reply to an interpellation
by Cochery, that Prim had offered the Spanish throne to the Hereditary
Prince of Hohenzollern, (Remark: “He can do nothing of the kind. Only
the Cortes,”) and that the Prince had accepted it. (Remark: “He will
only declare himself after he has been elected.”) The Spanish people
has not yet, however, expressed its wishes. (Remark: “That is the main
point.”) The French Government do not recognise the negotiations in
question. (Remark: “There are no negotiations excepting those between
Spain and the eventual candidates for the throne.”) Grammont therefore
begged that the discussion might be postponed, as it was purposeless
for the moment. (Remark: “Very.”) The French Government would maintain
the neutral attitude which they had observed up to the present, but
would not permit a foreign Power to place a Prince upon the Spanish
throne, (“Hardly any power entertains such an intention, except perhaps
France,”) and endanger the honour and dignity of France. They trusted
to the wisdom of the Germans, (Remark: “Has nothing to do with it,”)
and to the friendship of the Spanish people. (Remark: “That is the main
point.”) Should they be deceived in their hopes they would do their
duty without hesitation or weakness. (Remark: “We also.”)
Bucher sent me a whole packet of sketches for articles:--
1. “If Spain records her decision to establish a government which
shall be peaceful, and tolerant in religious matters, and which may
be expected to be friendly to Germany, who is also devoted to peace,
can it be in our interest to prevent the execution of that resolve,
and for that purpose to take measures of doubtful legality? Shall
we, because of a threat of war made in pursuit of an arbitrary and
dynastic object, take steps to frustrate a reorganisation of Spanish
affairs advantageous to Germany? Is it not rather an act of insolent
presumption on the part of France to address such a demand to Germany?
Obviously France lacks either the courage or the means to enforce her
views at Madrid; and it appears from Grammont’s speech of the 4th of
July that in her anger at what has happened in Spain she is prepared
to throw herself upon Germany in a blind fit of rage. That speech is
to a certain extent a declaration of war against the person of the
Prince of Hohenzollern, in case he should decide to accept the offer
of the Spanish people. France demands that Prussia shall undertake
the office of policeman in case a German Prince who has attained _his
majority_ shows a disposition to meet the wishes of the Spaniards. For
a North German Government to interfere with a citizen who should wish
to exercise his right to emigrate and adopt the Spanish nationality
would raise a very questionable point of law from a constitutional
standpoint. Even if such a power existed, the dignity of Germany would
demand that it should only be applied in her own interests. The calm
consideration of those interests is not in the least affected by the
warlike threats of a neighbouring State, which, instead of arguments,
appeals to its 400,000 soldiers. If France lays claim in this manner
to the guardianship of adjoining nations, the maintenance of peace can
for the latter be only a question of time, which may be decided at any
moment. On Grammont’s appointment to the French Foreign Office it was
feared in many quarters that the choice by the Emperor Napoleon of a
statesman who was only remarkable for his personal impetuosity and his
hostility to Germany indicated a desire to secure for himself greater
liberty in breaking the peace. Unfortunately the haughty and aggressive
tone of the Duke’s speech is not calculated to remove the apprehensions
entertained at that time. He is not a minister of peace, but rather the
instrument of a personal policy which shrinks from no responsibility.
In itself the question as to who is to be the ruler of Spain is not
one for which Germany would go to war. But the French demand that
the German Government, in opposition to its own interests, should put
artificial difficulties in the way of the Spaniards manifests a depth
of self-conceit which scarcely any government amongst the independent
States of Europe could submit to at the present day. We seek no
quarrel, but if any one tries to force one upon us he will find us
ready to go through with it to the bitter end.”
2. In another article (there was too much material to be disposed of in
one) the following considerations were to be developed. This was not to
be communicated to the official organs, but either to the _Kölnische
Zeitung_ or the _Spenersche Zeitung_, while it was to be given in a
curtailed form to Hahn’s _Literary Bureau_. “If the candidature of
Alphonso had up to the present any prospect of success in Spain, it
would have been most prejudicially affected by the foolish uproar
raised in France, which stamped it with a French official character. No
worse service could be done to that Prince than to represent him as a
French candidate. Montpensier had already suffered under the reproach
that he was a Frenchman. The Bourbons had formerly been imposed upon
the Spaniards, and had proved themselves no blessing. The manner in
which the succession to the throne is now discussed in France would
offend a nation even less proud than the Spaniards.”
3. “Between the years 1866 and 1868, and particularly before the fall
of Isabella, France schemed a great deal against Germany with Austria,
Italy, and also with Spain. Those intrigues were set at nought by the
Revolution of September, to which Count Bismarck referred when he said
at that time in Parliament that the danger of war, which had been very
imminent, had been dispelled by an unforeseen event. So long as France
maintains her warlike intentions towards Germany, she will desire
to see on the Spanish throne a dynasty favourable to those schemes,
possibly an Ultramontane one, as in case of an attack on Germany it
would make a difference of about 50,000 men to France whether she
had a benevolent, or at least a neutral neighbour on the other side
of the Pyrenees or one whose attitude might be suspected. It is true
that France has nothing to fear directly from Spain if the French,
who for the past eighty years have been unable to make up their own
minds, and who cannot govern themselves, would give up the attempt to
play the part of tutor to other nations. Let the period 1848-1850 in
France be compared with that of 1868-1870 in Spain, and the comparison
will not be to the advantage of the nation _qui marche à la tête de la
civilisation_.”
4. “England is accustomed to look upon the Peninsula as a dependency
of her own, and doubtless believes that her influence can be more
easily made to prevail in a state of insecurity than under the rule of
a powerful dynasty. It is not wise of the English to recall certain
incidents of Spanish history, a course in which they are followed by
the French newspapers. The Spanish version of the history of the wars
against the First Napoleon is very different to the English one. In
Buen Retiro every traveller is shown the site of a once prosperous
porcelain manufactory, which was needlessly burned to the ground by the
British allies of Spain.”
5. Still another subject. “Very pleased with the article in the
_Spenersche Zeitung_ (this was addressed to me). Please again call
attention in a somewhat similar manner to the impetuosity of Grammont
therein referred to. What is the real ground for all this alarm? A
paragraph in the _Agence Havas_ to the effect that the affair had been
settled without the concurrence of the Cortes. It is probable that
the French Government itself had this paragraph inserted, and it was,
moreover, concocted in complete ignorance of the Spanish Constitution
and of the laws governing the election of a King. This, which was
the only new feature, was a barefaced invention. It had already
been mentioned in all the papers that Prim’s speech of the 11th of
June referred to the Prince of Hohenzollern, and that had caused no
excitement in France. Is the present agitation then a _coup monté_?
Does the French Government insist upon a ‘row’? Has Louis Napoleon
chosen Grammont in order to pick a quarrel with us? At any rate he has
been unskilful in his treatment of this question. The general moral
to be drawn as often as possible is: the French Government is, after
all, not quite so shrewd as people believe. The French have succeeded
in many things with the assistance of 300,000 soldiers, and owing to
that success they are regarded as immensely clever. Is that really so?
Circumstances show that it is not.”
_July 10th, evening._--Received further series of sketches and
drafts for articles from Bucher, who acts as the mouthpiece of the
Chancellor’s views and intentions.
1. For the _Spenersche_ or _Kölnische_:--“Those foreign Powers that are
not concerned in the differences respecting the Spanish throne are as
desirous to maintain peace as Germany herself. Their influence will,
however, be neutralised by Grammont’s ill-considered threats. Should
the German Governments consider the security of our frontier to be
seriously threatened, they would scarcely come to a decision without
convoking Parliament.”
2. “The French are running amuck like a Malay who has got into a rage
and rushes through the streets dagger in hand, foaming at the mouth,
stabbing every one who happens to cross his path. If France is mad
enough to regard Germany as a fit object for a vicarious whipping,
nothing will restrain her, and the result will be that she will herself
receive a personal castigation.”
3. “The semi-official journals in Paris pretend that attention has been
attracted there by the numerous cipher despatches exchanged between
Berlin and Madrid, and that they have been clever enough to decipher
them. We do not know whether many despatches have passed between the
two capitals mentioned, but we remember a communication which was made
to Parliament some time ago by Count Bismarck, according to which
the cipher system of our Foreign Office is based on a vocabulary of
about 20,000 words, each one of which is represented by a group of
figures arbitrarily chosen. It is impossible to ‘decipher’ such a
system in the same way as those based on an altered alphabet and other
old methods. In order to read such a despatch, it is essential to
have the vocabulary. Does the cleverness on which the Parisians pride
themselves consist in having stolen the key to our ciphers? This would
be in contradiction with the original statement that the Prince of
Hohenzollern’s candidature first became known through a communication
from Prim. It would, therefore, appear that the official press wants
to clear the Government of the reproach of incapacity by a subsequent
invention, acting, on the maxim that it is better to be taken for a
rogue than a fool.”
4. “According to a private telegram from Paris to the _Berliner Boersen
Zeitung_, our Ambassador there, together with the second Secretary
of Embassy, left for Ems on receipt of a Note delivered to him
immediately after the Cabinet Council at Saint Cloud. We have made
inquiries in the proper quarter as to the accuracy of this report, and
have received the following answer: Note delivered. ‘Not a shadow of
truth. Werther’s journey was decided upon and announced in Paris long
before the agitation began.’”
5. “As was already known, Prim intended this year, as on previous
occasions, to visit Vichy. This would have led to a meeting between
himself and the Emperor Napoleon and a discussion of the succession
to the Spanish throne. It is also reported that the Prince of
Hohenzollern was not indisposed to try confidentially to bring about an
understanding with the Emperor. All this has been rendered impossible
by the abrupt tone of the Duc de Grammont. As Prim’s visit to Vichy has
long since been announced in the newspapers, and the near relationship
as well as the personal friendship which hitherto existed between the
Prince of Hohenzollern and the Emperor rendered both meetings probable,
it is hard to avoid the suspicion that the French Government, dreading
insurmountable domestic difficulties, desires to inflame French vanity
in favour of a war, which would at the same time promote the dynastic
views of the Empress Eugénie.”
_July 12th._--Received from Secretary Wollmann a note from Bucher in
Varzin which is intended for me. It has been sent to the Secretary
of State, in order that he should say whether there is any objection
to its being used in the press. He has no objection, and so it goes
to the newspapers. It runs as follows: “The _Imparcial_ publishes
a letter from Paris to the effect that the furious article in
the _Constitutionnel_ reproaching Prince Hohenzollern with his
relationship to Murat, has been revised by the Emperor himself.”
In the evening the Minister returned. He is dressed in plain clothes
and looks very well.
_July 13th._--Called early to the Chief. I am to wait until a statement
appears in the press to the effect that the renunciation of Prince
Hohenzollern was in consequence of pressure from Ems, and then to
contradict it. “In the meantime (said the Minister) the _Norddeutsche_
should only say that the Prince’s present decision has not been
altogether unexpected. When he accepted the throne which had been
offered to him he had obviously not foreseen that his decision would
occasion so much excitement in Paris. For more than thirty years past
the best relations existed between Napoleon and the Hohenzollern
family. Prince Leopold could not, therefore, have apprehended any
antipathy to his candidature on the part of the Emperor. As his
candidature suddenly became known after the Cortes had been adjourned
till November, it may well have been assumed that there would be time
enough in the interval to sound the Emperor as to his views. Now
that this assumption (here the Chancellor began to speak more slowly
as if he were dictating), which, up to the acceptance of the Crown
by the Prince, was still quite legitimate, had proved to be partly
erroneous, it was scarcely probable that the Prince would, on his
own responsibility, be disposed to cope single handed with the storm
which his decision had raised, and might yet raise, in view of the
apprehensions of war of the whole European world, and the influence
brought to bear upon him from London and Brussels. Even a portion of
the responsibility of involving the great European nations, not only in
one war, but possibly in a series of wars, would weigh very heavily
upon a man who could not claim to have assumed it as part of the duty
of the Royal office which he had already accepted. That was more
than could well be expected of a Prince who only occupied a private
position. It was the offensive tone of Grammont that alone prevented
Prussia from exercising her influence with the Prince.”
The following is to be published in other papers: “It cannot be denied
that a Spanish Government disposed to promote the cause of peace and to
abstain from conspiring with France would be of considerable value to
us. But if, some fourteen days ago, the Emperor Napoleon had addressed
himself confidentially to Berlin, or indicated that the affair was
attracting attention, Prussia, instead of adopting an indifferent
attitude, would have co-operated in pacifying public opinion in Paris.
The situation has been entirely altered through the aggressive tone of
Grammont’s speech, and the direct demands addressed to the King, who is
staying in privacy at Ems for the benefit of his health, unaccompanied
by a single Minister. His Majesty rightly declined to accede to these
demands. That incident has created so much indignation in Germany, that
many people feel disappointed at Prince Leopold’s renunciation. At any
rate, the confidence in the peaceful intentions of France has been so
thoroughly shaken that it will take a considerable time to restore it.
If commerce and trade have been injured by the evidence which has shown
us what a den of brigands we have to deal with in France, the people of
that country must fasten the responsibility on the personal _régime_
under which they at present live.”
The Minister also desires it to be incidentally remarked in the
non-official press that of the South German Courts those of Munich
and Carlsruhe had given the most satisfactory declarations in this
affair, while on the other hand that of Stuttgart had expressed itself
evasively.
Finally, I am to communicate to one of the local papers that Count
Bismarck has been sent for to Ems to consult with the King as to
summoning Parliament. Breaking off a cure which he was undergoing, the
Chancellor has remained in Berlin in order to await there the further
instructions of his Majesty, or ultimately to return to Varzin. The
Count then added: “Later on I will call for you several times, as there
is something more to be prepared for the _Norddeutsche_. We shall
now be shortly interrupted.” The Crown Prince arrived five minutes
afterwards and had a long interview with the Minister.
_July 14th._--Our newspapers to call attention to the loyal attitude
of Würtemberg, “which in consequence of a misunderstanding has been
represented in some journals as evasive.”
_July 15th._--I am to send the following _démenti_ to Wolf’s
Telegraphic Agency for circulation: “The news published by the
_Spenersche Zeitung_ respecting the opening of Parliament is not quite
accurate. It was proposed a week ago by the Chancellor while in Varzin
that it should be convoked as soon as the Government Bills were ready
for submission to it. His Majesty shares this view, and the Federal
Council has accordingly been summoned for to-morrow, Saturday, morning
to consider those measures.”
In the evening the Chancellor dictated an article for the
_Kreuzzeitung_ on the confusion by the public between personal and
private proceedings of the King and his official acts. It ran as
follows: “It appears from the Mazaredo pamphlet that the Hereditary
Prince of Hohenzollern informed the King at Ems of his acceptance of
the offer of the Spanish throne, probably towards the end of June.
His Majesty was then at Ems for the purpose of taking the waters, and
certainly not with the intention of carrying on business of State,
as none of his Ministers had been summoned thither. As a matter of
fact, only so much has become public respecting the King’s reply to
the communication of the Hereditary Prince (it was in the form of a
letter written in his Majesty’s own hand) that the Sovereign was not
pleased at the news, although he did not feel called upon to offer any
opposition. In the whole affair no State action of any kind has been
taken. This constitutional aspect of the situation does not appear to
have been properly appreciated up to the present in public discussions
of the question. The position of the King in his private correspondence
was confounded with his position as head of the State, and it was
forgotten that in the latter capacity, according to the Constitution,
the co-operation of the Ministry is necessary to constitute a State
action. It is only the French Cabinet that appears to have thoroughly
realised this distinction, inasmuch as it brought the whole force of
its diplomacy to bear upon the person of the Sovereign, who was staying
at a watering-place for the sake of his health, and whose private life
was not protected by the usual etiquette, in order to force him under
official pressure into private negotiations which might afterwards be
represented as arrangements with the Government.”
_July 19th._--About an hour after the opening of Parliament in the
Royal Palace (1.45 P.M.) Le Sourd, the French Chargé d’Affaires,
delivered Napoleon’s declaration of war at the Foreign Office.
Towards 5 o’clock in the evening I was called to the Minister, who was
in his garden. After searching for him for some time I saw him coming
through one of the long shady alleys to the left which led to the
entrance in the Königgrätzer Strasse. He was brandishing a big stick.
His figure stood out against the yellow evening sunshine like a picture
painted on a gold ground. He stopped in his walk as I came up to him,
and said: “I wish you to write something in the _Kreuzzeitung_ against
the Hanoverian nobles. It must come from the provinces, from a nobleman
living in the country, an Old Prussian--very blunt, somewhat in this
style: It is reported that certain Hanoverian nobles have endeavoured
to find pilots and spies in the North Sea for French men-of-war. The
arrests made within the last few days with the assistance of the
military authorities are understood to be connected with this affair.
The conduct of those Hanoverians is infamous, and I certainly express
the sentiments of all my neighbours when I put the following questions
to the Hanoverian nobles who sympathise with those traitors. Have they
any doubt, I would ask them, that a man of honour could not now regard
such men as entitled to demand honourable satisfaction by arms whether
their unpatriotic action was or was not undertaken at the bidding of
King George? Do they not, as a matter of course, consider that an
affair of honour with them is altogether out of the question, and
should one of them be impudent enough to propose such a thing, would
they not have him turned out of the house by the servants or eject
him _propriæ manu_ after having, of course, put on a pair of gloves
to handle him with? Are they not convinced that such miscreants can
only be properly described by the good old Prussian word _Hundsvott_
(scurvy, infamous rogues), and that their treason has branded their
posterity to the third and fourth generations with indelible disgrace?
I beg them to answer these questions.”
_Evening._--In an article in the _Liberté_ of the 18th instant, that
paper reminds Italy that she owes her liberation to France, and that
in 1866 it was France who brought about the Italian alliance with the
Berlin Cabinet. It then maintains that, in view of the seriousness
of approaching events, Victor Emmanuel, with truly chivalrous
sentiment, has not for a moment hesitated to assure the French of his
unconditional support. With reference to this article our papers should
observe: “Up to the present the French have played the part of masters
to the whole world, and Belgium, Spain, and the King of Prussia have
in turn experienced their arrogance. Their behaviour was somewhat like
that of the Sultan towards his Khedive, it was a kind of megalomania
based upon the bayonet. Their presumption is now beginning to waver, so
they court the assistance of those good friends whom they pretend to
have placed under obligations to them.”
The Minister subsequently dictated the following, to be worked up
for the German newspapers outside Berlin, such as the _Kölnische
Zeitung_, and for the English and Belgium journals: “According to
confidential communications from loyal Hanoverian circles, amongst
other decisive factors which led the French to the declaration of
war, were the reports sent to Paris by Colonel Stoffel, the Military
Plenipotentiary in Berlin. Stoffel’s information was, it appears, less
accurate than abundant, as none of those who supplied him with it
being prepared to forego the payments they received from him merely
because they had nothing to say, they occasionally invented the news
of which they warranted the correctness. The Plenipotentiary had, it
is said, been informed that the arming of the Prussian infantry, both
as regards rifles and ammunition, was at present undergoing a thorough
transformation, and that consequently a moment so favourable as the
present for attacking Prussia would hardly occur again, inasmuch as on
the completion of this change the Prussian armaments would have been
unassailable.”[4]
2. “It now appears to be beyond all doubt that the French Government
was aware of the candidature of the Prince of Hohenzollern for months
past, that they carefully promoted it and foolishly imagined it
would serve as a means of isolating Prussia and creating a division
in Germany. No trustworthy information has been received as yet as
to whether and how far Marshal Prim had prepared the way for this
intrigue, in agreement with the Emperor Napoleon. But doubtless
that point will ultimately be cleared up by history. The sudden
disappearance of Spain from the political field as soon as the
differences between France and Prussia broke out gives matter for
reflection and suspicion. It cannot but be regarded as strange that
after the zeal shown by the Spanish Government in the matter of the
Hohenzollern candidature had been raised to boiling point it should
have suddenly fallen below zero, and that the relations of Marshal Prim
to the French Cabinet should now appear to be of the most friendly
character, while the Spaniards seem no longer to feel any irritation at
the interference of France in their internal affairs.”
3. “Rumours were circulated this afternoon to the effect that the
former French Military Plenipotentiary, Baron Stoffel, had been
insulted in the street. On closer inquiry it was ascertained that
some individuals who knew Stoffel followed him in the street, and
on his reaching his house struck the door with their sticks. The
police intervened energetically on the first report of this matter
and have taken measures to prevent a repetition of such conduct and
to provide that Baron Stoffel shall not be interfered with on his
departure this evening. Excesses of this description are, however,
highly reprehensible, even when they are confined to words. The former
representatives of France are under the protection of international law
and of the honour of Germany until they have crossed the frontier.”
_July 21st._--Keudell asked me this morning if I knew Rasch, the
journalist, and if I could say where he was now to be found, in Berlin
or elsewhere. I replied that I had seen him in Schleswig in 1864,
afterwards at a table d’hôte at the Hotel Weissberg, in the Dessauer
Strasse, where he lodged at the end of February. I knew nothing more
about him, but had heard that he was extremely conceited, almost to
the point of madness--a political visionary who desired to convert the
whole world to republicanism. I was not aware of his whereabouts in
Berlin, but would make inquiries at Weissberg’s. Keudell told me to
hunt him up and ask him whether he would go to Garibaldi and urge him
to undertake an expedition against Rome, at the same time carrying him
money from us. I pointed out that Rasch was perhaps too vain to keep
his own counsel. Keudell consoled himself with the idea that he would
doubtless prove a good patriot. I declined to treat with Rasch in the
matter, as I could not speak to him in my own name but in that of the
Foreign Office, and that could be better done by some official of
higher rank, who would make a greater impression upon Rasch. Keudell
seemed to recognise the justice of this view. I made inquiries and
was able to report on the same evening that Rasch was staying at
Weissberg’s.
Called to the Minister in the evening. He showed me an extract from the
_National Zeitung_, and observed: “They say here that the English would
not allow the French to attack Belgium. Well and good, but how does
that help the Belgians if the protection comes too late? If Germany
were once defeated (which God forbid!) the English would not be able
to assist the Belgians in the least, but might, on the contrary, be
thankful if they themselves remained safe in London.”
I am further to call attention to the “manner in which France is
begging for help on all sides--that great warlike nation which makes
so much parade of its victories, representing them as having always
been won solely by the force of its own arms. They go begging (use
that expression) to Italy, to Denmark, to Sweden, and above all to
the German States, to whom they promise the same brilliant destiny
which they have already prepared for Italy--political independence and
financial ruin.”
Called up to the Minister again later. I am to secure the insertion
of the following in the non-official German papers and in the Belgian
and English press: “The English Government observe their neutrality
in connection with the war that has now broken out in a liberal and
conscientious spirit. They impartially permit both sides to purchase
horses and munitions of war in England. It is unfortunate, however,
that France alone can avail herself of this liberality, as will appear
from a glance at the geographical position of the two countries and
from the superiority of the French at sea. Then quote what Heffter (the
book must be in the library) has to say on this kind of neutrality,
and observe that the English jurists describe it more tersely as
‘fraudulent neutrality.’”
_July 23rd._--Called to the Minister five times to-day. The press
should urge the prosecution and seizure of Rothan, an Alsacian who
speaks German, hitherto French Chargé d’Affaires at Hamburg, who has
been a zealous spy and instrument of French intrigue in North Germany,
and who is now understood to be wandering along the coast between the
Elbe and Ems, as also that of the ex-Hanoverian officer, Adolf von
Kielmansegg, respecting whom further particulars are to be obtained
from the Ministry of the Interior. The Count further wants the press
to give a list of the names of the Bavarian members of Parliament who
voted for the neutrality of that State in the national war, mentioning
their professions but without any further remarks. “Give it first in
Brass,” (_i.e._, _Norddeutsche Allgemeine Zeitung_,) he added. “You
will find such a list amongst the documents. The complaints as to the
manner in which England understands neutrality must be continually
renewed. The English Government does not forbid the export of horses,
though only France can avail herself of that facility. Colliers
are allowed to load at Newcastle and to supply fuel for the French
men-of-war cruising in the North Sea. English cartridge factories
are working for the French army under the eyes of the Government. In
Germany the painful feeling has become more and more widespread that,
under Lord Granville, England, while nominally maintaining neutrality,
favours France in the manner in which it is really observed.”
About 11 P.M. I was again called to the Minister. The reports
respecting the English coal ships to be at once sent by a Chancery
attendant to Wolf’s Telegraphic Agency for circulation to the
newspapers.
In this connection may be mentioned an Embassy report from London,
dated the 30th of July, to the following effect: Lord Granville had
asked the Ambassador if he had not stirred up the authorities in Berlin
against the English Government. The reply was in the negative. The
Ambassador had only carried out his instructions. Public opinion in
Germany influenced the Government, just as the German press influenced
public opinion. The manner in which neutrality was observed on the
part of England had excited the greatest indignation in Germany. The
action of the English Government, which indeed recognised that France
was in the wrong, but failed to give expression to that conviction,
was also bitterly resented there. Granville replied that once it had
been decided to remain neutral that neutrality must be maintained in
every respect. If the export of contraband of war were forbidden, the
French would regard it as an act of one-sided hostility, while at the
same time it would ruin English trade in the branches affected by such
prohibition, and favour American manufacturers. For the present, every
one in England approved of the maintenance of neutrality, and therefore
in a general way no change was possible in these matters. At the same
time, the English Government was ready, in case of complaints reaching
them in an official way respecting any acts of illegality, to institute
an inquiry into the facts and secure the punishment of the guilty
parties. It did not seem impossible to prevent the supply of English
coal to French men-of-war. Next Monday a Bill was to be submitted to
Parliament for the amendment of the laws regulating neutrality. The
report concluded as follows: “England is in many respects well disposed
towards us, but will for the present remain neutral. If we make further
attacks upon English public opinion through our official press in
connection with these grievances, it will serve no purpose but to
conjure up future difficulties. Granville is not what we might desire,
but he is not prejudiced against us. He may become so, however, if he
is further provoked by us. We can hardly succeed in overthrowing him,
and if we did his probable successor would in all likelihood be much
worse than himself.”
_July 24th._--I am instructed by the Count to send an article to the
_Kölnische Zeitung_ respecting the Dutch coal question. He gave me
the following information on this subject: “Holland asked us to again
permit the passage of Prussian coal down the Rhine, and requested
that a large transport of Rhenish coal intended for Holland should be
allowed to pass the frontier. It was only to be used in factories, and
the Government of the Netherlands would prohibit its re-exportation.
Prussia willingly agreed to this, but shortly afterwards it was
ascertained that foreign vessels were being loaded with coal in Dutch
ports, and the Government of the Netherlands subsequently informed us
that in promising to prevent the re-exportation they had overlooked
the circumstance that their treaty with France did not permit this.
Thereupon as a matter of course the export of Prussian coal to Holland
was prohibited. In the interval, however, they seem to have secured
a sufficient supply in Holland to provide the French fleet for a
considerable time. That is a very suspicious method of observing the
neutrality promised by the gentlemen at the Hague.”
Bucher brings me the following paragraph from the Chief, which is to
be inserted in the _Spenersche Zeitung_, or some other non-official
organ, and afterwards in the _North German Correspondence_: “In 1851
a literary _gamin_ in Paris was commissioned to conjure up the Red
Terror in a pamphlet, which proved very useful to the President Louis
Napoleon, enabling him to escape from a debtors’ prison and ascend the
Imperial throne. The Duc de Grammont now tries to raise the Spanish
Terror in order to save the Emperor from the necessity of accounting
for the hundred millions which he diverted from the State Treasury
into his private purse. The literary gentleman in question was made a
Prefect. What reward can Grammont have had in view?”
_Evening._--The Minister wishes an article to be prepared for
circulation in the German press describing the French and French policy
under the Emperor Napoleon. This is to be first sent to the _Spenersche
Zeitung_, while the Literary Bureau is to secure the insertion of the
principal points in a condensed form in the Magdeburg papers and a
number of the smaller journals to-morrow. The Count said (literally):
“The French are not so astute as people generally think. As a nation
they resemble certain individuals amongst our lower classes. They are
narrow-minded and brutal,--great physical force, boastful and insolent,
winning the admiration of men of their own stamp through their audacity
and violence. Here in Germany the French are also considered clever by
persons who do not think deeply, and their Ministers are regarded as
great statesmen because of their insolent interference in the affairs
of the whole world, and their desire to rule everywhere. Audacity
is always impressive. People think their success is due to shrewd
political calculation, but it is actually due to nothing else than the
fact that they always keep 300,000 soldiers ready to back up their
policy. That alone, and not their political intelligence, has enabled
them to carry things with such a high hand. We must get rid of this
fiction.... In political affairs the French are in the fullest sense
of the word a narrow-minded nation. They have no idea how things look
outside of France, and learn nothing about it in their schools. The
French educational establishments, for the greater glory of France,
leave their pupils in the crassest ignorance as to everything beyond
her frontiers, and so they have not the slightest knowledge of their
neighbours; that is the case with the Emperor, or at least he is not
much better, to say nothing of Grammont, who is an ass (_Rindvieh_).
Napoleon is ignorant at bottom, although he has been educated in
German schools. His ‘Cæsar’ was intended to conceal that fact. He has
forgotten everything. His policy was always stupid. The Crimean War
was against the interests of France, which demanded an alliance or
at least a good understanding with Russia. It was the same with the
war in Italy. There he created a rival in the Mediterranean, North
Africa, Tunis, &c., who may one day prove dangerous. The Italian people
are much more gifted than the French, only less numerous. The war in
Mexico and the attitude adopted in 1866 were blunders, and doubtless
in storming about as they do at present the French feel conscious that
they have committed another blunder.”
_July 25th._--At 11 o’clock this morning Count Bismarck and his family
took the Holy Communion at their residence. He asked whether any one
in our bureau desired to join them, but no one offered to do so. I was
for a moment tempted, but reconsidered the matter. It might look as if
I wished to recommend myself.
Copies of the Benedetti draft treaty are sent to Auber (the French
Press Agency) and Heide.
_July 27th._--It is to be stated either in the _Norddeutsche_ or
the _Spenersche Zeitung_ that secrecy respecting confidential
communications between great States is, as a rule, more carefully
observed and maintained than the public imagines. Nevertheless, the
French misrepresentation of Prussia’s attitude in the affair of the
candidature for the Spanish throne (in Grammont’s despatch of the 21st
of July) obliged the authorities here to disregard these considerations
of discretion. Benedetti’s proposal has therefore been published and it
may be followed by other documents of the same description. The Count
concluded his directions as follows: “We are at least entitled to tell
the truth with discretion in presence of such indiscreet lies.”
Bucher brings me from the Minister the following sketch of a paragraph
for the press: “The despatch of the Duc de Grammont, the full text
of which now lies before us, is a desperate attempt to prove that
the origin of the situation which they have themselves created was
the Hohenzollern candidature, and to conceal the motive which they
confessed on many other occasions--namely, the conquest by France of
the left bank of the Rhine and of Belgium. The inconsistency of the
whole assertion is made clear by the circumstance that the offer of
the Spanish throne to the Hereditary Prince of Hohenzollern was first
made in a letter dated the 14th of February of the present year.
Therefore, there can be no connection between this offer and the
conversations in March, 1869, between Benedetti and Von Thile, which
were the outcome of aspirations or proposals frequently ventilated in
the press (also with reference to Prince Frederick Charles). In 1851
the President Louis Napoleon succeeded in obtaining credence both at
home and abroad for certain fictions, so long as that was necessary for
the attainment of his object. The fiction which is now circulated, at a
somewhat late hour, to the effect that the Prince of Hohenzollern was
the candidate of Prussia is refuted in advance by the fact, which has
been well known for a long time, that the Prussian Government as well
as the officials of the Confederation, had absolutely no knowledge of,
or connection with, the Spanish proposal. It was resolutely opposed by
his Majesty the King, as the head of the Hohenzollern family, until
last June, when at Ems he reluctantly withdrew his opposition when it
was represented to him that otherwise Spain would fall into the hands
of the Republicans. We find it difficult to understand what interest
the French Government can have in circulating such lies now that war
has actually broken out. The attempt of the Duc de Grammont to conjure
up the spectre of a restoration of Charles V.’s monarchy can only be
explained by the complete isolation of the French mind. That apparition
had no sooner manifested itself than it vanished before the angry
contempt of public opinion, which resented being supposed capable of
such credulity.”
The Chancellor desires to see the following considerations reproduced
in the evening papers: “The Benedetti document is by no means the
only one dealing with the matter in question. Negotiations were also
carried on by others, as, for instance, by Prince Napoleon during his
stay in Berlin. Since French diplomacy was ignorant enough to believe
that a German Minister who followed a national policy could for a
moment think of entertaining such proposals, it had only itself to
thank if it was befooled with its own schemes so long as such fooling
appeared calculated to promote the maintenance of peace. Even those who
pursue the most ignorant and narrow-minded policy must ultimately come
to recognise that they have hoped for and demanded impossibilities.
The bellicose temper which now prevails in Paris dates from such
recognition. The hopes of German statesmen that they would be able to
befool the French until a peaceful _régime_ was established in France
by some transformation of her despotic constitution have unfortunately
not been realised. Providence willed it otherwise. Since we can no
longer maintain peace it is not necessary now to preserve silence. For
we preserved silence solely in order to promote the continuance, and,
if possible, the permanency, of peaceful relations.”... The Minister
concluded: “You can add, too, that the question of French Switzerland
was also mentioned in the negotiations, and that it was hinted that in
Piedmont they knew quite well where the French districts begin and the
Italian districts leave off.”
_July 28th._--I see the original of Benedetti’s draft treaty, and I am
to receive a photographic copy of it similar to that which has been
prepared for distribution amongst foreign Governments.
Bucher handed me the following sketch of an article, received by
him from the Minister, which is to be inserted in some organ not
apparently connected with the Government: “Those who now hold power
in Spain declare that they do not wish to interfere in the conflict
between Germany and France, because the latter might create internal
difficulties for them. They allow Bonaparte to prohibit their election
of the King of their own choice. They look on calmly with folded arms
while other nations go to war over a difference that has arisen out of
a question of Spanish domestic interest. We had formed quite another
opinion of the Castilian _gentilhomme_. The Spanish temper seems to
resemble that of Gil Blas, who wanted to fight a duel with the army
surgeon but observed that the latter had an unusually long rapier.”
_July 30th, 10 p.m._--The Minister desires that attention should be
again called to the manner in which the French are looking about for
foreign assistance, and he once more gives a few points: “France is
begging in all directions, and wants in particular to take Italy into
her pay. Here, as everywhere, she speculates upon the worst elements,
while the better elements will have nothing to do with her. How does
that harmonise with the greatness of the nation which ‘stands at the
head of civilisation,’ and whose historians always point out that it
was only defeated at Leipzig because its opponents were four to one?
At that time they had half Germany, Italy, Holland, and the present
Belgium on their side. To-day, when they stand alone, they go round
hat in hand to every door, and seek mercenaries to reinforce their own
army, in which they can therefore have but very little confidence.”
_July 31st._--This morning received from Roland one of the photographic
copies of the Benedetti draft.
CHAPTER II
DEPARTURE OF THE CHANCELLOR FOR THE SEAT OF WAR--I FOLLOW HIM, AT FIRST
TO SAARBRÜCKEN--JOURNEY FROM THERE TO THE FRENCH FRONTIER--THE
FOREIGN OFFICE FLYING COLUMN
On the 31st of July, 1870, at 5.30 P.M., the Chancellor, accompanied
by his wife and his daughter, the Countess Marie, left his residence
in the Wilhelmstrasse to take the train for Mainz, on his way to
join King William at the seat of war. He was to be followed by some
Councillors of the Foreign Office, a Secretary of the Central Bureau,
two deciphering clerks and three or four Chancery attendants. The
remainder of us only accompanied him with our good wishes, as, with his
helmet on his head, he passed out between the two sphinxes that guard
the door steps, and entered his carriage. I also had resigned myself
to the idea of following the course of the army on the map and in the
newspapers. A few days after the declaration of war, on my begging the
Minister to take me with him in case I could be of use, he replied that
that depended on the arrangements at headquarters. At the moment there
was no room for me. My luck, however, soon improved.
On the evening of the 6th of August a telegram was received at the
Ministry giving news of the victory at Wörth. Half an hour later I took
the good tidings still fresh and warm to a group of acquaintances who
waited in a restaurant to hear how things were going. Everybody knows
how willingly Germans celebrate the receipt of good news. My tidings
were very good indeed, and many (perhaps most) of my friends celebrated
them too long. The result was that next morning I was still in bed when
the Foreign Office messenger Lorenz brought me a copy of a telegraphic
despatch, according to which I was to start for headquarters
immediately. Privy Councillor Hepke wrote: “Dear Doctor,--Get ready to
leave for headquarters in the course of the day.” The telegram ran as
follows: “Mainz, 6th of August, 7.36 P.M. Let Dr. Busch come here
and bring with him a Correspondent for the _National Zeitung_ and one
for the _Kreuzzeitung_. Bismarck.” Hepke allowed me to select these
correspondents.
I had therefore after all attained to the very height of good fortune.
In a short time I had provided for all essentials, and by midday I had
received my pass legitimation, and free ticket for all military trains.
That evening a little after 8 o’clock I left Berlin together with the
two correspondents whom the Minister wished to accompany me, namely,
Herr von Ungarn-Sternberg, for the _Kreuzzeitung_, and Professor
Constantine Roeszler for the _National Zeitung_. In the beginning we
travelled first class, afterwards third, and finally in a freight car.
There were numerous long halts, which in our impatience seemed still
longer. It was only at 6 o’clock on the morning of the 9th of August
that we reached Frankfurt. As we had to wait here for some hours we had
time to inquire where the headquarters were now established. The local
Commandant was unable to inform us, nor could the Telegraph Director
say anything positive on the subject. He thought they might be still in
Homburg, but more probably they had moved on to Saarbrücken.
It was midday before we again started, in a goods train, by way of
Darmstadt, past the Odenwald, whose peaks were covered with heavy white
fog, by Mannheim and towards Neustadt. As we proceeded our pace became
gradually slower, and the stoppages, which were occasioned by seemingly
endless lines of carriages transporting troops, became more and more
frequent. Wherever a pause occurred in the rush of this onward wave of
modern national migration, crowds hurried to the train, cheering and
flourishing their hats and handkerchiefs. Food and drink were brought
to the soldiers by people of all sorts and conditions, including poor
old women--needy but good-hearted creatures whose poverty only allowed
them to offer coffee and dry black bread.
We crossed the Rhine during the night. As day began to break we noticed
a well-dressed gentleman lying near us on the floor who was speaking
English to a man whom we took to be his servant. We discovered that
he was a London banker named Deichmann. He also was anxious to get to
headquarters in order to beg Roon’s permission to serve as a volunteer
in a cavalry regiment, for which purpose he had brought his horses
with him. The line being blocked near Hosbach, on Deichmann’s advice
we took a country cart to Neustadt, a little town which was swarming
with soldiers--Bavarian riflemen, Prussian Red Hussars, Saxon and other
troops.
It was here that we took our first warm meal since our departure from
Berlin. Hitherto we had had to content ourselves with cold meat, while
at night our attempts to sleep on the bare wooden benches with a
portmanteau for a pillow were not particularly successful. However, we
were proceeding to the seat of war, and I had experienced still greater
discomforts on a tour of far less importance.
After a halt of one hour at Neustadt, the train crossed the Hardt
through narrow valleys and a number of tunnels, passing the defile in
which Kaiserslautern lies. From this point until we reached Homburg it
poured in torrents almost without cessation, so that when we arrived
at that station at 10 o’clock the little place seemed to be merely a
picture of night and water. As we stepped out of the train and waded
through swamp and pool with our luggage on our shoulders, we stumbled
over the rails and rather felt than saw our way to the inn “Zur Post.”
There we found every bed occupied and not a mouthful left to eat. We
ascertained however, that had even the conditions been more favourable
we could not have availed ourselves of them, as we were informed that
the Count had gone on with the King, and was at that moment probably in
Saarbrücken. There was no time to be lost if we were to overtake him
before he left Germany.
It was far from pleasant to have to turn out once more into the deluge,
but we were encouraged to take our fate philosophically by considering
the still worse fate of others. In the tap-room of the “Post” the
guests slept on chairs enveloped in a thick steam redolent of tobacco,
beer, and smoking lamps and the still more pungent odour of damp
clothes and leather. In a hollow near the station we saw the watchfire
of a large camp half quenched by the rain--Saxon countrymen of ours,
if we were rightly informed. While wading our way back to the train
we caught the gleam of the helmets and arms of a Prussian battalion
which stood in the pouring rain opposite the railway hotel. Thoroughly
drenched and not a little tired, we at length found shelter in a
waggon, where Deichmann cleared a corner of the floor on which we too
could lie, and found a few handfuls of straw to serve us as a pillow.
My other two companions were not so fortunate. They had to manage as
best they could on the top of boxes and packages with the postmen and
transport soldiers. It was evident that the poor Professor, who had
grown very quiet, was considerably affected by these hardships.
About 1 o’clock the train set itself slowly in motion. By daybreak,
after several stoppages, we reached the outskirts of a small town with
a beautiful old church. A mill lay in the valley through which we could
also see the windings of the road that led to Saarbrücken. We were told
that this town was only two or three miles off, so that we were near
our journey’s end. Our locomotive, however, seemed to be quite out of
breath, and as the headquarters might at any moment leave Saarbrücken
and cross the frontier, where we could get no railway transport and
in all probability no other means of conveyance, our impatience and
anxiety increased, and our tempers were not improved by a clouded sky
and drizzling rain. Having waited in vain nearly two hours for the
train to start, Deichmann again came to our rescue. After a short
disappearance he returned with a miller who had arranged to carry us to
the town in his own trap. The prudent fellow, however, made Deichmann
promise that the soldiers should not take his horses from him.
During the drive the miller told us that the Prussians were understood
to have already pushed on their outposts as far as the neighbourhood of
Metz. Between 9 and 10 o’clock we reached Sanct Johann, a suburb of
Saarbrücken, where we noticed very few signs of the French cannonade
a few days ago, although it otherwise presented a lively and varied
picture of war times. A huddled and confused mass of canteen carts,
baggage waggons, soldiers on horse and foot, and ambulance attendants
with their red crosses, &c., filled the streets. Some Hessian dragoon
and artillery regiments marched through, the cavalrymen singing,
“_Morgenroth leuchtest mir zum fruehen Tod!_” (Dawn, thou lightest me
to an early grave).
At the hotel where we put up I heard that the Chancellor was still
in the town, and lodged at the house of a merchant and manufacturer
named Haldy. I had therefore missed nothing by all our delays, and
had fortunately at length reached harbour. Not a minute too soon,
however, as on going to report my arrival I was informed by Count
Bismarck-Bohlen, the Minister’s cousin, that they intended to move on
shortly after midday. I bade good-bye to my companions from Berlin,
as there was no room for them in the Chancellor’s suite, and also to
our London friend, whose patriotic offer General Roon was regretfully
obliged to decline. After providing for the safety of my luggage, I
presented myself to the Count, who was just leaving to call upon the
King. I then went to the Bureau to ascertain if I could be of any
assistance. There was plenty to do. Every one had his hands full, and
I was immediately told off to make a translation for the King of Queen
Victoria’s Speech from the Throne, which had just arrived. I was highly
interested by a declaration contained in a despatch to St. Petersburg,
which I had to dictate to one of our deciphering clerks, although at
the time I could not quite understand it. It was to the effect that we
should not be satisfied with the mere fall of Napoleon.
That looked like a foreshadowing of some miracle.
Strassburg! and perhaps the Vosges as our frontier! Who could have
dreamed of it three weeks before?
In the meantime the weather had cleared up. Shortly before one o’clock,
under a broiling sun, three four-horse carriages drew up before our
door, with soldiers riding as postilions. One was for the Chancellor,
another for the Councillors and Count Bismarck-Bohlen, and the third
for the Secretaries and Decipherers. The two Councillors and the Count
having decided to ride, I took a place in their carriage, as I also
did subsequently whenever they went on horseback. Five minutes later
we crossed the stream and entered the Saarbrücken high road, which
led past the battle-field of the 6th of August. Within half an hour
of our departure from Sanct Johann we were on French soil. There were
still many traces of the sanguinary struggle that had raged there five
days ago--branches torn from the trees by artillery fire, fragments of
accoutrements and uniforms, the crops trampled into the earth, broken
wheels, pits dug in the ground by exploding shells, and small wooden
crosses roughly tied together, probably marking the graves of officers
and others. So far as one could observe all the dead had been already
buried.
Here at the commencement of our journey through France I will break
off my narrative for a while in order to say a few words about the
Foreign Office Field Bureau and the way in which the Chancellor and his
people travelled, lodged, worked and lived. The Minister had selected
to accompany him Herr Abeken and Herr von Keudell, Count Hatzfeldt,
who had previously spent several years at the Embassy in Paris, and
Count Bismarck-Bohlen, all four Privy Councillors of Legation. After
these came the _Geheim-Sekretär_, Bölsing, of the Centralbureau,
the two deciphering clerks, Willisch and St. Blanquart, and finally
myself. At Ferrières our list of Councillors was completed by Lothar
Bucher, and a new deciphering clerk, Herr Wiehr, also joined us. At
Versailles the number was further increased by Herr von Holstein,
subsequently Councillor of Embassy, the young Count Wartensleben, and
Privy Councillor Wagner, the latter, however, not being employed on
Foreign Office work. Herr Bölsing who had fallen ill, was replaced
by Geheim-Sekretär Wollmann, and the accumulation of work afterwards
required a fourth deciphering clerk. Our “Chief,” as the Chancellor
was usually called by the staff, had kindly arranged that all his
fellow-workers, Secretaries as well as Councillors, should in a certain
sense be members of his household. When circumstances permitted we
lodged in the same house, and had the honour of dining at his table.
Throughout the whole war the Chancellor wore uniform. It was generally
the well-known undress of the yellow regiment of heavy Landwehr
cavalry. During the early months of the campaign he as a rule only
wore the Commander’s Cross of the Order of the Red Eagle, to which he
afterwards added the Iron Cross. I only saw him a couple of times in
a dressing gown. That was at Versailles, when he was unwell, the only
time, as far as I know, that anything ailed him throughout the whole
war. When travelling he was usually accompanied in the carriage by Herr
Abeken, but on some occasions he took me with him for several days in
succession. He was very easy to please in the matter of his quarters,
and was willing to put up with the most modest shelter when better was
not to be had. Indeed, it once happened that there was no bedstead and
that his bed had to be made upon the floor.
Our carriages usually followed immediately after those of the King’s
suite. We started generally about 10 o’clock in the morning, and
sometimes covered as much as sixty kilometres in the day. On reaching
our quarters for the night our first duty was to set about preparing
an office, in which there was seldom any lack of work, especially
when we had the Field Telegraph at our disposal. When communications
were thus established, the Chancellor again became what, with short
intervals, he had been throughout this entire period, namely, the
central figure of the whole civilised European world. Even in those
places where we only stayed for one night he, incessantly active
himself, kept his assistants almost continuously engaged until a late
hour. Messengers were constantly going and coming with telegrams and
letters. Councillors were drawing up notes, orders and directions under
instructions from their chief, and these were being copied, registered,
ciphered and deciphered in the Chancellerie. Reports, questions,
newspaper articles, &c., streamed in from every direction, most of them
requiring instant attention.
Never, perhaps, was the well nigh superhuman power of work shown by the
Chancellor, his creative, receptive and critical activity, his ability
to deal with the most difficult problems, always finding the right and
the only solution, more strikingly evident than during this period.
The inexhaustible nature of his powers was all the more astounding,
as he took but little sleep. Except when a battle was expected and
he rose at daybreak to join the King and the army, the Chancellor
rose rather late, as had been his custom at home, usually about 10
o’clock. On the other hand, he spent the night at work, and only fell
asleep as daylight began to appear. He was often hardly out of bed and
dressed before he commenced work again, reading despatches and making
notes upon them, looking through newspapers, giving instructions to
his Councillors and others, and setting them their various tasks, or
even writing or dictating. Later on there were visits to be received,
audiences to be granted, explanations to be given to the King. Then
followed a further study of despatches and maps, the correction of
articles, drafts hurriedly prepared with his well-known big pencil,
letters to be written, information to be telegraphed, or published in
the newspapers, and in the midst of it all the reception of visitors
who could not be refused a hearing yet must occasionally have been
unwelcome. It was only after 2, or even 3 o’clock, in places where
we made a longer stay, that the Chancellor allowed himself a little
recreation by taking a ride in the neighbourhood. On his return he set
to work again, continuing until dinner time, between 5.30 and 6 P.M. In
an hour and a half at latest, he went back to his writing-desk, where
he frequently remained till midnight.
In his manner of taking his meals, as in his sleep, the Count differed
from the general run of mankind. Early in the day he took a cup of
tea and one or two eggs, and from that time until evening he, as a
rule, tasted nothing more. He seldom took any luncheon and rarely
came to tea, which was usually served between 10 and 11 at night.
With some exceptions, he therefore had practically but one meal in
the twenty-four hours, but, like Frederick the Great, he then ate
with appetite. Diplomats are proverbially fond of a good table, being
scarcely surpassed in this respect by the clergy. It is part of their
business, as they often have important guests who, for one reason or
another, must be put in good humour, and it is universally recognised
that nothing is better calculated to that end than a well-filled
cellar and a dinner which shows the skill of a highly trained _chef_.
Count Bismarck also kept a good table, which, when circumstances
permitted, became quite excellent. That was the case for instance at
Reims, Meaux, Ferrières and Versailles, where the genius of our cook
in the Commissariat uniform created breakfasts and dinners that made
any one accustomed to a homely fare feel, as he did justice to them,
that he was at length resting in Abraham’s bosom, particularly when
some specially fine brand of champagne was added to the other gracious
gifts of Providence. During the last five months our table was also
enriched by presents from home where, as was only right and proper, our
people showed how fondly they remembered the Chancellor, by sending
him plentiful supplies of good things, both fluid and solid, geese,
venison, fish, pheasants, monumental pastry, excellent beer, rare
wines, and other acceptable delicacies.
At first only the Councillors wore uniform, Herr von Keudell that of
the Cuirassiers, and Count Bismarck-Bohlen that of the Dragoon Guards,
while Count Hatzfeldt and Herr Abeken wore the undress uniform of
the Foreign Office. It was afterwards suggested that the whole of
the Minister’s _personnel_, with the exception of the two gentlemen
first mentioned, who were also officers, should be allowed the same
privilege. The Chief gave his consent, so the people of Versailles had
an opportunity of seeing our Chancery attendants in a dark blue tunic
with two rows of buttons, black collar trimmed with velvet, and a cap
of the same colour, while our Councillors, Secretaries and Decipherers
carried swords with a gold sword-knot. The elderly Privy Councillor
Abeken, who could make his horse prance as proudly as any cavalry
officer, looked wonderfully warlike in this costume, in which, I fancy,
he delighted not a little. It was to him just as great a pleasure to
show off in all this military bravery as it had been to travel through
the Holy Land dressed up as an Oriental, although he did not understand
a word of Turkish or Arabic.
CHAPTER III
FROM THE FRONTIER TO GRAVELOTTE
In the preceding chapter I broke off my narrative at the French
frontier. We recognised that we had crossed it by the notices posted
in the villages, “Département de la Moselle.” The white roads were
thronged with conveyances, and in every hamlet troops were billeted.
In these hilly and partially wooded districts we saw small camps
being pitched here and there. After about two hours’ drive we reached
Forbach, which we passed through without stopping. In the streets
through which we drove the signboards were almost entirely French,
although the names were chiefly German. Some of the inhabitants who
were standing at their doors greeted us in passing. Most of them,
however, looked sulky, which, although it did not add to their beauty,
was natural enough, as they had evidently plenty of soldiers to provide
quarters for. The windows were all full of Prussians in blue uniforms.
We thus jogged on, up hill and down dale, reaching Saint Avold about
half-past four. Here we took up lodgings, Chancellor and all, with a
M. Laity, at No. 301 Rue des Charrons. It was a one-storey house, but
rather roomy, with a well-kept fruit and vegetable garden at the back.
The proprietor, who was said to be a retired officer, and appeared
to be well to do, had gone away with his wife the day before, leaving
only a maid and an old woman, who spoke nothing but French. In half an
hour we had fixed up our office and chosen our sleeping quarters. Work
began without delay. As there was nothing to be done in my department,
I tried to assist in deciphering the despatches, an operation which
offers no particular difficulties.
At seven o’clock we dined with the Chancellor in a little room looking
out on a small courtyard with some flower beds. The conversation at
table was very lively, the Minister having most to say. He did not
consider a surprise impossible, as he had satisfied himself during
his walk that our outposts were only three-quarters of an hour from
the town and very wide apart. He had asked at one post where the next
was stationed, but the men did not know. He said: “While I was out I
saw a man with an axe on his shoulder following close at my heels. I
kept my hand on my sword, as one cannot tell in certain circumstances
what may happen; but in any case I should have been ready first.” He
remarked later on that our landlord had left all his cupboards full
of underclothing, adding: “If this house should be turned into an
ambulance hospital, his wife’s fine underlinen will be torn up for lint
and bandages, and quite properly. But then they will say that Count
Bismarck took the things away with him.”
We came to speak of the disposal of the troops in action. The Minister
said that General Steinmetz had shown himself on that occasion to be
self-willed and disobedient. “Like Vogel von Falkenstein, his habit
of taking the law into his own hands will do him harm in spite of the
laurels he won at Skalitz.”
There was cognac, red wine, and a sparkling Mainz wine on the table.
Somebody mentioned beer, saying that probably we should be unable
to obtain it. The Minister replied: “That is no loss! The excessive
consumption of beer is deplorable. It makes men stupid, lazy and
useless. It is responsible for the democratic nonsense spouted over the
tavern tables. A good rye whiskey is very much better.”
I cannot now remember how or in what connection we came to speak about
the Mormons. The Minister was surprised at their polygamy, “as the
German race is not equal to so much--Orientals seem to be more potent.”
He wondered how the United States could tolerate the existence of
such a polygamous sect. The Count took this opportunity of speaking
of religious liberty in general, declaring himself very strongly in
favour of it. But, he added, it must be exercised in an impartial
spirit. “Every one must be allowed to seek salvation in his own way.
I shall propose that one day, and Parliament will certainly approve.
As a matter of course, however, the property of the Church must remain
with the old churches that acquired it. Whoever retires must make a
sacrifice for his conviction, or rather his unbelief.” “People think
little the worse of Catholics for being orthodox, and have no objection
whatever to Jews being so. It is altogether different with Lutherans,
however, and that church is constantly charged with a spirit of
persecution, if it rejects unorthodox members. But it is considered
quite in order that the orthodox should be persecuted and scoffed at in
the press and in daily life.”
After dinner the Chancellor and Councillors took a walk in the garden
from which a large building distinguished by a flag with the Geneva
Cross was visible at a little distance to the right. We could see
a number of nuns at the windows who were watching us through opera
glasses. It was evidently a convent that had been turned into a
hospital. In the evening one of the deciphering clerks expressed great
anxiety as to the possibility of a surprise, and we discussed what
should be done with the portfolios containing State papers and ciphers
in such circumstances. I tried to reassure them, promising to do my
utmost either to save or destroy the papers, should necessity arise.
There was no occasion for anxiety. The night passed quietly. Next
morning as we were at lunch a green _Feldjäger_, or Royal Courier,
arrived with dispatches from Berlin. Although such messengers usually
make rapid progress, this one had not travelled any quicker than I
had done in my fear to arrive too late. He left on Monday, the 8th
of August, and had several times taken a special conveyance, yet he
had spent nearly four days on the way, as it was now the 12th. I
again assisted the Decipherers. Afterwards, while the Minister was
with the King, I visited the large and beautiful town church with the
Councillors, the chaplain showing us round. In the afternoon, while the
Minister was out for a ride, we inspected the Prussian artillery park
on a neighbouring height.
We dined at four, on the Chancellor’s return. He had ridden a long
way in order to see his two sons, who were serving as privates in a
regiment of dragoon guards, but found that the German cavalry had
already pushed forward towards the upper reaches of the Moselle. He
was in excellent spirits, evidently owing to the good fortune which
continued to favour our cause. In the course of the conversation, which
turned on mythology, the Chief said he could never endure Apollo, who
flayed Marsyas out of conceit and envy, and slew the children of Niobe
for similar reasons. “He is the genuine type of a Frenchman, one who
cannot bear that another should play the flute better than, or as well
as, himself.” Nor was Apollo’s manner of dealing with the Trojans to
the Count’s taste. The straightforward Vulcan would have been his man,
or, better still, Neptune--perhaps because of the _Quos ego_!--but he
did not say.
After rising from table we had good news to telegraph to Berlin for
circulation throughout the whole country, namely, that there were ten
thousand prisoners in our hands on the 7th of August, and that a great
effect had been produced on the enemy by the victory at Saarbrücken.
Somewhat later we had further satisfactory particulars to send home.
The Minister of Finance in Paris, evidently in consequence of the rapid
advance of the German forces, had invited the French people to deposit
their gold in the Bank of France instead of keeping it in their houses.
There was also some talk of a proposed proclamation forbidding and
finally abolishing the conscription in the districts occupied by the
German troops. We also heard from Madrid that the Montpensier party,
some politicians belonging to the Liberal Union such as Rios Rosas and
Topete, as well as various other party leaders, were exerting every
effort to bring about the immediate convocation of the representative
assembly in order that the Provisional Government should be put an
end to by the election of a King. The Duc de Montpensier, whom they
had in view as a candidate, was already in the Spanish capital. The
Government, however, obstinately opposed this plan.
Early next morning we broke up our quarters and started for the small
town of Falquemont, which we now call Falkenberg. The road was thronged
with long lines of carts, artillery, ambulances, military police, and
couriers. While some detachments of infantry marched along the highway,
others crossed the stubble fields to the right, being guided by wisps
of straw tied to poles stuck in the ground. Now and then we saw men
fall out of the ranks and others lying in the furrows, fagged out,
while a pitiless August sun glared down from a cloudless sky. Thick
yellow clouds of dust raised by the marching of the troops followed
us into Falkenberg, a place of about two thousand inhabitants, where
I put up at the house of the baker, Schmidt. We lost sight of the
Minister in the crowd and dust, and I only afterwards ascertained that
he had gone on to see the King at the village of Herny. The march of
the troops through the town continued almost uninterruptedly the whole
day. A Saxon regiment, which was stationed quite near us, frequently
sent their caterers to our baker for bread, but the supply was soon
exhausted owing to the enormous demand.
In the afternoon some Prussian hussars brought in a number of prisoners
in a cart, including a Turco who had exchanged his fez for a civilian’s
hat. In another part of the town we witnessed a brawl between a shopman
and one of the female camp-followers who had stolen some of his goods,
which she was obliged to restore. So far as I could see, our people
always paid for what they asked, sometimes doing even more.
The people where I lodged were very polite and good humoured. Both
husband and wife spoke a German dialect, which was occasionally helped
out with French words. From the sacred pictures which were hung on the
walls they appeared to be Catholics. I had an opportunity later on of
doing them a small service, when some of our soldiers insisted willy
nilly upon a supply of bread, which the baker was unable to give them,
as there were only two or three loaves in the shop. But I must do my
countrymen the justice to say that they wanted the food badly, and were
willing to pay for it. I proposed a compromise, which was accepted;
each soldier was at once to get a good slice and as much as ever he
required next morning.
On Sunday, the 14th of August, after luncheon, we followed the Minister
to Herny. He had taken up his quarters in a whitewashed peasant’s
house, a little off the High Street, where his window opened upon a
dung-hill. As the house was pretty large we all joined him there. Count
Hatzfeldt’s room also served as our office. The King had his quarters
at the parish priest’s, opposite the venerable old church. The village
consisted of one long wide street, with some good municipal buildings.
At the railway station we found everything in the wildest confusion,
the whole place littered with torn books, papers, &c. Some soldiers
kept watch over two French prisoners. For several hours after 4 P.M. we
heard the heavy thunder of cannon in the direction of Metz. At tea the
Minister said: “I little thought a month ago that I should be taking
tea with you, gentlemen, to-day in a farmhouse at Herny.” Coming to
speak of the Duc de Grammont, the Count wondered that, on seeing the
failure of his stupid policy against us, he had not joined the army in
order to expiate his blunders. He was quite big and strong enough to
serve as a soldier. “I should have acted differently in 1866 if things
had not gone so well. I should have at once enlisted. Otherwise I could
never have shown myself to the world again.”
I was frequently called to the Minister’s room to receive instructions.
Our illustrated papers were to publish pictures of the charge at
Spichernberg, and also to deny the statement of the _Constitutionnel_
that the Prussians had burnt down everything on their march,
leaving nothing but ruins behind them. We could say with a clear
conscience that we had not observed the least sign of this. It was
also thought well to reply to the _Neue Freie Presse_, which had
hitherto been well disposed towards us, but had now adopted another
policy, possibly because it had lost some subscribers who objected
to its Prussophile tone, or perhaps there was something in the
rumour that the Franco-Hungarian party intended to purchase it. The
Chancellor, in giving instructions respecting another article of
the _Constitutionnel_, concluded as follows: “Say that there never
was any question in the Cabinet Council of a cession of Saarbrücken
to France. The matter never went beyond the stage of confidential
inquiries, and it is self-evident that a national Minister, inspired
by the national spirit, could never have dreamt of such a course.
There might, however, have been some slight basis for the rumour. A
misunderstanding or a distortion of the fact that previous to 1864 the
question was raised whether it would not be desirable to sell the coal
mines at Saarbrücken, which are State property, to a company. I wanted
to meet the expenses of the Schleswig-Holstein war in this way. But
the proposal came to nothing, owing to the King’s objections to the
transaction.”
On Monday, August 15th, about 6 A.M., the Minister drove off in his
carriage, accompanied by Count Bismarck-Bohlen, and followed on
horseback by Herr Abeken, Herr von Keudell, and Count Hatzfeldt. The
rest of us remained behind, where we had plenty of work on hand, and
could make ourselves useful in other ways. Several detachments of
infantry passed through the village during the day, amongst them being
three Prussian regiments and a number of Pomeranians, for the most
part tall, handsome men. The bands played “Heil dir im Siegerkranz,”
and “Ich bin ein Preusse.” One could see in the men’s eyes the fearful
thirst from which they were suffering. We speedily organised a fire
brigade with pails and jugs and gave as many as possible a drink of
water as they marched by. They could not stop. Some took a mouthful in
the palms of their hands, whilst others filled the tin cans which they
carried with them, so that at least a few had some momentary relief.
Our landlord, Matthiote, knew a little German, but his wife only spoke
the somewhat unintelligible French dialect of this part of Lorraine.
They were thought not to be too friendly towards us, but the Minister
had not observed it. He had only seen the husband, and said he was not
a bad fellow. “He asked me as he brought in the dinner if I would try
his wine. I found it very tolerable, but on my offering to pay for it
he declined, and would only accept payment for the food. He inquired as
to the future frontier, and expected that they would be better off in
the matter of taxation.”
We saw little of the other inhabitants of the village. Those we met
were polite and communicative. An old peasant woman whom I asked for
a light for my cigar led me into her room and showed me a photograph
of her son in a French uniform. Bursting into tears she reproached the
Emperor with the war. Her _pauvre garçon_ was certainly dead, and she
was inconsolable.
The Councillors returned after 3 o’clock, the Minister himself coming
in a little later. In the meantime we were joined by Count Henckel, a
portly gentleman with a dark beard, Herr Bamberger, a member of the
Reichstag whom Count Bohlen was accustomed to call the “Red Jew,” and a
Herr von Olberg, who was to be appointed to an administrative position
of some kind. We began to feel ourselves masters of the conquered
country and to make our arrangements accordingly. As to the portion
which we at that time proposed to retain permanently a telegram to St.
Petersburg which I helped to cipher said that if it were the will of
Providence we intended to annex Alsace.
We heard at dinner that the King and the Chancellor, accompanied by
General Steinmetz, had made a reconnaissance which took them within
about three English miles of Metz. The French troops outside the
fortress had been driven into the city and forts on the previous day by
Steinmetz’s impetuous attack at Courcelles.
In the evening, as we sat on a bench outside the door, the Minister
joined us for a moment. He asked me for a cigar, but Councillor
Taglioni, the King’s decipherer, was quicker than I, which was a pity,
as mine were much better. At tea the Chancellor mentioned in the
course of conversation that on two occasions he had been in danger
of being shot by a sentry, once at San Sebastian and another time at
Schluesselburg. From this we learned that he also understood a little
Spanish. Passing from the Schluesselburg story, he came to relate the
following anecdote, which, however, I was unable to hear quite clearly,
and so cannot vouch whether it occurred to the Minister himself or
to some one else. One day the Count was walking in the Summer Garden
at St. Petersburg, and met the Emperor, with whom, as a Minister in
high favour, his relations were somewhat unreserved. The two, after
strolling on together for awhile, saw a sentry posted in the middle of
a grass plot. Bismarck took the liberty to ask what he was doing there.
The Emperor did not know, and questioned the aide-de-camp, who was also
unable to explain. The aide-de-camp was then sent to ask the sentry.
His answer was, “It has been ordered,” a reply which was repeated by
every one of whom the aide-de-camp inquired. The archives were searched
in vain--a sentry had always been posted there. At last an old footman
remembered that his father had told him that the Empress Catherine had
once seen an early snowdrop on that spot, and had given instructions
that it should not be plucked. They could find no better way of
preserving it than by placing a sentry to guard it, who was afterwards
kept on as a matter of habit. The anti-German feeling in Holland and
its causes was then referred to. It was thought to be partly due to the
circumstance that Van Zuylen, when he was Dutch Minister at Berlin,
had made himself unpleasant, and consequently did not receive as much
consideration as he desired, so that he possibly left us in ill-humour.
On the 16th of August, at 9.30 A.M., we started for Pont à Mousson. On
the excellent high road to that town we passed through several villages
with fine buildings, containing the public offices and schools. The
whole way was brightened by detachments of soldiers, horse and foot,
and a great variety of vehicles. Here and there we also saw small
encampments. A little after 3 o’clock we reached our destination, a
town of about eight thousand inhabitants. Passing the market-place,
where a regiment of Saxon infantry were bivouacked, some of them lying
on the ground on bundles of straw, we turned into the Rue St. Laurent.
Here the Chancellor, with three of the Councillors, took up their
residence at the corner of Rue Raugraf in a little château overgrown
with red creepers. The rest of the party lived a few doors off. I slept
with Saint Blanquart in a room which was a veritable museum of natural
history and ethnology, being filled with the most varied trophies from
all parts of the world.
After a hasty toilette we returned to the office. On our way we
observed a number of notices posted on the walls, one announcing our
victory of the fourteenth, another respecting the abolition of the
conscription, and a third by the Mayor, apparently in connection with
some attacks by civilians on our troops, warning the inhabitants to
maintain a prudent attitude. There was also an order issued by our
people strictly enjoining the population to keep lights in their
windows at night, and to leave the doors of houses and shops open, and
to deliver up all arms at the Town Hall.
During the greater part of the afternoon we again heard the distant
roar of cannon, and ascertained at dinner that there had been renewed
fighting near Metz. Some one remarked that perhaps it would not be
possible to prevent the French retiring to Verdun. The Minister
replied, smiling, “That hardened reprobate Molk (Moltke) says it would
be no misfortune, as they would then be delivered all the more surely
into our hands”--which must mean that we could surround and annihilate
them while they were retreating. Of the other remarks made by the
Chancellor on this occasion I may mention his reference to the “small
black Saxons, who looked so intelligent” and who pleased him so much
on his paying them a visit the day before. These were either the dark
green Chasseurs or the 108th Regiment which wore the same coloured
uniform. “They seem to be sharp, ready fellows,” he added, “and the
fact ought to be mentioned in the newspapers.”
On the following night we were awakened several times by the steady
tramp of infantry and the rumbling of heavy wheels as they rolled over
the rough pavement. We heard next morning that they were Hessians. The
Minister started shortly after 4 A.M., intending to proceed towards
Metz, where an important battle was expected either that day or the
next. As it appeared probable that I should have little to do I availed
myself of the opportunity to take a walk in the environs with Willisch.
Going up stream we came upon a pontoon bridge erected by the Saxons,
who had collected there a large number of conveyances, amongst others
some carts from villages near Dresden. We swam across the clear deep
river and back again.
On returning to the bureau in the Rue Raugraf we found that the
Chancellor had not yet arrived. We had news, however, of the battle
which had been fought the day before to the west of Metz. There were
heavy losses on our side, and it was only with great difficulty
that Bazaine was prevented from breaking through our lines. It was
understood that the village of Mars la Tour was the point at which the
conflict had raged most violently. The leaden rain of the chassepots
was literally like a hailstorm. One of the cuirassier regiments, we
were told, with the exaggeration which is not unusual in such cases,
was almost utterly destroyed and the dragoon guards had also suffered
severely. Not a single division escaped without heavy losses. To-day,
however, we had superior numbers as the French had had yesterday, and
if the latter attempted another sortie we might expect to be victorious.
It did not, however, appear certain, and we were accordingly somewhat
uneasy. We could not sit still or think steadily, and, as in fever, we
were oppressed by the same ideas, which returned again and again. We
walked to the market and then to the bridge, where we saw the wounded,
who were now gradually coming in, those with light injuries on foot and
the others in ambulance cars. On the road towards Metz we met a batch
of over 120 prisoners. They were for the most part small, poor-looking
specimens; but there were also amongst them some tall, broad-shouldered
fellows from the guards, who could be recognised by the white facings
of their tunics. Then once more to the market-place and around the
garden behind the house, where a dog lies buried under a tombstone with
the following touching inscription:--
GIRARD AUBERT ÉPITAPHE À SA CHIENNE.
Ici tu gis, ma vieille amie,
Tu n’es donc plus pour mes vieux jours.
O toi, ma Diane chérie,
Je te pleurerai toujours.
At length, about 6 o’clock, the Chancellor returned. No great battle
had taken place that day, but it was highly probable that an engagement
would occur on the morrow. The Chief told us at dinner that he had
visited his eldest son, Count Herbert, in the field ambulance at
Mariaville, where he was lying in consequence of a bullet wound in the
thigh, which he had received during the general cavalry charge at Mars
la Tour. After riding about for some time the Minister at length found
his son in a farmhouse with a considerable number of other wounded
soldiers. They were in charge of a surgeon, who was unable to obtain a
supply of water, and who scrupled to take the turkeys and chickens that
were running about the yard for the use of his patients. “He said he
could not,” added the Minister, “and all our arguments were in vain. I
then threatened to shoot the poultry with my revolver and afterwards
gave him twenty francs to pay for fifteen. At last I remembered that I
was a Prussian General, and ordered him to do as I told him, whereupon
he obeyed me. I had, however, to look for the water myself and to have
it fetched in barrels.”
In the meantime the American General Sheridan had arrived in the town
and asked for an interview with the Chancellor. He had come from
Chicago, and lodged at the Croix Blanc in the market-place. At the
desire of the Minister I called upon General Sheridan and informed
him that Count Bismarck would be pleased to see him in the course of
the evening. The general was a small, corpulent gentleman of about
forty-five, with dark moustache and chin tuft, and spoke the purest
Yankee dialect. He was accompanied by his aide-de-camp, Forsythe, and a
journalist named MacLean, who served as an interpreter, acting at the
same time as war correspondent for the _New York World_.
During the night further strong contingents of troops marched through
the town--Saxons, as we ascertained next day. In the morning we heard
that the King and Chancellor had gone off at 3 A.M. A battle was being
fought on about the same ground as that of the 16th, and it appears as
if this engagement were to prove decisive. It will be easily understood
that we were still more excited than we had been during the last few
days. Uneasy, and impatient for particulars of what was passing, we
started in the direction of Metz, going some four kilometres from Pont
à Mousson, suffering both mentally and physically, from our anxiety
and suspense as well as from the sweltering heat of a windless day
and a blazing sky. We met numbers of the less severely wounded coming
towards the town, singly, in couples, and in large companies. Some
still carried their rifles, while others leant upon sticks. One had the
red cape of a French cavalryman thrown over his shoulders. They had
fought two days before at Mars la Tour and Gorze. They had only heard
rumours of this day’s battle, and these, good and bad as they happened
to be, were soon circulated in an exaggerated form throughout the town.
The good news at length seemed to get the upper hand, although late in
the evening we had still heard nothing definite. We dined without our
Chief, for whom we waited in vain until midnight. Later on we heard
that he, accompanied by Sheridan and Count Bismarck-Bohlen, was with
the King at Rezonville.
On Friday, August the 19th, when we ascertained for certain that the
Germans had been victorious, Abeken, Keudell, Hatzfeldt and I drove
to the battle-field. At Gorze the Councillors got out, intending to
proceed further on horseback. The narrow road was blocked with all
sorts of conveyances, so that it was impossible for our carriage to
pass. From the same direction as ourselves came carts with hay, straw,
wood, and baggage, while ammunition waggons and vehicles conveying the
wounded were coming the other way. The latter were being moved into
the houses, nearly all of which were turned into hospitals and were
distinguished by the Geneva cross. At almost every window we could see
men with their heads or arms in bandages.
After about an hour’s delay we were able to move slowly forward. The
road to the right not far from Gorze would have taken us in little
over half an hour to Rezonville, where I was to meet the Minister and
our horsemen. My map, however, failed to give me any guidance, and I
was afraid of going too near Metz. I therefore followed the high road
further, and passing a farm where the house, barn and stables were full
of wounded, we came to the village of Mars la Tour.
Immediately behind Gorze we had already met traces of the battle,--pits
dug in the earth by shells, branches torn off by shot and some dead
horses. As we went on we came upon the latter more frequently,
occasionally two or three together, and at one place a group of eight
carcases. Most of them were fearfully swollen, with their legs in the
air, while their heads lay slack on the ground. There was an encampment
of Saxon troops in Mars la Tour. The village seemed to have suffered
little from the engagement of the 16th. Only one house was burned
down. I asked a lieutenant of Uhlans where Rezonville was. He did not
know. Where was the King? “At a place about two hours from here,” he
said, “in that direction,”--pointing towards the east. A peasant woman
having directed us the same way, we took that road, which brought us
after a time to the village of Vionville. Shortly before reaching this
place I saw for the first time one of the soldiers who had fallen in
the late battle, a Prussian musketeer. His features were as dark as
those of a Turco, and were fearfully bloated. All the houses in the
village were full of men who were severely wounded. German and French
assistant-surgeons and hospital attendants, all wearing the Geneva
cross, were busy moving from place to place.
I decided to wait there for the Minister and the Councillors, as I
believed they must certainly pass that way soon. As I went towards
the battle-field through a side street I saw a human leg lying in a
ditch, half covered with a bundle of blood-stained rags. Some four
hundred paces from the village were two parallel pits about three
hundred feet in length, and neither wide nor deep, at which the grave
diggers were still working. Near by had been collected a great mass
of German and French dead. Some of the bodies were half naked, but
most of them were still in uniform. All were of a dark grey colour
and were fearfully swollen from the heat. There might have been one
hundred and fifty corpses in all, and others were being constantly
unloaded from the carts. Doubtless, many had already been buried.
Further on in the direction of Metz the ground rose slightly, and
there in particular great numbers appeared to have fallen. The ground
was everywhere covered with French caps, Prussian helmets, knapsacks,
arms, uniforms, underclothing, shoes, and paper. Here and there in the
furrows of a potato field lay single bodies, one with a whole leg torn
away, another with half the head blown off, while some had the right
hand stretched out stiffly pointing towards the sky. There were also a
few single graves, marked with a chassepot stuck in the ground or with
a cross made from the wood of a cigar box roughly tied together. The
effluvium was very noticeable, and at times, when the wind came from
the direction of a heap of dead horses, it became unendurable.
It was time to return to the carriage, and besides I had seen quite
enough of the battle-field. I took another way back, but I was again
obliged to pass further masses of the dead, this time all French.
Near some of the bodies lay packets of letters that had been carried
in their knapsacks. I brought some of these with me as a memento,
amongst them being two letters in German from one Anastasia Stampf,
of Scherrweiler, near Schlettstadt. These I found lying by a French
soldier who had been stationed at Caen shortly before the outbreak of
the war. One of them, in indifferent spelling, was dated “The 25th of
the Hay Month, 1870,” and concluded with the words, “We constantly
commend thee to the protection of the Blessed Virgin!”
It was 4 o’clock when I got back, and as the Minister had not arrived,
we returned to Gorze. Here we met Keudell, who, with Abeken and Count
Hatzfeldt had called upon the Chief at Rezonville. During the battle of
the 18th instant, which was decided at Gravelotte, the Minister had,
together with the King, ventured a considerable distance towards the
front, so that for a time both of them were in some danger. Bismarck
had afterwards with his own hands taken water to the wounded. At 9 P.M.
I saw him again safe and sound at Pont à Mousson, where we all took
supper with him. Naturally, the conversation turned for the most part
on the last two battles and the resulting gains and losses. The French
had fallen in huge masses. The Minister had seen our artillery mow
down whole lines of their guards near Gravelotte. We had also suffered
severely. Only the losses of the 16th of August were known up to the
present. “A great many noble Prussian families will go into mourning,”
the Chief said. “Wesdehlen and Reuss lie in their graves, Wedell and
Finkenstein are dead, Rahden (Lucca’s husband) is shot through both
cheeks, and a crowd of officers commanding regiments or battalions have
either fallen or are severely wounded. The whole field near Mars la
Tour was yesterday still white and blue with the bodies of cuirassiers
and dragoons.” In explanation of this statement, we were informed that
near the village referred to there had been a great cavalry charge upon
the French, who were pressing forward in the direction of Verdun. This
charge was repelled by the enemy’s infantry in Balaclava fashion, but
had so far served its purpose that the French were kept in check until
reinforcements arrived. The Chancellor’s two sons had also gallantly
ridden into that leaden hailstorm, the elder receiving no less than
three bullets, one passing through the breast of his tunic, another
hitting his watch, and the third lodging in his thigh. The younger
appears to have escaped unhurt. The Chief related, evidently with some
pride, how Count Bill rescued two comrades who had lost their horses,
dragging them out of the _mêlée_ in his powerful grasp and riding off
with them. Still more German blood was shed on the 18th, but we secured
the victory, and obtained the object of our sacrifices. That evening
Bazaine’s army had finally retired to Metz, and even French officers
whom we had captured admitted that they now believed their cause was
lost. The Saxons, who had made long marches on the two previous days,
were able to take an important part in the battle near the village of
Saint Privat. They now occupied the road to Thionville, so that Metz
was entirely surrounded by our troops.
It appeared that the Chancellor did not quite approve of the course
taken by the military authorities in both battles. Among other things
he said that Steinmetz had abused the really astounding gallantry of
our men--“he was a spendthrift of blood.” The Minister spoke with
violent indignation of the barbarous manner in which the French
conducted the war; they were said to have fired upon the Geneva cross
and even upon a flag of truce.
Sheridan seemed to have speedily got on a friendly footing with the
Minister, as I was instructed to invite him and his two companions to
dinner on the following evening.
At 11 o’clock on the 20th of August the Chancellor received a visit
from the Crown Prince, who was stationed with his troops about
twenty-five English miles from Pont à Mousson on the road from Nancy
to Châlons. In the afternoon some twelve hundred prisoners, including
two carts conveying officers, passed through the Rue Notre Dame in
charge of a detachment of Prussian cuirassiers. Sheridan, Forsythe and
MacLean dined that evening with the Minister, who kept up a lively
conversation in good English with the American general. The Chief and
his American guests had champagne and porter. The latter was drunk out
of pewter mugs, one of which the Minister filled for me. I mention this
because no one else at table had porter, and the gift was particularly
welcome, as since we left Saarbrücken we had had no beer. Sheridan,
who was known as a successful soldier on the Federal side in the last
year of the American Civil War, spoke a good deal. He told us of the
hardships he and his companions had undergone during the ride from the
Rocky Mountains to Chicago, of the fearful swarms of mosquitoes, of a
great heap of bones in California or thereabouts in which fossils were
found, and of buffalo and bear hunting, &c. The Chancellor also told
some hunting stories. One day in Finland he found himself in dangerous
proximity to a big bear. It was white with snow, and he had barely been
able to see it. “At last I fired, however, and the bear fell some six
paces from me. But it was not killed, and might get up again. I knew
what I had to expect, and so without stirring I quietly reloaded, and
as soon as it stirred I shot it dead.”
We were very busy on the forenoon of the 21st of August, preparing
reports and leading articles to be forwarded to Germany. We heard
that the bearer of a flag of truce who was fired upon by the French
was Captain or Major Verdy, of Moltke’s general staff, and that the
trumpeter who accompanied him was wounded. Trustworthy information
was received from Florence to the effect that Victor Emmanuel and his
Ministers had, in consequence of our victories, decided to observe
neutrality, which up to that time was anything but certain. Now it was
at last possible to estimate, at least approximately, the losses of the
French at Courcelles, Mars la Tour, and Gravelotte. The Minister put
them at about 50,000 men during the three days, of whom about 12,000
were killed. He added: “The ambition and mutual jealousy of some of our
generals was to blame for the severity of our losses. That the guards
charged too soon was entirely due to their jealousy of the Saxons who
were coming up behind them.”
That afternoon I had some talk with one of the dragoon guards who had
been in the charge on the French battery on the 16th. He maintained
that besides Finkenstein and Reuss, the two Treskows were also dead
and buried; and that after the battle one squadron had been formed out
of the three squadrons of his regiment that had been in action, and
one regiment out of the two dragoon regiments that had been engaged.
He spoke very modestly about that gallant deed. “We had to charge,” he
said, “in order to prevent our artillery being taken by the enemy.”
While I was talking to him some Saxon infantry passed by with a batch
of about 150 prisoners. I ascertained from the escort that after their
long march the Saxons had fought in the battle near Roncourt and Saint
Privat. Once they had charged with the bayonet and the butt ends of
their rifles. They had lost a good many officers, including General
Krausshaar.
As I entered the room that evening at tea time the Chief said: “How are
you, doctor?”
“I thank your Excellency, quite well.”
“Have you seen something of what has been going on?”
“Yes, your Excellency, the battle-field near Vionville.”
“It is a pity you were not with us to share our adventures on the 18th.”
The Chancellor then went on to give us a full account of his
experiences during the last hours of the battle and the following
night. I shall give these and other particulars later on, as I heard
them from the Minister. Here I will only mention that the King had
ventured too far to the front, which Bismarck thought was not right.
Referring to our men, the American General Sheridan said: “Your
infantry is the best in the world; but it was wrong of your generals to
advance their cavalry as they did.” I may further mention that Bohlen
in the course of the conversation said to the Chancellor: “Did you hear
how the Bavarian muttered when the result seemed doubtful--‘Things look
bad! It’s a bad case!’--and was obviously delighted to think we were
going to be beaten?” The Bavarian referred to was Prince Luitpold. The
name of General Steinmetz then came up. The Chancellor said that he
was brave, but self-willed and excessively vain. Small and slight of
figure, when he came into the Diet he always stood near the President’s
chair so as to be noticed. He used to attract attention by pretending
to be very busy taking notes of what went on, as if he were following
the debate with great care. “He evidently thought the newspapers would
mention it, and praise his zeal. If I am not mistaken his calculation
proved correct.”
On Monday, the 22nd of August, I wrote in my diary: “Called to the
Chief at 10.30 A.M. He asked first after my health and whether I also
had been attacked by dysentery. He had had a bad time of it the night
before. The Count down with dysentery! God save him from it! It would
be worse than the loss of a battle. Without him our whole cause would
be reduced to uncertainty and vacillation.”
On the instructions of the Chief I sent the _Kölnische Zeitung_ the
translation of part of a confidential report according to which the
Emperor Alexander was favourably disposed towards the French. I also
wired to Berlin respecting the closing of some small telegraph offices
the officials of which were required for the field service.
There is no longer any doubt that we shall retain Alsace and Metz,
with its environs, in case of a final victory over France. The
considerations that have led the Chancellor to this conclusion, and
which have already been discussed in an academic way in the English
press, are somewhat as follows:
A war indemnity, however great it may be, would not compensate us for
the enormous sacrifices we have made. We must protect South Germany
with its exposed position against French attacks, and thus put an end
to the pressure exercised upon it by France during two centuries,
especially as this pressure has during the whole time greatly
contributed to German disorganisation and confusion. Baden, Würtemberg,
and the other south-western districts must not in future be threatened
by Strassburg and subject to attack from that point. This also applies
to Bavaria. Within 150 years the French have made war upon South-west
Germany more than a dozen times. Efforts were made in 1814 and 1815
in a forbearing spirit to secure guarantees against a renewal of such
attacks. That forbearance, however, was without effect, and it would
now also remain fruitless. The danger lies in the incurable arrogance
and lust of power which is part of the French character, qualities that
might be abused by every ruler--not by any means by the Bonapartes
alone--for the purpose of attacking peaceful neighbours. Our protection
against this evil does not lie in vain attempts periodically to soothe
French susceptibilities, but rather in securing a well-defended
frontier. France, by repeatedly annexing German territory and all the
natural defences on our western frontier, has put herself in a position
to force her way into South Germany with a comparatively small force
before assistance can be brought from the north. Such invasions have
repeatedly occurred under Louis XIV. and his successor, as well as
under the Republic and the First Empire, and the sense of insecurity
obliges the German States to reckon constantly with France. That the
annexation of a piece of territory will produce bitter feelings amongst
the French is a matter of no consequence. Such feelings would exist in
any case, even without any cession of territory. Austria did not lose
an acre of soil in 1866, and yet what thanks have we had? Our victory
at Sadowa had already filled the French with hatred and vexation. How
much stronger must that sentiment be after our victories at Wörth and
Metz! Revenge for those defeats will continue to be the war cry in
Paris even without any annexation, and will spread to influential
circles in the provinces, just as the idea of revenge for Waterloo
was kept alive there for decades. An enemy who cannot be turned into
a friend by considerate treatment must be rendered thoroughly and
permanently harmless. Not the demolition, but the surrender, of the
eastern fortresses of France can alone serve our purpose. Whoever
desires disarmament must wish to see France’s neighbours adopt this
course, as France is the sole disturber of European peace, and will
remain so as long as she can.
It is astonishing how freely this idea of the Chief’s now flows from
one’s pen. What looked like a miracle ten days ago seems now quite
natural and a matter of course. Perhaps the suggestion as to a German
Empire which is understood to have been mentioned during the visit of
the Crown Prince is also an idea of the same kind. Blessings follow
closely upon each other’s heels. We may now regard everything as
probable.
At dinner the Minister complained of the excessive frugality with which
the principal officials of the Royal Household catered for the King’s
table. “There is seldom any champagne, and in the matter of food also
short commons is the rule. When I glance at the number of cutlets I
only take one, as I am afraid that otherwise somebody else would have
to go without.” These remarks, like similar hints given recently, were
intended for one or other of the gentlemen from the Court, with a view
to their being repeated in the proper quarter. The conversation then
turned on the improper, not to say disgraceful, manner in which the
French soldiers carried on the war. The Minister said they had killed
one of our officers near Mars la Tour (Finkenstein, I believe it was)
while he was sitting wounded by the roadside. One of the company
maintained that he had been shot, but another said that an examination
of the body by a doctor showed that the officer had been stabbed. The
Chief remarked that if he had to choose, he should prefer being stabbed
to being shot.
Count Herbert has been brought in from the Field Hospital, and a bed
has been prepared for him on the floor in his father’s room. I was
talking to him to-day. His wound is painful, but up to the present it
does not appear to be dangerous. He is to return to Germany one of
these days, where he will remain until he has recovered.
CHAPTER IV
COMMERCY--BAR LE DUC--CLERMONT EN ARGONNE
On Tuesday, August 23rd, we were to continue our journey westwards.
Sheridan and his companions were to accompany us or to follow without
delay. Regierungspräsident von Kühlwetter remained behind as Prefect;
Count Henckel went to Saargemund, and Count Renard, a huge figure
with a beard of corresponding amplitude, went to Nancy in a similar
capacity. Bamberger, the member of Parliament, visited us again. I
also noticed Herr Stieber on one occasion in the neighbourhood of the
house at the corner of the Rue Raugraf, and as I was walking about
the town to take a last look at the place before leaving, I saw the
fine-drawn, wrinkled, clean shaven face of Moltke, whom I had last seen
as he entered the Foreign Office in company with the Minister of War
five or six days before the declaration of hostilities. It seemed to
me that his features wore to-day an expression of perfect content and
satisfaction.
On my return to the office I was much interested by a report of the
views recently expressed by Thiers as to the immediate future of
France. He regarded it as certain that in case of victory we should
retain Alsace. The defeat of Napoleon would be followed by the loss
of his throne. He would be succeeded for a few months by a Republic,
and then probably by one of the Orleans family, or perhaps by Leopold
of Belgium, who, according to the source from which our informant
obtained his news (one of Rothschild’s confidants), was known on the
best authority to be extremely ambitious.
We left Pont à Mousson at 10 o’clock. In the villages along the road
the houses stood side by side as in a town. Most of them possessed
handsome municipal buildings and schools, and some had seemingly
ancient Gothic churches. On the other side of Gironville the road
passes a steep hill, with a wide prospect of the plain beneath. Here
we left the carriages in order to ease the load for the horses. The
Chancellor who drove at the head of our party with Abeken also got
out and walked for a quarter of an hour, his big boots reminding one
of pictures of the thirty years’ war. Moltke walked beside him; the
greatest strategist of our days striding along towards Paris on a
country road near the French frontier in company with the greatest
statesman of our time!
After we had returned to the carriages we saw a number of soldiers to
the right putting up a telegraph line. Shortly after 2 o’clock we came
to Commercy, a bright little town with about 6,000 inhabitants. The
white blinds in the better class houses were for the most part drawn
down, as if the occupants did not wish to see the hated Prussians. The
people in blouses were more curious and less hostile.
The Chief, together with Abeken and Keudell, took up their quarters
in the château of Count Macore de Gaucourt in the Rue des Fontaines,
where a Prince von Schwarzburg had lodged, and which was now occupied
by the lady of the house. Her husband was in the French army and was
accordingly with his regiment in the field. He was a very distinguished
gentleman, being descended from the old Dukes of Lorraine. There was
a pretty flower garden near the house, and behind it was a large
wooded park. I put up not far from the Minister’s quarters at No. 1
Rue Heurtebise, where I had a friendly and obliging landlord and an
excellent fourpost bed. I called afterwards on the Chancellor, whom
I found in the garden, and asked if there was anything for me to do.
After thinking for a moment, he said there was, and an hour later I
provided work both for the Field Post and the new telegraph line.
Amongst other things I wrote the following paragraph: “It is now quite
clear that the Princes of the Orleans family consider that their time
has come, as they expect to see the star of the Napoleons sink lower
and lower. In order to emphasise the fact that they are Frenchmen, they
have placed their swords in the present crisis at the service of their
country. The Orleans lost their throne in great part through their own
sluggishness and their indifference to the development of neighbouring
States. They would now appear determined to regain it by energy, and
to maintain their position by flattering French chauvinism, and love
of glory and universal dominion. Our work is not yet done. A decisive
victory is probable, but is not yet certain. The fall of Napoleon seems
near at hand, but it is not yet accomplished. Even should it occur,
could we, in view of the considerations already mentioned, rest content
with it and accept it as the sole result of our exertions, could we
feel confident of having attained our principal object, namely, to
secure peace with France for many years to come? No one can answer that
question in the affirmative. A peace with the Orleans on the French
throne would be still more a mockery than one with Napoleon, who must
already have had enough of ‘la gloire.’ Sooner or later we should be
again challenged by France, who probably would be then better prepared
and would have secured more powerful allies.”
Three reserve army corps are to be formed in Germany. One, and the
strongest, near Berlin; one on the Rhine; and a third at Glogau in
Silesia, in consequence of the equivocal attitude of Austria. That
would be a purely defensive measure. The troops on the Rhine are to
be commanded by the Grand Duke of Mecklenburg, those near Berlin by
General von Canstein, and those at Glogau by General von Löwenfeld.
Towards evening the military band played before the residence of the
King, the street urchins holding their notes for the musicians in the
friendliest possible manner. The King had also stopped at Commercy
during the war against the First Napoleon.
Counts Waldersee and Lehndorff, and Lieutenant-General von Alvensleben
(from Magdeburg) were amongst the Chief’s guests at dinner. Alvensleben
told us the story of a so-called “Marl-Major” who was accustomed to
attribute all sorts of occurrences to geognostic causes. He reasoned
somewhat in this style: “It follows from the character and conduct of
the Maid of Orleans that she could only have been born on a fertile
marly soil, that she was fated to gain a victory in a limestone
country, and to die in a sandstone district.”
Speaking of the barbarous way in which the French conducted the war,
Alvensleben said that they had also fired upon a flag of truce at
Toul. On the other hand, an officer who for a joke rode along the
glacis had a friendly chat with the gentlemen on the walls. The
question whether it would be possible to take Paris by storm in spite
of its fortifications was answered in the affirmative by the military
guests. General Alvensleben said: “A great city of that kind cannot
be successfully defended if it is attacked by a sufficiently numerous
force.” Count Waldersee wished to “see Babel utterly destroyed,” and
brought forward arguments in favour of that measure with which I was
immensely pleased. The Minister, however, replied: “Yes, that would be
a very good thing, but it is impossible for many reasons. One of these
is that numbers of Germans in Cologne and Frankfurt have considerable
sums invested there.”
The conversation then turned upon our conquests in France and those
still to be made. Alvensleben was in favour of keeping the country up
to the Marne. Bismarck had another idea, which, however, he seemed to
think it impossible to realise. “My ideal would be,” he said, “a kind
of German colony, a neutral State of eight or ten million inhabitants,
free from the conscription and whose taxes should flow to Germany so
far as they were not required for domestic purposes. France would thus
lose a district from which she draws her best soldiers, and would be
rendered harmless. In the rest of France no Bourbon, no Orleans, and
probably no Bonaparte, neither Lulu (the Prince Imperial) nor the fat
Jerome, nor the old one. I did not wish for war in connection with the
Luxemburg affair, as I knew that it would lead to six others. But we
must now put an end to all this. However, we must not sell the bear’s
skin before we have killed it. I confess I am superstitious in that
respect.” “Never mind,” said Count Waldersee, “our bear is already
badly hit.”
The Chief then again referred to the royal table and to the frugal
manner in which food was doled out to the guests, his remarks being
probably intended for Count Lehndorff, who was expected to repeat them.
“We had cutlets there recently, and I could not take two, as there was
only one apiece for us. Rabbit followed, and I debated with myself
whether I should take a second portion, although I could easily have
managed four. At length hunger overcame my politeness, and I seized a
second piece, though I am sure I was robbing somebody else.”
The Chancellor then went on to speak of his sons. “I hope,” he said, “I
shall be able to keep at least one of my youngsters--I mean Herbert,
who is on his way to Germany. He got to feel himself quite at home in
camp. Formerly he was apt to be haughty, but as he lay wounded at Pont
à Mousson he was almost more friendly with the common troopers who
visited him than with the officers.”
At tea we were told that in 1814 the King had his quarters in the
same street where he now lives, next door to the house he occupies at
present. The Chief seems to have spoken to him to-day about decorating
Bavarian soldiers with the Iron Cross. The Minister said: “My further
plan of campaign for his Majesty is that part of his escort should be
sent on ahead. The country must be scoured by a company to the right
and left of the road, and the Royal party must remain together. Pickets
must be posted at stated intervals. The King approved when I told him
that this had been done also in 1814. The Sovereigns did not drive on
that occasion, but went on horseback, and Russian soldiers, twenty
paces apart, lined the whole route.” Somebody suggested the possibility
that peasants or franctireurs might fire at the King. “Certainly,”
added the Chief, “and what makes it so important a point is that the
personage in question, if he is ill or wounded or otherwise out of
sorts, has only to say ‘Go back!’ and we must all of us go back.”
We left Commercy next day at noon, passing several military detachments
and a number of encampments on our way. The measures of precaution
mentioned by the Chief had been adopted. We were preceded by a squadron
of uhlans and escorted by the _Stabswache_, which formed a bright
picture of many colours, being recruited from the various cavalry
regiments, such as green, red, and blue hussars, Saxon and Prussian
dragoons, &c. The carriages of the Chancellor’s party followed close
behind those of the King’s. For a long time we did not come across
any villages. Then we passed through St. Aubin, and soon after came
to a milestone by the roadside with the words “Paris 241 kilometres,”
so that we were only a distance of some thirty-two German miles from
Babel. We afterwards passed a long line of transport carts belonging
to the regiments of King John of Saxony, the Grand Duke of Hesse, &c.,
which showed that we were now in the district occupied by the Crown
Prince’s army.
Shortly afterwards we entered the small town of Ligny, which was
thronged with Bavarian and other soldiers. We waited for about
three-quarters of an hour in the market-place, which was crowded
with all sorts of conveyances, while the Chief paid a visit to the
Crown Prince. On our starting once more we met further masses of blue
Bavarian infantry, some light horse collected round their camp fires,
then a second squadron with a herd of cattle guarded by soldiers, and
finally a third larger encampment within a circle of baggage waggons.
Bar le Duc, the largest town in which we have stayed up to the
present, may have a population of some 15,000. The streets and squares
presented a lively picture as we drove through, and we caught glimpses
of curious female faces watching us through the blinds. On the arrival
of the King the Bavarian band played “Heil dir im Siegerkranz.” He took
up his quarters in the house occupied by the local branch of the Bank
of France, in the Rue de la Banque. The Chancellor and his party lodged
on the other side of the street, in the house of a M. Pernay, who had
gone off leaving an old woman in charge.
Dr. Lauer, the King’s physician, dined with the Minister that evening.
The Chief was very communicative as usual, and appeared to be in
particularly good humour. He renewed his complaints as to the “short
commons” at the royal table, evidently intending the doctor to repeat
them to Count Puckler or Perponcher. During his visit at Ligny he had
to take breakfast, which he said was excellent, with the Crown Prince
and the Princes and chief officers of his suite. He had a seat near the
fire, however, which was not quite to his taste, and otherwise it was
in many ways less comfortable than in his own quarters. “There were too
many Princes there for an ordinary mortal to be able to find a place.
Amongst them was Frederick the Gentle (Friedrich der Sachte--Frederick
VIII. of Schleswig-Holstein). He wore a Bavarian uniform, so that
I hardly knew him at first. He looked somewhat embarrassed when he
recognised me.” We also gathered from what the Chief said that Count
Hatzfeldt was to act as a kind of Prefect while we remained here, a
position for which probably his thorough knowledge of French and of
the habits of the country had recommended him. We also heard that the
headquarters might remain here for several days,--“as at Capua,” added
the Count, laughing.
Before tea some articles were despatched to Germany, including one
on the part played by the Saxons at Gravelotte, which the Chancellor
praised repeatedly.
By way of change I will here again quote from my diary:--
_Thursday, August 25th._--Took a walk early this morning in the upper,
and evidently the older, part of the town. The shops are almost all
open. The people answer politely when we ask to be shown the way. Not
far from our quarters there is an old stone bridge over the river
which was unquestionably built before Lorraine and the Duchy of Bar
belonged to France. Towards 9 o’clock the Bavarians began their
march through the town, passing in front of the King’s quarters.
More French spectators had collected on both sides of the street
than was quite comfortable for us. For hours together light horse
with green uniforms and red facings, dark blue cuirassiers, lancers,
artillery and infantry, regiment after regiment marched before the
Commander-in-Chief of the German forces. As they passed the King the
troops cheered lustily, the cavalry swinging their sabres, and the foot
soldiers lifting up their right hands. The colours were lowered before
the Sovereign, the cavalry trumpets blew an ear-splitting fanfare,
while the infantry bands played stirring airs, one of them giving the
beautiful Hohenfriedberg march. First came General von Hartmann’s Army
Corps, followed by that of Von der Tann, who afterwards took breakfast
with us. Who could have thought, immediately after the war of 1866, or
even three months ago, of the possibility of such a scene?
Wrote several articles for post and others for the wire. Our people
are pressing forward rapidly. The vanguards of the German columns
are already between Châlons and Epernay. The formation of three
reserve armies in Germany, which has been already mentioned, began
a few days ago. The neutral Powers raise some objections to our
intended annexation of French territory for the purpose of securing
an advantageous western frontier, especially England, who up to the
present has shown a disposition to tie our hands. The reports from St.
Petersburg appear to be more favourable, the Tsar being well disposed
to us, although he by no means unreservedly accepts the proposed
measures, while we are assured of the active sympathy of the Grand
Duchess Hélène. We hold fast to our intention to enforce the cession
of territory, that intention being based upon the necessity of at
length securing South Germany from French attack and thus rendering it
independent of French policy. When our intentions are made public they
will certainly be energetically endorsed by the national sentiment,
which it will be difficult to oppose.
It is reported that a variety of revolting acts have been committed by
the bands of franctireurs that are now being formed. Their uniform is
such that they can hardly be recognised as soldiers, and the badges by
which they are distinguished can be easily laid aside. One of these
young fellows lies in a ditch near a wood, apparently sunning himself,
while a troop of cavalry rides by. When they have passed he takes a
rifle which has been concealed in a bush, fires at them and runs into
the wood. Knowing the way he again appears a little further on as a
harmless peasant. I am inclined to think that these are not defenders
of their country but rather assassins who should be strung up without
ceremony whenever they are caught.
Count Seckendorf, of the Crown Prince’s staff, was the Chief’s guest at
dinner. The Augustenburger (Frederick VIII. of Schleswig-Holstein), who
has joined the Bavarians, was spoken of, and not to his advantage....
(The opinions expressed were practically identical with those given in
a letter which I received a few months later from a patriotic friend,
Herr Noeldeke, who lived in Kiel at that time as a professor. He wrote:
“We all know that he was not born for heroic deeds. He cannot help
that. If he waits persistently for his inheritance to be restored to
him by some miraculous means, that is a family trait. But he might
at least have made an effort to appear heroic. Instead of loafing
around with the army he might have led a company or a battalion of the
soldiers whom at one time he was nearly calling his own,--or for my
part he might have led Bavarians. In all probability the result would
not have been very remarkable, but at any rate he would have shown his
good will.”)
Reference was made to the rumour that the Bavarian battalions did not
appear particularly anxious to advance at the battle of Wörth (or was
it Weissenburg?), and that Major von Freiberg called upon them to show
themselves equal to “those gallant Prussians.” Seckendorf, if I am not
mistaken, confirmed this report. On the other hand, he denied that
the Crown Prince had ordered treacherous French peasants to be shot.
He had, on the contrary, acted with great leniency and forbearance,
especially towards unmannerly French officers.
Count Bohlen, who is always ready with amusing anecdotes and flashes of
fun, said: “On the 18th von Breintz’s battery was subjected to such a
heavy fire that in a short time nearly all his horses and most of his
men lay dead or wounded. As he was mustering the survivors, the captain
remarked, ‘A very fine fight, is it not?’”
The Chief said: “Last night I asked the sentry at the door how he was
off for food, and I found that the man had had nothing to eat for
twenty-four hours. I went to the kitchen and brought him a good chunk
of bread, at which he seemed highly pleased.”
Hatzfeldt’s appointment as Prefect led to the mention of other Prefects
and Commissaries _in spe_. Doubt having been expressed as to the
capacity of some of them, the Minister remarked: “Our officials in
France may commit a few blunders, but they will be soon forgotten if
the administration in general is conducted energetically.”
The conversation having turned on the telegraph lines which were being
so rapidly erected in our rear, somebody told the following story.
The workmen who found that their poles were stolen and their wires
cut, asked the peasants to keep guard over them during the night. The
latter, however, refused to do this, although they were offered payment
for it. At length they were promised that the name of each watchman
should be painted upon every pole. This speculation on French vanity
succeeded. After that the fellows in the long nightcaps kept faithful
watch, and no further damage was done.
_Friday, August 26th._--We are to move forward to Saint Ménehould,
where our troops have captured 800 mobile guards. Early in the day I
wrote an article about the franctireurs, dealing in detail with the
false view which they take of what is permissible in war.
We moved forward on the 26th, not to Saint Ménehould, however,
which was still unsafe, being infested by franctireurs and mobile
guards, but to Clermont en Argonne, where we arrived at 7 o’clock
in the evening. On our way we passed through several rather large
villages with handsome old churches. For the last couple of hours
military policemen were stationed along the road at intervals of about
200 paces. The houses, which were built of grey sandstone and not
whitewashed, stood close together. The whole population shuffled about
in clumsy wooden shoes, and the features of the men and women, of whom
we saw great numbers standing before the doors, were, so far as I could
observe in a passing glance, almost invariably ugly. Probably the
people thought it necessary to remove the prettier girls to a place of
safety out of the way of the German birds of prey.
We met some Bavarian troops with a line of transport waggons. The
troops loudly cheered the King, and afterwards the Chancellor. Later
on we overtook three regiments of infantry, some hussars, uhlans, and
a Saxon commissariat detachment. Near a village, which was called
Triaucourt if I am not mistaken, we met a cartful of franctireurs who
had been captured by our people. Most of these young fellows hung
their heads, and one of them was weeping. The Chief stopped and spoke
to them. What he said did not appear to please them particularly. An
officer of higher rank who came over to the carriage of the Councillors
and was treated to a friendly glass of cognac told us that these
fellows or comrades of theirs had on the previous day treacherously
shot a captain or major of the uhlans, named Von Fries or Friesen. On
being taken prisoners they had not behaved themselves like soldiers,
but had run away from their escort. The cavalry and rifles, however,
arranged a kind of battue in the vineyards, so that some of them were
again seized, while others were shot or cut down. It was evident that
the war was becoming barbarous and inhuman, owing to these guerilla
bands. Our soldiers were prejudiced against them from the beginning,
even apart from the possibility of their lying treacherously in ambush,
as they looked upon them as busybodies who were interfering in what was
not their business, and as bunglers who did not understand their work.
We took up our residence at Clermont in the town schoolhouse in the
main street, the King’s quarters being over the way. On our arrival,
the Grande Rue was full of carts and carriages, and one saw here and
there a few Saxon rifles. While Abeken and I were visiting the church
we could hear in the stillness the steady tramp of the troops and their
hurrahs as they marched past the King’s quarters.
On our return we were told that the Minister had left word that we
were to dine with him in the Hôtel des Voyageurs. We found a place at
the Chief’s table in a back room of the hotel, which was full of noise
and tobacco smoke. Amongst the guests was an officer with a long black
beard, who wore the Geneva cross on his arm. This was Prince Pless. He
said that the captured French officers at Pont à Mousson had behaved in
an insolent manner, and had spent the whole night drinking and playing
cards. A general had insisted that he was entitled to have a separate
carriage, and been very obstreperous when his demand was naturally
rejected. We then went on to speak of the franctireurs and their odious
modes of warfare. The Minister confirmed what I had already heard from
Abeken, namely, that he had spoken very sharply to the prisoners we had
met in the afternoon. “I told them, ‘_Vous serez tous pendus,--vous
n’êtes pas des soldats, vous êtes des assassins!_’ On my saying this
one of them began to howl.” We have already seen that the Chancellor is
anything but unfeeling, and further proof of this will be given later
on.
In our quarters the Chief’s chamber was on the first floor, Abeken, I
believe, having a back room on the same landing. The remainder of us
were lodged on the second floor in a dormitory or kind of hall which
at first only contained two chairs and two bedsteads with mattresses
but without quilts. The night was bitterly cold, and I only with my
waterproof to cover me. Still it was quite endurable, especially when
one fell asleep thinking of the poor soldiers who have to lie outside
in the muddy fields.
In the morning we were busy rearranging our apartment to suit our
needs. Without depriving it of its original character we turned it
into an office and dining-room. Theiss’s cleverness conjured up a
magnificent table out of a sawing bench and a baker’s trough, a
barrel, a small box and a door which we took off its hinges. This work
of art served as breakfast and dining table for the Chancellor of
the Confederation and ourselves, and in the intervals between those
meals was used as a desk by the Councillors and Secretaries, who
neatly committed to paper and reproduced in the form of despatches,
instructions, telegrams, and newspaper articles the pregnant ideas
which the Count thought out in our midst. The scarcity of chairs
was to a certain extent overcome by requisitioning a bench from the
kitchen, while some of the party contented themselves with boxes as
seats. Wine bottles that had been emptied by the Minister served
as candlesticks--experience proved that champagne bottles were the
fittest for this purpose and as a matter of fact good wax candles
burned as brightly in these as in a silver chandelier. It was more
difficult to secure the necessary supply of water for washing, and
sometimes it was hard even to get enough for drinking purposes, the
soldiers having during the last two days almost drained the wells for
themselves and their horses. Only one of our party lamented his lot
and grumbled at these and other slight discomforts. The rest of us,
including the far-travelled Abeken, accepted them all with good humour,
as welcome and characteristic features of our expedition.
The office of the Minister of War, or rather of the general staff, was
on the ground floor, where Fouriere and a number of soldiers sat at the
desks and rostrums in the two schoolrooms. The walls were covered with
maps, &c., and with mottoes, one of which was particularly applicable
to the present bad times: “_Faites-vous une étude de la patience, et
sachez céder par raison._”
The Chief came in while we were taking our coffee. He was in a bad
temper, and asked why the proclamation threatening to punish with death
a number of offences by the population against the laws of war had not
been posted up. On his instructions I inquired of Stieber, who told me
that Abeken had handed over the proclamation to the general staff, and
that he (Stieber), as director of the military police, could only put
up such notices when they came from his Majesty.
On going to the Chancellor’s room to inform him of the result of my
inquiries, I found that he was little better off than myself in the
way of sleeping accommodation. He had passed the night on a mattress
on the floor with his revolver by his side, and he was working at a
little table which was hardly large enough to rest his two elbows on.
The apartment was almost bare of furniture and there was not a sofa
or armchair, &c. He, who for years past had so largely influenced the
history of the world, and in whose mind all the great movements of our
time were concentrated and being shaped anew, had hardly a place on
which to lay his head; while stupid Court parasites rested from their
busy idleness in luxurious beds, and even Monsieur Stieber managed to
provide for himself a more comfortable resting-place than our Master.
On this occasion I saw a letter that had fallen into our hands. It came
from Paris, and was addressed to a French officer of high rank. From
this communication it appeared that little hope was entertained of
further successful resistance, and just as little of the maintenance of
the dynasty. The writer did not know what to expect or desire for the
immediate future. The choice seemed to lie between a Republic without
republicans, and a Monarchy without monarchists. The republicans were
a feeble set and the monarchists were too selfish. There was great
enthusiasm about the army, but nobody was in a hurry to join it and
assist in repelling the enemy.
The Chief again said that attention should be called to the services
of the Saxons at Gravelotte. “The small black fellows should in
particular be praised. Their own newspapers have expressed themselves
very modestly, and yet the Saxons were exceptionally gallant. Try to
get some details of the excellent work they did on the 18th.”
They were very busy in the office in the meantime. Councillors and
Secretaries were writing and deciphering at full pressure, sealing
despatches at the lights stuck into the champagne-bottle-candlesticks,
and all around portfolios and documents, waterproofs and shoe-brushes,
torn papers and empty envelopes, were strewn about in picturesque
confusion. Orderlies, couriers and attendants came and went. Every
one was talking at the same time, and was too occupied to pay the
least attention to his neighbours. Abeken was particularly active in
rushing about between the improvised table and the messengers, and
his voice was louder than ever. I believe that this morning his ready
hand turned out a fresh document every half hour; at least, one heard
him constantly pushing back his chair and calling a messenger. In
addition to all this noise came the incessant tramp, tramp, tramp of
the soldiers, the rolling of the drums and the rattle of the carts over
the pavement. In this confusion it was no light task to collect one’s
thoughts and to carry out properly the instructions received, but with
plenty of good will it could be done.
After dinner, at which the Chancellor and some of the Councillors were
not present, as they dined with the King, I took a walk with Willisch
to the chapel of St. Anne on the top of the hill. There we found a
number of our countrymen, soldiers belonging to the Freiberg Rifle
Battalion, at supper under a tree. They have been engaged in the battle
of the 18th. I tried to obtain some particulars of the fight, but could
not get much more out of them than that they had given it with a will
to the Frenchmen.
By the side of the chapel a pathway led between a row of trees to a
delightful prospect, whence we could see at our feet the little town,
and beyond it to the north and east an extensive plain, with stubble
fields, villages, steeples, groups of trees and stretches of wood,
and to the south and west a forest that spread out to the horizon,
changing from dark green to the misty blue of the far distance. This
plain is intersected by three roads, one of which goes direct to
Varennes. On this road not far from the town a Bavarian regiment was
stationed, whose camp fires added a picturesque note to the scene.
In the distance to the right was a wooded hill with the village of
Faucoix, while the small town of Montfaucon was visible further off.
The second road, more towards the east, leads to Verdun. Still further
to the right, not far from a camp of Saxon troops, was the road to Bar
le Duc, on which we noticed a detachment of soldiers. We caught the
glint of their bayonets in the evening sunshine and heard the sound of
their drums softened by the distance.
Here we remained a good while gazing at this pleasing picture, which in
the west was glowing with the light of the setting sun, and watching
the shadows of the mountain spread slowly over the fields until all
was dark. On our way back we again looked in at the church of St.
Didier, in which some Hessians were now quartered. They lay on straw
in the choir and before the altar, and lit their pipes at the lamps
which burned before the sanctuary--without, however, intending any
disrespect, as they were decent, harmless fellows.
On Sunday, August 28th, we were greeted with a dull grey sky and a soft
steady rain that reminded one of the weather experienced by Goethe
not far from here in September, 1792, during the days preceding and
following the artillery engagement at Valmy. At the Chief’s request I
took General Sheridan a copy of the _Pall Mall Gazette_, and afterwards
tried to hunt up some Saxons who could give me particulars of the
battle of the 18th. At length I found an officer of the Landwehr, a
landed proprietor named Fuchs-Nordhof, from Moeckern, near Leipzig.
He was not able to add much to what I knew. The Saxons had fought
principally at Sainte Marie aux Chênes and Saint Privat, and protected
the retreat of the guards, who had fallen into some disorder. The
Freiberg Rifles took the position held by the French at the point of
the bayonet without firing a shot. The Leipzig Regiment (the 107th)
in particular had lost a great many men and nearly all its officers.
That was all he could tell me, except that he confirmed the news as to
Krausshaar’s death.
When the Minister got up we were again provided with plenty of work.
Our cause was making excellent progress. I was in a position to
telegraph that the Saxon cavalry had routed the 12th Chasseurs at
Voussières and Beaumont. I was informed (and was at liberty to state)
that we held to our determination to compel France to a cession of
territory, and that we should conclude peace on no other conditions.
The arguments in support of this decision were given in the following
article which was sanctioned by the Chief:--
“Since the victories of Mars la Tour and Gravelotte the German forces
have been constantly pressing forward. The time would, therefore,
appear to have come for considering the conditions on which Germany can
conclude peace with France. In this matter we must be guided neither
by a passion for glory or conquest, nor by that generosity which is
frequently recommended to us by the foreign press. Our sole object must
be to guarantee the security of South Germany from fresh attacks on the
part of France such as have been renewed more than a dozen times from
the reign of Louis XIV. to our own days, and which will be repeated
as often as France feels strong enough. The enormous sacrifices, in
blood and treasure which the German people have made in this war,
together with all our present victories, would be in vain if the power
of the French were not weakened for attack and the defensive strength
of Germany were not increased. Our people have a right to demand that
this shall be done. Were we to content ourselves with a change of
dynasty and an indemnity the position of affairs would not be improved,
and there would be nothing to prevent this war leading to a number of
others, especially as the present defeat would spur on the French to
revenge. France with her comparatively great wealth would soon forget
the indemnity, and any new dynasty would, in order to fortify its own
position, endeavour to secure a victory over us and thus compensate
for the present misfortunes of the country. Generosity is a highly
respectable virtue, but as a rule in politics it secures no gratitude.
In 1866 we did not take a single inch of ground from the Austrians, but
have we received any thanks in Vienna for this self-restraint? Do they
not feel a bitter longing for revenge simply because they have been
defeated? Besides the French already bore us a grudge for our victory
at Sadowa, though it was not won over them but over another foreign
Power. Whether we now generously forego a cession of territory or not,
how will they feel towards us after the victories of Wörth and Metz,
and how will they seek revenge for their own defeat?
“The consequences of the other course adopted in 1814 and 1815, when
France was treated with great consideration, prove it to have been bad
policy. If at that time the French had been weakened to the extent
which the interests of general peace required, the present war would
not have been necessary.
“The danger does not lie in Bonapartism, although the latter must
rely chiefly upon Chauvinist sentiment. It consists in the incurable
arrogance of that portion of the French people which gives the tone to
the whole country. This trait in the French national character, which
will guide the policy of every dynasty, whatever name it may bear, and
even of a Republic, will constantly lead to encroachments upon peaceful
neighbours. Our victories, to bear fruit, must lead to an actual
improvement of our frontier defences against this restless neighbour.
Whoever wishes to see the diminution of military burdens in Europe, or
desires such a peace as would permit thereof, must look not to moral
but to material guarantees as a solid and permanent barrier against
the French lust of conquest; in other words, it should in future be
made as difficult as possible for France to invade South Germany
with a comparatively small force, and even in peace to compel the
South Germans, through the apprehension of such attack, to be always
reckoning with the French Government. Our present task is to secure
South Germany by providing it with a defensible frontier. To fulfil
that task is to liberate Germany, that is to complete the work of the
War of Liberation in 1813 and 1814.
“The least, therefore, that we can demand and that the German people,
and particularly our comrades across the Main, can accept is, the
cession of the French gateways into Germany, namely Strassburg and
Metz. It would be just as short-sighted to expect any permanent
peace from the mere demolition of these fortresses as to trust in
the possibility of winning over the French by considerate treatment.
Besides, it must not be forgotten that this territory which we now
demand was originally German and in great part still remains German,
and that its inhabitants will perhaps in time learn to feel that they
belong to one race with ourselves.
“We may regard a change of dynasty with indifference. An indemnity
will only temporarily weaken France financially. What we require is
increased security for our frontiers. This is only attainable, however,
by changing the two fortresses that threaten us into bulwarks for our
protection. Strassburg and Metz must cease to be points of support for
French attacks and be transformed into German defences.
“Whoever sincerely desires a general European peace and disarmament,
and wants to see the ploughshare replace the sword, must first wish to
see the eastern neighbours of France secure peace for themselves, as
France is the sole disturber of public tranquillity and will so remain
as long as she has the power.”
CHAPTER V
WE TURN TOWARDS THE NORTH--THE CHANCELLOR OF THE CONFEDERATION AT
REZONVILLE--THE BATTLE AND BATTLEFIELD OF BEAUMONT
_Sunday, August 28th._--At tea we receive an important piece of news.
We ourselves and the whole army (with the exception of that portion
which remains behind for the investment of Metz) are to alter our line
of march, and instead of going westwards in the direction of Châlons,
we are to turn northwards, following the edge of the Argonne forest
towards the Ardennes and the Meuse district. Our next halt will, it
is believed, be at Grand Pré. This move is made for the purpose of
intercepting Marshal MacMahon, who has collected a large force and is
marching towards Metz for the relief of Bazaine.
We start at 10 o’clock on the 29th, passing through several villages
and occasionally by handsome châteaux and parks, a camp of Bavarian
soldiers, some line regiments, rifles, light horse and cuirassiers.
In driving through the small town of Varennes we notice the house
where Louis XVI. was arrested by the postman of Saint Ménehould. It
is now occupied by a firm of scythe manufacturers. The whole place is
full of soldiers, horse and foot, with waggons and artillery. After
extricating ourselves from this crowd of vehicles and men, we push
rapidly forward through villages and past other camps, until we reach
Grand Pré. Here the Chancellor takes up his quarters in the Grande
Rue, a little way from the market, the King lodging at an apothecary’s
not far off. The second section of the King’s suite, including Prince
Charles, Prince Luitpold of Bavaria, and the Hereditary Grand Duke of
Mecklenburg-Schwerin, was quartered in the neighbouring village of
Juvin. I am billeted at a milliner’s opposite the Chief’s quarters. I
have a nice clean room, but my landlady is invisible. We saw a number
of French prisoners in the market-place on our arrival. I am informed
that an encounter with MacMahon’s army is expected to-morrow morning.
At Grande Pré the Chief again showed that he never thought of the
possibility of an attempt being made to assassinate him. He walked
about in the twilight alone and without any constraint, going even
through narrow and lonely streets that offered special opportunities
for attack. I say this from personal experience, because I followed him
with my revolver at a little distance. It seemed to me possible that an
occasion might arise when I might be of assistance to him.
On my hearing next morning that the King and the Chancellor were going
off together in order to be present at the great battue of the second
French army I thought of a favourite proverb of the Chief’s which he
repeated to me on his return from Rezonville:--“_Wer sich grün macht,
den fressen die Ziegen_,” and plucking up heart I begged him to take
me with him. He answered, “But if we remain there for the night what
will you do?” I replied, “That doesn’t matter, Excellency; I shall
know how to take care of myself.” “Well, then, come along!” said he,
laughing. The Minister took a walk in the market-place while I, in high
good humour, fetched my travelling bag, waterproof and faithful diary.
On his return he entered his carriage and motioned to me to join him,
when I took my place at his side. One must have luck to secure such a
piece of good fortune, and one must also follow it up.
We started shortly after 9 o’clock. At first we retraced our steps
along yesterday’s road. Then to the left through vineyards and past
several villages in a hilly district. We met some parks of artillery
and troops on the march or resting by the way. About 11 o’clock
we reached the little town of Busancy, where we stopped in the
market-place to wait for the King.
The Chief was very communicative. He complained that he was
frequently disturbed at his work by persons talking outside his door,
“particularly as some of the gentlemen have such loud voices. An
ordinary inarticulate noise does not annoy me. I am not put out by
music or the rattle of waggons, but what irritates me is a conversation
in which I can distinguish the words. I then want to know what it is
about, and so I lose the thread of my own ideas.”
He then pointed out to me that when officers saluted our carriage, it
was not for me to return the salute. He himself was not saluted as
Minister or Chancellor, but solely as a general officer, and soldiers
might feel offended if a civilian seemed to think that the salute was
also intended for him.
He was afraid that nothing in particular would occur that day, an
opinion which was shared by some Prussian artillery officers who were
standing by their guns immediately opposite Busancy, and with whom he
spoke. “It will be just as it was occasionally when I was out wolf
shooting in the Ardennes. After wandering about for days in the snow,
we used to hear that a track had been discovered, but when we followed
it up the wolf had disappeared. It will be the same with the French
to-day.”
After expressing a hope that he might meet his second son, respecting
whom he repeatedly inquired of officers along the route, the Minister
added:--“You can see from his case how little nepotism there is in
our army. He has already served twelve months and has obtained no
promotion, while others are recommended for the rank of ensign in
little more than a month.” I took the liberty to ask how that was
possible. “I do not know,” he answered. “I have made close inquiries
as to whether he had been guilty of any slight breaches of discipline;
but no, his conduct has been quite satisfactory, and in the engagement
at Mars la Tour he charged as gallantly on the French square as any
of his comrades. On the return ride he dragged with him out of the
fight two dragoons who had been unhorsed, grasping one of them in each
hand.[5] It is certainly well to avoid favouritism, but it is bitter to
be slighted.”
A few weeks later both his sons were promoted to the rank of officers.
Subsequently, amongst many other things, the Chief once more gave me
an account of his experiences on the evening of the 18th of August.
They had sent their horses to water, and were standing near a battery
which had opened fire. This was not returned by the French, but, he
continued, “while we thought their cannon had been dismounted, they
were for the last hour concentrating their guns and mitrailleuses for a
last great effort. Suddenly they began a fearful fire with shells and
smaller projectiles, filling the whole air with an incessant crashing
and roaring, howling and whistling. We were cut off from the King,
whom Roon had sent to the rear. I remained by the battery, and thought
that if we had to retire I could jump on to the next ammunition cart.
We expected that this attack would be supported by French infantry,
who might take me prisoner, even if I were to treat them to a steady
revolver fire. I had six bullets ready for them, and another half-dozen
in reserve. At length our horses returned, and I started off to join
the King. That, however, was jumping from the frying pan into the fire.
The shells that passed over our heads fell exactly in the space across
which we had to ride. Next morning we saw the pits which they dug in
the ground. It was therefore necessary for the King to retire still
further to the rear. I told him this after the officers had mentioned
it to me. It was now night. The King said he was hungry, and wished to
have something to eat. Drink was to be had from one of the sutlers,
wine and bad rum, but there was nothing to eat except dry bread. At
last they managed to hunt up a couple of cutlets in the village, just
enough for the King, but nothing for his companions, so that I was
obliged to look out for something else. His Majesty wished to sleep
in the carriage between dead horses and severely wounded soldiers.
Later on he found shelter in a miserable hut. The Chancellor of the
Confederation was obliged to seek cover elsewhere. Leaving the heir of
one of our mighty German potentates (the young Hereditary Grand Duke
of Mecklenburg) to keep watch over the carriage and see that nothing
was stolen, I went with Sheridan on a reconnoitring tour in search of
a sleeping place. We came to a house which was still burning, but that
was too hot for us. I inquired at another, it was full of wounded; at
a third, and got the same answer, and still a fourth was also full of
wounded. Here, however, I refused to budge. I saw a top window in which
there was no light, and asked who was there. ‘Only wounded soldiers,’
was the reply. ‘Well, we are just going up to see,’ I said, and marched
upstairs. There we found three beds with good and tolerably clean straw
mattresses, where we took up our quarters and slept capitally.”
When the Minister first told this story at Pont à Mousson, with less
detail, his cousin, Count Bismarck-Bohlen, added: “Yes, you fell asleep
immediately, as also did Sheridan, who rolled himself up in a white
linen sheet--where he found it I cannot imagine--and seemed to dream
of you all night, as I heard him murmur to himself several times, ‘O
dear Count!’” “Yes,” said the Minister, “and the Hereditary Grand
Duke, who took the affair in very good part, and was altogether a very
pleasant and amiable young gentleman.” “Moreover,” continued Bohlen,
“the best of it was that there really was no such scarcity of shelter.
In the meantime a fine country house had been discovered that had
been prepared for the reception of Bazaine, with good beds, excellent
wine, and I know not what besides, all first rate. The Minister of War
quartered himself there, and had a luxurious supper with his staff.”
On the way to Busancy the Chancellor further said: “The whole day I had
nothing to eat but army bread and bacon fat. In the evening we got five
or six eggs. The others wanted them cooked, but I like them raw, and
so I stole a couple, and cracking the shells on the hilt of my sword, I
swallowed them, and felt much refreshed. Early next morning I had the
first warm food for thirty-six hours. It was only some pea-soup with
bacon, which I got from General Goeben, but I enjoyed it immensely.”
The market-place at Busancy, a small country town, was crowded with
officers, hussars, uhlans, couriers, and all sorts of conveyances.
After a while Sheridan and Forsythe also arrived. At 11.30 the King
appeared, and immediately afterwards we heard the unexpected news
that the French were standing their ground. At about four kilometres
from Busancy we came to a height beneath which to the left and right
a small open valley lay between us and another height. Suddenly we
heard the muffled sound of a discharge in the distance. “Artillery
fire,” said the Minister. A little further on I saw two columns of
infantry stationed on the other side of a hollow to the left on a piece
of rising ground bare of trees. They had two guns which were being
fired. It was so far off however that one could hardly hear the report.
The Chief was surprised at the sharpness of my sight and put on his
glasses, which I for the first time learned were necessary to him when
he wished to see at a distance. Small white clouds like balloons at a
great height floated for three or four seconds above the hollow and
then disappeared in a flash. These were shrapnel shells. The guns must
have been German, and seemed to throw their shot from a declivity on
the other side of the hollow. Over this hollow was a wood, in front of
which I could observe several dark lines, perhaps French troops. Still
further off was the spur of a hill, with three or four large trees.
This, according to my map, was the village of Stonn, from which, as I
afterwards heard, the Emperor Napoleon watched the fight.
The firing to the left soon ceased. Bavarian artillery, blue
cuirassiers, and green light horse, passed us on the road, going at
a trot. A little further on, just as we drove by a small thicket,
we heard a rattle, as of a slow and badly delivered volley. “A
mitrailleuse,” said Engel, turning round on the box. Not far off, at a
place where the Bavarian rifles were resting in the ditch by the road,
the Minister got on horseback in order to ride with the King, who was
ahead of us. We ourselves, after following the road for a time, turned
towards the right across a stubble field. The ground gradually rose
to a low height on which the King stood with the Chief and a number
of Princes, generals and other officers of high rank. I followed them
across the ploughed fields, and standing a little to one side I watched
the battle of Beaumont till nearly sunset.
It began to grow dark. The King sat on a chair near which a straw
fire had been lit, as there was a strong wind. He was following the
course of the battle through a field-glass. The Chancellor, who was
similarly occupied, stood on a ridge, from which Sheridan also watched
the spectacle. It was now possible to catch the flash of the bursting
shells and the flames that were rising from the burning houses at
Beaumont. The French continued to retire rapidly, and the combatants
disappeared over the crest of the treeless height that closed the
horizon to the left behind the wood over the burning village. The
battle was won.
It was growing dark when we returned towards Busancy, and when we
reached it it was surrounded by hundreds of small fires that threw the
silhouettes of men, horses, and baggage waggons into high relief. We
got down at the house of a doctor who lived at the end of the main
street, in which the King had also taken up his quarters. Those of our
party who had been left behind at Grand Pré had arrived before us. I
slept here on a straw mattress on the floor of an almost empty room,
under a coverlet which had been brought from the hospital in the town
by one of our soldiers. That, however, did not in the least prevent my
sleeping the sleep of the just.
On Wednesday, August the 31st, between 9 and 10 A.M., the King and the
Chancellor drove out to visit the battle-field of the previous day. I
was again permitted to accompany the Minister. At first we followed the
road taken the day before through Bar de Busancy and Sommauthe. Between
these two villages we passed some squadrons of Bavarian uhlans, who
heartily cheered the King. Behind Sommauthe, which was full of wounded,
we drove through a beautiful wood that lay between that village and
Beaumont, where we arrived after 11 o’clock. King William and our
Chancellor then got on horseback and rode to the right over the fields.
I followed in the same direction on foot. The carriages went on to the
town, where they were to wait for us.
The Chancellor remarked that the French had not offered a particularly
steady resistance yesterday, or shown much prudence in their
arrangements. “At Beaumont a battery of heavy artillery surprised them
in their camp in broad daylight. Horses were shot tethered, many of the
dead are in their shirt-sleeves, and plates are still lying about with
boiled potatoes, pots with half-cooked meat, and so forth.”
During the drive the Chief came to speak of “people who have the King’s
ear and abuse his good nature,” thinking in the first place of the
“fat Borck, the holder of the King’s Privy Purse;” and afterwards
referring to Count Bernstorff, our then Ambassador in London, who, when
he gave up the Foreign Office in Berlin, “knew very well how to take
care of himself.” In fact, “he was so long weighing the respective
advantages of the two Embassies--London and Paris--that he delayed
entering upon his duties much longer than was decent or proper.”
I ventured to ask what sort of a person Von der Goltz was, as one heard
such different opinions about him, and whether he really was a man of
importance and intellect as was maintained. “Intelligent? yes, in a
certain sense,” replied the Minister; “a quick worker, well informed,
but changeable in his views of men and things,--to-day in favour of
this man or this project, to-morrow for another and sometimes for the
very opposite. Then he was always in love with the Princesses to whose
Courts he was accredited, first with Amelia of Greece and then with
Eugénie. He believed that what I had the good fortune to carry through,
he, with his exceptional intelligence, could have also done and even
better. Therefore he was constantly intriguing against me, although
we had been good friends in our youth. He wrote letters to the King
complaining of me and warning his Majesty against me. That did not help
him much, as the King handed over the letters to me, and I replied
to them by reprimanding him. But in this respect he was persevering,
and continued to write indefatigably. He was very little liked by his
subordinates, indeed they actually detested him. On my visit to Paris
in 1862 I called upon him to report myself just as he had settled down
to a siesta. I did not wish to have him disturbed, but his secretaries
were evidently delighted that he should be obliged to get up, and one
of them immediately went in to announce me. It would have been so easy
for him to secure the good will and attachment of his people. It is
not difficult for an Ambassador, and I too would do it gladly. But as
a Minister one has no time, one has too many other things to think of
and to do. So I have had to adopt a more military style.” It will be
seen from this description that Von der Goltz was Arnim’s forerunner
and kindred spirit.
The Minister went on to speak of Radowitz, saying he did not feel quite
certain whether it was dulness or treachery on Radowitz’s part that
was to blame for the diplomatic defeat at Olmütz. The army ought to
have been brought into line before Olmütz, but Radowitz had intrigued
against it. “I would leave it an open question whether he did so as
an Austrian ultramontane Jesuit, or as an impracticable dreamer who
thought he knew everything. Instead of looking to our armaments he
occupied the King with constitutional trifles, of mediæval follies,
questions of etiquette and such like. On one occasion we heard that
Austria had collected 80,000 men in Bohemia, and was buying great
numbers of horses. This was mentioned before the King in Radowitz’s
presence. He suddenly stepped forward, looking as if he knew much more
about it than anybody else, and said, ‘Austria has 22,493 men and 2,005
horses in Bohemia,’ and then turned away, conscious that he had once
more impressed the King with a sense of his importance.”
The King and the Chancellor first rode to the field where the heavy
artillery had been at work. I followed them after I had jotted down my
notes. This field lies about 800 to 1000 paces to the right of the road
that brought us here. In front of it towards the wood at the bottom of
the valley were some fields surrounded by hedges in which lay about a
thousand German dead, Thuringians of the 31st Regiment. The camp itself
presented a horrible appearance, all blue and red from the French dead,
most of them being killed by the shells of the 4th Corps, and fearfully
disfigured.
The Chancellor, as he afterwards told me, noticed among some prisoners
in a quarry a priest who was believed to have fired at our men. “On my
charging him with having done so he denied it. ‘Take care,’ I said to
him, ‘for if it is proved against you, you will certainly be hanged.’
In the meantime I gave instructions to remove his cassock.” Near the
church the King saw a wounded musketeer, with whom he shook hands,
although the man was rather tattered and dirty from the work of the
previous day, doubtless to the surprise of the French officers who were
present. The King asked him what his business was. He replied that he
was a Doctor of Philosophy. “Well, then, you will have learnt to bear
your wounds in a philosophical spirit,” said the King. “Yes,” answered
the musketeer, “I have already made up my mind to do so.”
Near the second village we overtook some common soldiers, Bavarians,
who had broken down on the march, and were dragging themselves slowly
along in the burning sun. “Hullo, countryman!” called out the Minister
to one of these, “will you have some brandy?” “Why, certainly;” and
so would a second and a third, to judge from their looks. All three,
and a few more, after they had had a pull at the Minister’s flask
and at mine, received a decent cigar in addition. At the village of
Crehanges, where the princely personages of the second section of the
King’s suite were quartered, together with some gentlemen of the Crown
Prince’s retinue, the King ordered a lunch, to which Bismarck was also
invited. In the meantime I sat on a stone by the roadside and wrote
up my diary, and afterwards assisted the Dutch Ambulance corps, who
had erected a bright green tent for the wounded in the vicinity of the
village. When the Minister returned he asked me what I had been doing,
which I told him. “I would rather have been there than in the company
I was in,” he said, breathing deeply, and then quoted the line from
Schiller’s _Diver_, “_Unter Larven die einzige fühlende Brust_” (the
only feeling heart amongst all those masks).
During the rest of the drive the conversation moved for a considerable
time in exalted regions, and the Chief readily gave me full information
in answer to my inquiries. I regret, however, that I cannot for various
reasons publish all I heard.
A certain Thuringian Serene Highness appeared to be particularly
objectionable to him. He spoke of his “stupid self-importance as a
Prince, regarding me as _his_ Chancellor also;” of his empty head, and
his trivial conventional style of talk. “To some extent, however, that
is due to his education, which trained him to the use of such empty
phrases. Goethe is also partly to blame for that. The Queen has been
brought up much in the same style. One of the chairs in the Palace
would be taken to represent the Burgomaster of Apolda, who was coming
to present his homage. ‘Ah!’ she was taught to say, ‘very pleased to
see you, Herr Burgomaster!’ (Here the Chancellor leant his head a
little to one side, pouted his lips, and assumed a most condescending
smile.) ‘How are things going on in the good town of Apolda? In Apolda
you make socks and tobacco and such things, which do not require much
thinking or feeling.’”
I ventured to ask how he now stood with the Crown Prince?
“Excellently,” he answered. “We are quite good friends since he has
come to recognise that I am not on the side of the French, as he had
previously fancied--I do not know on what grounds.” I remarked that
the day before the Crown Prince had looked very pleased. “Why should
he not be pleased?” replied the Count. “The Heir Apparent of one of
the most powerful kingdoms in the world, and with the best prospects.
He will be reasonable later on and allow his Ministers to govern more,
and not put himself too much forward, and in general he will get rid of
many bad habits that render old gentlemen of his trade sometimes rather
troublesome. For the rest, he is unaffected and straightforward; but
he does not care to work much, and is quite happy if he has plenty of
money and amusements, and if the newspapers praise him.”
I took the liberty to ask further what sort of woman the Crown Princess
was, and whether she had much influence over her husband. “I think
not,” the Count said; “and as to her intelligence, she is a clever
woman; clever in a womanly way. She is not able to disguise her
feelings, or at least not always. I have cost her many tears, and she
could not conceal how angry she was with me after the annexations (that
is to say of Schleswig and Hanover). She could hardly bear the sight
of me, but that feeling has now somewhat subsided. She once asked me
to bring her a glass of water, and as I handed it to her she said to a
lady-in-waiting who sat near and whose name I forget, ‘He has cost me
as many tears as there is water in this glass.’ But that is all over
now.”
Finally we descended from the sphere of the gods to that of ordinary
humanity. After I had referred to the Coburg-Belgian-English clique,
the conversation turned on the Augustenburger in his Bavarian uniform.
“He’s an idiot,” said the Chancellor. “He might have secured much
better terms. At first I did not want from him more than the smaller
Princes were obliged to concede in 1866. Thanks, however, to Divine
Providence and the pettifogging wisdom of Samwer, he would agree
to nothing. I remember an interview I had with him in 1864, in the
billiard-room near my study, which lasted until late in the night. I
called him ‘Highness’ for the first time, and was altogether specially
polite. When, however, I mentioned Kiel Harbour, which we wanted, he
remarked that that might mean something like a square mile, or perhaps
even several square miles, a remark to which I was of course obliged to
assent; and when he also refused to listen to our demands with regard
to the army, I assumed a different tone, and addressed him merely as
‘Prince.’ Finally, I told him quite coolly in Low German that we could
wring the necks of the chickens we had hatched. At Ligny he basely
tricked me the other day into shaking hands with him. I did not know
who the Bavarian general was who held out his hand to me, or I should
have gone out of his way.”
After an unusually long drive up hill and down dale, we arrived at
7 o’clock at the small town or market-place of Vendresse, there the
Chancellor put up at the house of a Widow Baudelot, with the rest of
his party, who had already taken possession of their quarters.
CHAPTER VI
SEDAN--BISMARCK AND NAPOLEON AT DONCHERY
On the 1st of September Moltke’s chase after the French in the Meuse
district was, from all we could hear, evidently approaching its close.
I had the good fortune to be present at it next day. After rising very
early in order to write up my diary from the hasty notes taken on the
previous day in the carriage and by the roadside at Chemery, I went to
the house of widow Baudelot. As I entered, a large cavalry detachment,
formed of five Prussian hussar regiments, green, brown, black and red,
rode past under the Chief’s window. These were to accompany the King
to a point near Sedan, whence he could witness the catastrophe which
was now confidently expected. When the carriage came and the Chancellor
appeared he looked about him. Seeing me he said, “Can you decipher,
doctor?” I answered, “Yes,” and he added, “Then get a cipher and come
along.” I did not wait to be asked twice. We started soon afterwards,
Count Bismarck-Bohlen this time occupying the seat next to the Minister.
We first passed through Chemery and Chehery, halting in a stubble field
near a third village which lay in a hollow to the left of the road at
foot of a bare hillock. Here the King, with his suite of Princes,
generals, and courtiers, got on horseback, as did also the Chief, and
the whole party moved towards the crest of the height. The distant roar
of the cannon announced that the battle was in full progress. It was a
bright sunny day, with a cloudless sky.
Leaving Engel in charge of the carriage I after a while followed the
horsemen, whom I found in a ploughed field from which one had an
extensive view of the district. Beneath was a deep wide valley, mostly
green, with patches of wood on the heights that surrounded it. The blue
stream of the Meuse flowed past a town of moderate size, the fortress
of Sedan. On the crest of the hill next us, at about the distance of
a rifle shot, is a wood, and there are also some trees to the left.
To the right in the foreground, which sloped obliquely, in a series
of steps as it were, towards the bottom of the valley, was stationed
a Bavarian battery, which kept up a sharp fire at and over the town.
Behind the battery were dark columns of infantry and cavalry. Still
farther to the right, from a hollow, rose a thick column of smoke.
It comes, we are told, from the burning village of Bazeilles. We are
only about an English mile in a beeline from Sedan, and in the clear
atmosphere one can easily distinguish the houses and churches. In the
distance, to the left and right, three or four villages, and beyond
them all towards the horizon, a range of hills covered throughout with
what appears to be a pine forest, serves as a frame for the whole
picture. It is the Ardennes, on the Belgian frontier.
The main positions of the French appear to be on the hillocks
immediately beyond the fortress, and it looks as if our troops intended
to surround them there. For the moment we can only see their advance on
the right, as the lines of our artillery, with the exception of the
Bavarians, who are posted under us, are lost behind the heights as they
slowly move forward. Gradually the smoke of the guns is seen beyond
the rising ground already mentioned, with the defile in the middle.
The corps that are advancing in half circle to enclose the enemy are
steadily endeavouring to complete the circle. To the left all is still.
At 11 o’clock a dark grey pillar of smoke with yellow edges rises from
the fortress, which has hardly taken any part in the firing. The French
troops beyond Sedan deliver an energetic fire, and at the same time,
over the wood in the defile, rise numbers of small white clouds from
the shells--whether French or German we cannot say. Sometimes, also, we
hear the rattle of the mitrailleuse.
There was a brilliant assembly upon the hill. The King, Bismarck,
Moltke, Roon, a number of Princes, Prince Charles, their Highnesses of
Weimar and Coburg, the Hereditary Grand Duke of Mecklenburg, generals,
aides-de-camp, Court officials, Count Hatzfeldt, who disappeared after
a while, Kutusow, the Russian, and Colonel Walker, the English Military
Plenipotentiary, together with General Sheridan and his aide-de-camp,
all in uniform, and all looking through field-glasses. The King stood,
while others sat on a ridge at the edge of the field, as did the
Chancellor also at times. I hear that the King sent word round that
it was better not to gather into large groups, as the French in the
fortress might in that case fire at us.
After 11 o’clock our line of attack advanced further on the right bank
of the Meuse towards the main position of the French, who were thus
more closely invested. In my eagerness I began to express my views to
Count Puckler, probably somewhat louder than was necessary or quite
fitting in the circumstances, and so attracted the attention of the
Chief, who has sharp ears. He turned round and beckoned to me to come
to him. “If you have strategic ideas to communicate to the Count it
would be well if you managed to do so somewhat more quietly, doctor, as
otherwise the King might ask who is speaking, and I should be obliged
to present you to him.” Shortly afterwards he received telegrams, six
of which he gave me to decipher, so that for the time I had to resign
my part as a spectator.
On returning to the carriage I found in Count Hatzfeldt a companion
who had also been obliged to combine business with pleasure. The Chief
had instructed him to copy out a French letter of four pages which
had been intercepted by our troops. I mounted the box and set to work
deciphering, while the battle roared like half-a-dozen thunderstorms
on the other side of the height. In my eagerness to get done I did not
feel the scorching midday sun, which raised blisters on one of my ears.
It was now 1 o’clock. By this time our line of fire encircled the
greater part of the enemy’s position on the heights beyond the town.
Clouds of smoke rose in a wide arch, while the well-known small
puff-balls of the shrapnels appeared for an instant and burst in the
air. Only to the left there yet remained a space where all was still.
The Chancellor now sat on a chair, studying a document of several
pages. I asked if he would like to have something to eat or drink, as
we had come provided. He declined, however, saying, “I should be very
glad, but the King has also had nothing.”
The opposing forces on the other side of the river must be very near
each other, as we hear oftener than before the hateful rattle of the
mitrailleuse. Its bark, however, we are told, is worse than its bite.
Between 2 and 3 o’clock, according to my watch, the King passed near
where I stood. After looking for a while through his glass towards the
suburbs of Sedan, he said to those who accompanied him, “There, to the
left, they are pushing forward large masses of troops; I think it is
a sortie.” It was, as a matter of fact, an advance of some columns of
infantry, which, however, soon retired, probably because they found
that although this place was quiet it was by no means open. Shortly
afterwards, with the assistance of the field-glass, one could see the
French cavalry deliver several attacks on the crest of the hill to
the left of the wood near the defile, which were repelled by volleys
from our side. After these charges it could be seen, even with the
naked eye, that the ground was covered with white objects, horses or
soldiers’ cloaks. Soon afterwards the artillery fire grew weaker at
all points, and there was a general retreat of the French towards the
town and its immediate vicinity. As already mentioned, they had for
some time past been closed in on the left, where the Würtemberg troops
had a couple of batteries not far from our hill, and where, as we were
informed, the 5th and 11th Army Corps had cut off all escape, with the
exception of a small gap towards the Belgian frontier. After half-past
4 all their guns were silent, and somewhat later ours also ceased
firing.
Once again the scene becomes more animated. Suddenly bluish white
clouds rise first in one and then in a second part of the town, showing
that it is burning in two places. Bazeilles also is still in flames,
and is sending up a pillar of dense grey, yellow vapour into the clear
evening air. The soft radiance of the declining sun is spreading more
and more over the valley at our feet, like burnished gold. The hillocks
of the battle-field, the ravine in the midst, the villages, the houses,
the towers of the fortress, the suburb of Torcy, and the broken bridge
in the distance to the left, stand out in clear relief, from moment to
moment more distinct as if seen through stronger and stronger glasses.
Towards 5 o’clock General Hindersin speaks to the King, and I fancy I
catch the words, “Bombard the town,” and a “heap of ruins.” A quarter
of an hour later a Bavarian officer gallops up the height towards us.
General von Bothmer sends word to the King that General Mailinger,
who is stationed at Torcy with the chasseurs, reports that the French
desire to capitulate, and that their unconditional surrender has been
demanded. The King replied, “No one can negotiate this matter except
myself. Tell the general that the bearer of the flag of truce must come
to me.”
The Bavarian rides back into the valley. The King then speaks to
Bismarck, and together they join the Crown Prince (who had arrived a
little before), Moltke and Roon. Their Highnesses of Weimar and Coburg
are also with them, standing a little to one side. After a while a
Prussian aide-de-camp appears, and reports that our losses, so far as
they can be ascertained up to the present, are not great--those of the
Guards being moderate, of the Saxons somewhat more, while the remaining
corps engaged suffered less. Only a small proportion of the French
have escaped into the woods in the direction of the Belgian frontier,
where search is now being made for them. All the rest have been driven
towards Sedan.
“And the Emperor?” questioned the King.
“We do not know,” answered the officer.
Towards 6 o’clock, however, another aide-de-camp appeared, and reported
that the Emperor was in the town, and would immediately send out a
_parlementaire_. “That is a grand success!” said the King, turning to
the company. “I thank thee (he added to the Crown Prince) for thy share
in it.” With these words he gave his hand to his son, and the latter
kissed it. He then held out his hand to Moltke, who also kissed it.
Finally he likewise shook hands with the Chancellor, and spoke to him
alone for some time. This seemed to excite the displeasure of some of
their Highnesses.
Towards half-past 6, after a detachment of cuirassiers had been
posted near the King as a guard of honour, the French General Reille,
Napoleon’s _parlementaire_, rode slowly up the hill. He dismounted
at a distance of some ten paces from the King, and after approaching
his Majesty took off his cap and handed over a letter of large size
with a red seal. The general is an elderly gentleman of medium height
and slender figure, in an unbuttoned black tunic with epaulettes and
shoulder straps, black vest, red trousers and polished riding boots. He
has no sword, but carries a walking stick in his hand. All the company
move away from the King, who opens and reads the letter, afterwards
communicating the contents, which are now generally known, to Bismarck,
Moltke, the Crown Prince and the other personages. Reille stands a
little further off, at first alone, and later in conversation with some
Prussian generals. The Crown Prince, Moltke and his Highness of Coburg
also speak to him while the King takes counsel with the Chancellor,
who then commissions Hatzfeldt to prepare a draft of the answer to the
imperial letter. Hatzfeldt brings it in a few minutes and the King
copies it, sitting on one chair, while the seat of another, held by
Major von Alten, who kneels before him, serves as a desk.
Shortly before 7 o’clock the French general rides back towards Sedan in
the twilight, accompanied by an officer and a uhlan trumpeter carrying
a white flag. The town is now in flames in three places, and the lurid
columns of smoke that rise from Bazeilles shows it to be still burning.
The tragedy of Sedan is over, and night lets down the curtain.
There might be an epilogue on the following day, but for the present
every one returned home. The King went back to Vendresse, the Chief,
Count Bismarck-Bohlen and I drove to the little town of Donchery,
where it was quite dark when we arrived. We put up at the house of
a Dr. Jeanjot. The town was full of Würtemberg soldiers, who were
camped in the market-place. Our reason for coming here was that an
arrangement had been made according to which the Chancellor and Moltke
were this evening to meet the French plenipotentiary to try to settle
the conditions of the capitulation of the four French army corps now
confined in Sedan.
I slept here in an alcove near the back room on the first floor,
with only the wall between me and the Minister, who had the large
front room. Towards 6 o’clock in the morning I was awakened by hasty
footsteps, and heard Engel say: “Excellency, Excellency, there is
a French general at the door. I cannot understand what he wants.”
The Minister would appear to have got up hurriedly and spoken a few
words to the French officer, who turned out to be General Reille.
The consequence was that he dressed immediately, and without waiting
either for breakfast or to have his clothes brushed, mounted his horse
and rode rapidly off. I rushed to his window to see in what direction
he went. I saw him trot off towards the market-place. In the room
everything was lying about in disorder. On the floor lay the “_Täglich
Losungen und Lehrtexte der Brüdergemeinde für 1870_” (Daily Watchwords
and Texts of the Moravian Brethren for 1870), and on the toilette stand
was another manual of devotion, “_Die tägliche Erquickung für gläubige
Christen_” (Daily Spiritual Refreshment for Believing Christians),
which Engel told me the Chancellor was accustomed to read at night.
I now hastily dressed myself also, and after I had informed them
downstairs that the Chief had gone off to Sedan to meet the Emperor
Napoleon, who had left the fortress, I followed him as fast as I could.
Some 800 paces from the bridge across the Meuse at Donchery to the
right of the road, planted with poplars, stands a single house, then
the residence of a Belgian weaver. It is painted yellow, is but one
story high, and has four windows on the front. There are white shutters
to the windows on the ground floor; the venetian blinds on those of the
first floor are also painted white, and it has a slate roof, like most
of the houses at Donchery. Near it to the left is a potato field, now
full of white blossoms, while to the right, across the path that leads
to the house, stand some bushes. I see here that the Chancellor has
already met the Emperor. In front of the house are six French officers
of high rank, of whom five have caps with gold trimmings, while that
worn by the sixth is black. What appears to be a hackney coach with
four seats is waiting on the road. Bismarck and his cousin, Count
Bohlen, are standing opposite the Frenchmen, while a little way off
is Leverström, as well as two hussars, one brown and one black. At 8
o’clock Moltke arrives with a few officers of the general staff, but
leaves again after a short stay. Soon afterwards a short, thick-set
man, in a red cap braided with gold lace, and wearing red trousers and
a hooded cape lined with red, steps from behind the house and speaks at
first to the French officers, some of whom are sitting under the hedge
by the potato field. He has white kid gloves, and smokes a cigarette.
It is the Emperor. At the short distance at which I stand from him
I can clearly distinguish his features. There is something soft and
dreamy in the look of his light grey eyes, which resemble those of
people who have lived fast. His cap is set a little to the right, in
which direction the head is also bent. The short legs do not seem in
proportion with the long upper part of the body. His whole appearance
has something unmilitary about it. The man is too soft, I am inclined
to think too pulpy, for the uniform he wears. One could even fancy that
he is capable of becoming sentimental at times. Those ideas, which
are mere impressions, force themselves upon one all the more when
one glances at the tall, well-set figure of our Chancellor. Napoleon
seems fatigued, but not very much depressed. Nor does he look so old
as I had expected. He might pass for a tolerably well-preserved man of
fifty. After a while he goes over to the Chief, and speaks to him for
about three minutes, and then--still smoking and with his hands behind
his back--walks up and down by the potato garden. A further short
conversation follows between the Chancellor and the Emperor, begun by
Bismarck, after which Napoleon once more converses with his French
suite. About a quarter to 9 o’clock Bismarck and his cousin leave,
going in the direction of Donchery, whither I follow them.
The Minister repeatedly related the occurrences of this morning and the
preceding night. In the following paragraphs I unite all these various
statements into a connected whole. The sense of what the Chancellor
said is faithfully given throughout, and his own words are in great
part reproduced.
“After the battle of the 1st of September, Moltke and I went to
Donchery, about five kilometres from Sedan, for the purpose of carrying
on the negotiations with the French. We spent the night there, the King
and his suite returning to Vendresse. The negotiations lasted until
midnight, without, however, leading to an understanding. In addition
to Moltke and myself, Blumenthal and three or four other officers
of the general staff were present. General Wimpffen was the French
spokesman. Moltke’s demand was very short. The whole French army must
surrender as prisoners of war. Wimpffen considered that too hard.
The army had deserved better treatment by the gallantry it had shown
in action. We ought to be content to let them go on condition that
they took no further part in the war, and removed to some district in
France to be fixed upon by us, or to Algiers. Moltke quietly maintained
his demand. Wimpffen dwelt upon his own unfortunate position. He had
joined the troops two days before on his return from Africa, and
only took over the command when MacMahon was wounded towards the
close of the battle--and yet he must now put his signature to such
a capitulation. He would rather try to hold the fortress or venture
a sortie. Moltke regretted that it was impossible for him to make
allowance for the position of the general, the hardship of which he
appreciated. He recognised the gallantry of the French troops, but they
could not possibly hold Sedan, and a sortie was out of the question.
He was prepared to allow one of the general’s officers to inspect
our positions, in order that he might convince himself of that fact.
Wimpffen then urged that from a political standpoint it was advisable
to grant better terms. We must desire a speedy and permanent peace, and
we could now secure it if we acted generously. A considerate treatment
of the army would put both the soldiers and the whole people under an
obligation of gratitude, and would inspire friendly feelings towards
us. An opposite course would lead to endless war. I intervened at this
point, as my trade came into question here. I told Wimpffen it was
possible to trust to the gratitude of a Prince but not to that of a
people, and least of all to that of the French. They had no permanent
institutions, they were constantly changing governments and dynasties,
which were not bound by what their predecessors had undertaken. If the
Emperor’s throne were secure it would be possible to count upon his
gratitude in return for more favourable conditions. As matters stood it
would be foolish not to avail themselves to the full of the advantages
of our success. The French were an envious, jealous people. They were
angry with us for our victory at Sadowa, and could not forgive us for
it, although it had not injured them. How then could any generosity
on our part prevent them from bearing us a grudge for Sedan? Wimpffen
could not agree to that. The French had changed latterly, and had
learnt under the Empire to think more of peaceful interests than of the
glory of war. They were ready to proclaim the brotherhood of nations,
and so on. It was not difficult to prove the contrary, and to show that
the acceptance of his proposals would lead rather to a prolongation of
the war, than to its termination. I finished by saying that we must
maintain our conditions. Castelneau then spoke, explaining on behalf of
the Emperor that the latter had only given up his sword on the previous
day in the hope of an honourable capitulation. I asked, ‘Whose sword
was that? The Emperor’s, or that of France?’ He replied, ‘Merely the
Emperor’s.’ ‘Well then,’ interjected Moltke, sharp as lightning--a
gleam of satisfaction overspreading his hawk-like features--‘There can
be no further question of any other conditions.’ ‘Very well,’ declared
Wimpffen, ‘in that case we shall renew the fight to-morrow.’ ‘I will
see that our fire commences at 4 o’clock,’ said Moltke, on which the
French expressed a wish to retire. I induced them, however, to remain
a little longer and to consider the matter once more. The result was
that they ultimately begged for an extension of the armistice, in order
to consult with their people in Sedan. At first Moltke did not wish to
agree to this, but finally consented on my pointing out to him that it
could do no harm.
“Towards 6 o’clock on the morning of the 2nd of September, General
Reille appeared before my lodging at Donchery, and said the Emperor
wished to speak to me. I dressed immediately and got on horseback,
dirty, unwashed, and dusty as I was, to ride to Sedan, where I expected
to see the Emperor. I met him, however, on the road near Fresnois,
three kilometres from Donchery. He sat with three officers in a
two-horse carriage, three others accompanying him on horseback. Of
these officers I only knew Reille, Castelneau, Moscowa, and Vaubert.
I had my revolver buckled round my waist, and as I found myself
alone in the presence of the six officers I may have glanced at it
involuntarily. I may perhaps even have instinctively laid my hand upon
it. Napoleon probably noticed that, as his face turned an ashy grey.
Possibly he thought that history might repeat itself--I think it was a
Prince de Condé who was murdered while a prisoner after a battle.[6]
“I saluted in military fashion. The Emperor took off his cap, the
officers following his example, whereupon I also removed mine, although
it was contrary to the regulations to do so. He said, ‘Couvrez-vous,
donc.’ I treated him exactly as if we were at Saint Cloud, and asked
him what his commands were. He wished to know whether he could speak to
the King. I said that was impossible, as his Majesty’s quarters were
about two German miles away. I did not wish him to see the King before
we had come to an understanding as to the capitulation. He then asked
where he could wait, which indicated that he could not return to Sedan,
as he had either experienced or apprehended some unpleasantness there.
The town was full of drunken soldiers, which was a great hardship for
the inhabitants. I offered him my quarters at Donchery, which I was
prepared to leave immediately. He accepted the offer, but when we had
come within a few hundred yards of the town he asked whether he could
not stay in a house which he saw by the road. I sent my cousin, who had
followed me, to view the house. On his report I told the Emperor that
it was a very poor place. He replied that it did not matter. After he
had gone over to the house and come back again, having probably been
unable to find the stairs which were at the back, I accompanied him to
the first floor, where we entered a small room with one window. It was
the best in the house, but its only furniture was a deal table and two
rush-bottomed chairs.
“Here I had a conversation with him which lasted for nearly
three-quarters of an hour. He complained first of this fatal war, which
he had not desired. He was forced into it by the pressure of public
opinion. I replied that in Germany nobody had wished for war, and the
King least of all. We had regarded the Spanish question as a matter
concerning Spain and not Germany, and we were justified in expecting
from the good relations between the princely house of Hohenzollern
and himself that an understanding could be easily come to with the
Hereditary Prince. We then went on to speak of the present situation.
He wished above all to obtain more favourable terms of capitulation. I
explained that I could not go into that question, as it was a purely
military one, with which Moltke would have to deal. On the other
hand it was open to us to discuss an eventual peace. He replied that
he was a prisoner, and therefore not in a position to decide. On my
asking him whom he regarded as competent to treat, he referred me to
the Government in Paris. I observed that the situation had therefore
not changed since yesterday, and that we must maintain our demand
respecting the army in Sedan, as a guarantee that we should not lose
the benefits of our victory. Moltke, to whom I had sent word, and who
had arrived in the meantime, was of the same opinion, and went to the
King in order to tell him so.
“Standing before the house the Emperor praised our army and the manner
in which it had been led. On my acknowledging that the French had also
fought well, he came back to the conditions of the capitulation, and
asked whether we could not allow the troops shut up in Sedan to cross
the Belgian frontier, there to be disarmed and held as prisoners. I
tried again to make it clear to him that that was a question for the
military authorities, and could not be settled without the concurrence
of Moltke. Besides, he himself had just declared that as a prisoner
he was not able to exercise his authority, and that accordingly
negotiations respecting questions of that kind should be carried on
with the principal officer in command at Sedan.
“In the meantime a search had been made for a better lodging for the
Emperor, and the officers of the general staff found that the little
château of Bellevue near Fresnois, where I first met him, was suitable
for his reception, and was not yet requisitioned for the wounded. I
advised him to remove there, as it would be more comfortable than the
weaver’s house, and that possibly he wanted rest. We would let the
King know that he was there. He agreed to this, and I rode back to
Donchery to change my clothes. I then accompanied him to Bellevue with
a squadron of the 1st Cuirassier Regiment as a guard of honour. The
Emperor wished the King to be present at the negotiations which began
here--doubtless counting on his soft-heartedness and good nature--but
he also desired me to take part in them. I had however decided that the
soldiers, who were made of sterner stuff, should settle the affair by
themselves; and so I whispered to an officer as I went up the stairs to
call me in five minutes and say that the King wanted to speak to me.
This was accordingly done. Napoleon was informed that he could only
see the King after the conclusion of the capitulation. The matter was
therefore arranged between Moltke and Wimpffen, much on the lines that
were laid down the evening before. Then the two monarchs met. As the
Emperor came out after the interview his eyes were filled with heavy
tears. In speaking to me he was much less affected, and was perfectly
dignified.”
We had no detailed particulars of these events on the forenoon of
the 2nd of September; and from the moment when the Chief, in a fresh
uniform and cuirassier’s helmet, rode off from Donchery until late at
night, we only heard vague rumours of what was going on. About 10.30
A.M. a detachment of Würtemberg artillery drove past our house at a
trot. In every direction clouds of dust rose from the hoofs of the
cavalry, while the bayonets of long columns of infantry glistened
in the sun. The road at our feet was filled with a procession of
waggons loaded with baggage and forage. Presently we met Lieutenant
von Czernicki, who wanted to go into Sedan, and invited us to drive
with him in his little carriage. We had accompanied him nearly as far
as Fresnois when, at about 1 o’clock, we met the King with a large
suite on horseback, including the Chancellor, coming in the opposite
direction. As it was probable that the Chief was going to Donchery we
got out and followed him. The party, however, which included Hatzfeldt
and Abeken, rode through the town, and we heard that they were viewing
the battle-field. As we did not know how long the Minister would remain
away we did not venture to leave Donchery.
About 1.30 P.M. some thousands of prisoners marched through the town on
their way to Germany. Most of them were on foot, but some of them were
in carts. They included about sixty to seventy officers, and a general
who was on horseback. Amongst the prisoners were cuirassiers in white
helmets, blue hussars with white facings, and infantrymen of the 22nd,
52nd and 58th regiments. They were escorted by Würtemberg infantry.
At 2 o’clock followed a second batch of about 2000 prisoners, amongst
whom were negroes in Arab costume--tall, broad-shouldered fellows, with
savage, ape-like features, and some old soldiers wearing the Crimean
and Mexican medals.
A little after 3 o’clock two French guns, with their ammunition waggons
and still drawn by French horses, passed through our street. The words
“5, Jäger, Görlitz” were written in chalk on one of the guns. Shortly
afterwards a fire broke out in one of the streets to the left of our
quarters. Würtemberg soldiers had opened a cask of brandy and had
imprudently made a fire near it.
Considerable distress prevailed in the town, and even our landlord
(he and his wife were good souls) suffered from a scarcity of bread.
The place was overcrowded with soldiers, who were quartered on the
inhabitants, and with the wounded who were sometimes put up in stables.
Some of the people attached to the Court tried to secure our house
for the Hereditary Grand Duke of Weimar, but we held out successfully
against them. Then an officer wanted to quarter a Prince of Mecklenburg
upon us, but we also sent him packing, telling him it was out of the
question, as the Chancellor of the Confederation lodged there. After a
short absence, however, I found that the Weimar gentlemen had forced
themselves into the house. We had reason to be thankful that they did
not turn our Chief out of his bed.
The Minister only returned after 11 o’clock and I had supper with
him, the party also including the Hereditary Grand Duke of Weimar, in
the uniform of the Light Blue Hussars, and Count Solms-Sonnenwalde,
formerly attached to the Embassy in Paris, and now properly speaking a
member of our staff, although we had seen very little of him recently.
The Chancellor gave us very full particulars of his ride over the
battle-field. He had been nearly twelve hours in the saddle, with short
intervals. They had been over the whole field, and were received with
great enthusiasm in all the camps and bivouacs. It was said that during
the battle our troops had taken over 25,000 prisoners, while 40,000 who
were in Sedan surrendered under the capitulation, which was concluded
about noon.
The Minister told us that Napoleon was to leave for Germany, that is
to say for Wilhelmshöhe, on the following morning. “The question is,”
said the Chief, “whether he is to go by way of Stenay and Bar le Duc or
through Belgium.” “In Belgium he would no longer be a prisoner,” said
Solms. “Well, that would not matter,” replied the Chief, “and it would
not even do any harm if he took another direction. I was in favour of
his going through Belgium, and he seemed also inclined to take that
route. If he failed to keep his word it would not injure us. But it
would be necessary to communicate beforehand with Brussels, and we
could not have an answer in less than two days.”
About 8 o’clock on the following morning, just as I was at breakfast,
we heard a noise which sounded like heavy firing. It was only the
horses in a neighbouring stable stamping on the wooden floor, probably
out of temper that they also should have been put on short commons, as
the drivers had only been able to give them half measures of oats. As
a matter of fact there was a general scarcity. I heard subsequently
that Hatzfeldt had been commissioned by the Chief to go to Brussels.
Shortly afterwards the Chancellor called me to his bedside. He had
received 500 cigars, and wished me to divide them among the wounded. I
accordingly betook myself to the barracks, which had been transformed
into a hospital, and to the bedrooms, barns and stables in the street
behind our house. At first I only wished to divide my stock amongst
the Prussians; but the Frenchmen who were sitting by cast such longing
glances at them, and their German neighbours on the straw pleaded
so warmly on their behalf--“We can’t let them look on while we are
smoking, they too have shared everything with us”--that I regarded it
as no robbery to give them some too. They all complained of hunger, and
asked how long they were going to be kept there. Later on they were
supplied with soup, bread and sausages, and some of those in the barns
and stables were even treated to bouillon and chocolate by a Bavarian
volunteer hospital attendant.
The morning was cold, dull and rainy. The masses of Prussian and
Würtemberg troops who marched through the town seemed however in
the best of spirits. They sang to the music of their bands. In all
probability the feelings of the prisoners who sat in the long line of
carts that passed in the opposite direction at the same time were more
in harmony with the disagreeable weather and the clouded sky. About 10
o’clock, as I waded in the drizzling rain through the deep mud of the
market-place in fulfilment of my mission to the wounded, I met a long
procession of conveyances coming from the Meuse bridge under the escort
of the black death’s-head hussars. Most of them were covered coaches,
the remainder being baggage and commissariat carts. They were followed
by a number of saddle horses. In a closed coupé immediately behind
the hussars sat the “Prisoner of Sedan,” the Emperor Napoleon, on his
way to Wilhelmshöhe through Belgium. General Castelneau had a seat in
his carriage. He was followed in an open waggonette by the infantry
general, Adjutant-General von Boyen, who had been selected by the King
as the Emperor’s travelling companion, and by Prince Lynar and some
of the officers who had been present at Napoleon’s meeting with the
Chancellor on the previous day. “Boyen is capitally suited for that
mission,” said the Chief to us the night before; “he can be extremely
rude in the most polite way.” The Minister was probably thinking of the
possibility that some of the officers in the _entourage_ of the august
prisoner might take liberties.
We learned afterwards that an indirect route through Donchery had been
taken, as the Emperor was particularly anxious not to pass through
Sedan. The hussars went as far as the frontier near Bouillon, the
nearest Belgian town. The Emperor was not treated with disrespect by
the French prisoners whom the party passed on the way. The officers on
the other hand had occasionally to listen to some unpleasant remarks.
Naturally they were “traitors,” as indeed from this time forward
everybody was who lost a battle or suffered any other mishap. It seems
to have been a particularly painful moment for these gentlemen when
they passed a great number of French field pieces that had fallen into
our hands. Boyen related the following anecdote. One of the Emperor’s
aides-de-camp, I believe it was the Prince de la Moscowa, thought
the guns belonged to us, as they were drawn by our horses, yet was
apparently struck by something in their appearance. He asked:--
“Quoi, est-ce que vous avez deux systèmes d’artillerie?”
“Non, monsieur, nous n’avons qu’un seul,” was the reply.
“Mais ces canons-là?”
“Ils ne sont pas les nôtres, monsieur.”
CHAPTER VII
FROM THE MEUSE TO THE MARNE
I again quote from my diary.
_Saturday, September 3rd._--We left Donchery shortly before 1 o’clock.
On the way we were overtaken by a short but severe storm, the thunder
echoing along the valleys. This was followed by a heavy rain, which
thoroughly drenched the Chancellor, who sat in an open carriage,
as he told us in the evening at table. Happily it had no serious
consequences: it depends more on diplomacy, and if the Chief were to
fall ill who could replace him?
I drove with the Councillors. Count Bohlen gave us numerous details
of the events of yesterday. Napoleon had left Sedan at such an early
hour it must have been before or shortly after daybreak--because he
felt it was unsafe to remain in the midst of the furious soldiery, who
were packed into the fortress like herrings in a barrel, and who burst
into paroxysms of rage, breaking their rifles and swords on hearing of
the capitulation. During the first interview at Donchery the Minister
had, amongst other things, told Wimpffen he must be well aware that
the arrogance and quarrelsomeness of the French, and their jealousy
at the success of neighbouring peoples, did not originate with the
working and industrial classes, but with the journalists and the mob.
These elements, however, swayed public opinion, constraining it to
their will. For that reason the moral guarantees to which the general
had referred would be of no value. We must have material guarantees,
at present by the capitulation of the army in Sedan, and then by the
cession of the great fortresses in the East. The surrender of the
French troops took place on a kind of peninsula formed by a bend of
the Meuse. Moltke had ridden out some distance from Vendresse to meet
the King. The interview between the two Sovereigns took place in the
drawing-room of the château of Bellevue. They were alone together
for about ten minutes. Subsequently the King summoned the officers
of his suite, ordered the capitulation to be read to him, and, with
tears in his eyes, thanked them for their assistance. The Crown Prince
is understood to have informed the Hessian regiments that the King
had selected Cassel for the internment of the Emperor Napoleon, in
recognition of their gallantry.
The Minister dined with the King at Vendresse, where we once more put
up for the night, but he nevertheless took some refreshment with us
afterwards. He read over to us a portion of a letter from his wife,
energetically expressing in biblical terms her hope that the French
would be destroyed. He then added meditatively, “Well, in 1866--seven
days. This time possibly seven times seven. Yes--when did we cross the
frontier? On the 4th? No, on the 10th of August. Five weeks ago. Seven
times seven--it may be possible.”
I again send off a couple of articles to Germany, amongst them being
one on the results of the battle of the 1st September.
We are to start for Reims to-morrow, our first halt to be at Rethel.
_Rethel, September 4th, evening._--Early this morning before we left
Vendresse I was called to the Chief, to receive instructions respecting
reports for the newspapers of his meeting with Napoleon. Towards the
close he practically dictated what I was to say.[7] Shortly afterwards,
about half-past 10, the carriages arrived, and we began our journey
into the champagne country. The way was at first somewhat hilly, then
we came to a softly undulating plain, with numerous fruit gardens, and
finally to a poor district with very few villages. We passed some large
detachments of troops, at first Bavarians, and afterwards the 6th and
50th Prussian regiments. Amongst the latter Willisch saw his brother,
who had been in battle, and had escaped unwounded. A little further
on the carriage of Prince Charles had to be left behind at a village,
as the axle had caught fire. We took Count Dönhoff, the Prince’s
master of the horse, and Major von Freyberg, aide-de-camp to Prince
Luitpold of Bavaria, into our conveyance. The tragedy at Bazeilles was
mentioned, and the major gave an account of the circumstances, which
differed considerably from that of Count Bohlen. According to him
twenty peasants, including one woman, lost their lives, but they were
killed in fight while opposing the soldiers, who stormed the place. A
priest was afterwards shot by court-martial. The Major however does
not appear to have been a witness of the occurrences which he relates,
so that his account of the affair may also prove to be inaccurate. He
knew nothing of the hangings mentioned by Bohlen. There are some people
whose tongues are more cruel than their dispositions.
We arrived at Rethel about 5.30 P.M. The quarter-master had chosen a
lodging for us in the roomy and well-furnished residence of one M.
Duval, in the Rue Grand Pont. The entire field bureau of the Foreign
Office was quartered in this house. After dinner I was summoned three
times to receive instructions from the Chief. Amongst other things
he said: “Metz and Strassburg are what we require and what we wish
to take--that is the fortresses. Alsace is a professorial idea.” He
evidently referred to the strong emphasis laid upon the German past of
that province and the circumstance that the inhabitants still retained
the use of the German language.
In the meantime the German newspapers were delivered. It was highly
satisfactory to observe that the South German press also began to
oppose the efforts of foreign diplomacy which desired to mediate in the
negotiations for peace between ourselves and France. In this respect
the _Schwäbische Merkur_ was perfectly in accord with the Chief’s views
in saying: “When the German peoples marched to the Rhine in order to
defend their native land, European diplomacy said the two antagonists
must be allowed to fight out their own quarrel, and that the war must
be thus localised. Well, we have carried on that war alone against
those who threatened all Europe, and we now also desire to localise the
conclusion of peace. In Paris we shall ourselves dictate the conditions
which must protect the German people from a renewal of such predaceous
invasion as the war of 1870, and the diplomats of foreign Powers who
looked on as spectators shall not be allowed to have anything to say in
the matter. Those who took no part in the fight shall have no voice in
the negotiations.” “We must breed other articles from this one,” said
the Chief, and it did.
_Reims, September 5th._--During the whole forenoon great masses of
troops marched along a road not far from our quarters at Rethel Bridge.
The procession was closed by four regiments of Prussian infantry. It
was very noticeable how few officers there were. Several companies were
under the command of young lieutenants or ensigns. This was the case
with the 6th and 46th, one battalion of which carried a captured French
eagle. Although the day was stiflingly hot, and the men were covered
with the white dust of the limestone roads, they marched steadily and
well. Our coachman placed a bucket of water by the way, so that they
could fill their tin cans and glasses, and sometimes their helmets, as
they passed.
Between 12 and 1 o’clock we started for Reims; the district through
which the road runs is in great part an undulating plain with few
villages.
At length we see the towers of the Cathedral of Reims rising over the
glistening plains, and beyond the town the blue heights that change
to green as we approach them, and show white villages along their
sides. We drive at first through poor outskirts and then through better
streets, and across a square with a monument, to the Rue de Cloître,
where we take up our quarters, opposite the Cathedral, in a handsome
house, which belongs to a M. Dauphinot. The Chief lodged on the first
floor, while the office was set up on the ground floor. The streets are
crowded with Prussian and Würtemberg soldiers. The King has done the
Archbishop the honour of taking up his quarters in his Palace. I hear
that our landlord is the Maire of Reims. Keudell understands that the
territory to be retained by us at the close of the war will probably
not be incorporated with any one State or divided between several, but
will become the collective possession of all Germany.
In the evening the Chief dined with us, and as we are here in the
centre of the champagne country we try several brands. In the course
of conversation the Chief mentions that he is usually bored at the
royal table. “When there are but few guests I sit near the King, and
then it is tolerable. But when there are a great number present I am
placed between the Bavarian Prince and the Grand Duke of Weimar, and
then the conversation is inexpressibly tedious.” Some one remarked
that yesterday a shot was fired out of a café, at a squadron of our
hussars. The Minister said the house must be immediately destroyed, and
the proprietor tried by court-martial. Stieber should be instructed to
inquire into the matter.
I understand we are to remain here for ten or twelve days.
_Tuesday, September 6th._--I have been working hard from 10 to 3
o’clock without interruption in preparing, amongst other things,
exhaustive, and also shorter, articles respecting the conditions upon
which Germany should make peace. The Chief found an article that
appeared in the _Volkszeitung_ of the 31st of August “very sensible
and well worth calling attention to.” The writer argued against the
annexation to Prussia of the conquered French territory; and after
endeavouring to show that such a course would rather weaken than
strengthen Prussia, concluded with the words: “Our aim ought to be,
not the aggrandisement of Prussia, but the unification of Germany,
and to put it out of the power of France to harm us.” Bamberger has
established a French newspaper at Nancy, to which we are to send
reports from time to time.
At dinner Count Bohlen remarked, as he counted the places, “I hope we
are not thirteen.” “No.” “That’s right, as the Minister does not like
that number.” Bohlen, who seems to be charged with the supervision
of the fleshpots, has to-day evidently inspired the genius of our
_chef-de-cuisine_ to one of his greatest achievements. The dinner is
magnificent. Amongst the guests are Von Knobelsdorff, a captain in
the Guards; Count York, and one Count Brühl, a somewhat bashful young
man, in the uniform of a lieutenant of dragoons. The latter brought
the great news that a Republic had been proclaimed in Paris and a
Provisional Government appointed, in which Gambetta, hitherto one of
the orators of the Opposition, and Favre have portfolios. Rochefort,
the editor of _La Lanterne_, is also a member of the Cabinet. It is
said that they wish to continue the war against us. The position has,
therefore, not improved in so far as peace is concerned; but it is also
by no means worse, especially if the Republic lasts, and it becomes,
later on, a question of gaining friends at foreign Courts. For the
present it is all over with Napoleon and Lulu. Like Louis Philippe in
1848, the Empress has fled. We shall soon discover what the lawyers and
literary men, who have now taken over the conduct of affairs, can do.
Whether France will recognise their authority remains to be seen.
Our uhlans are now at Château Thierry; in two days they may reach
Paris. It is now certain, however, that we shall remain another week at
Reims. Count Bohlen reported to the Chief the result of his inquiries
respecting the café from which our cavalry were fired at. Yielding to
the entreaties of the proprietor, who is believed to be innocent, the
house has not been destroyed. Moreover, the treacherous shot failed of
its effect. The proprietor has been let off with a fine of two hundred
or two hundred and fifty bottles of champagne, to be presented to the
squadron; and this he gladly paid.
At tea somebody (I now forget who it was) referred to the exceptional
position accorded to the Saxons in the North German Confederation as
regards military arrangements. The Chancellor did not consider the
matter of much importance. “Moreover, that arrangement was not made on
my initiative,” he observed; “Savigny concluded the treaty, as I was
seriously ill at the time. I am disposed to regard even less narrowly
the arrangements respecting the foreign relations of the smaller
States. Many people lay too much stress on this point, and apprehend
danger from the retention of their diplomatic representatives besides
those of the Confederation. If such States were in other respects
powerful, they could, even without official representatives, exchange
letters with foreign Courts and intrigue by word of mouth against our
policy. That could be managed by a dentist or any other personage of
that description. Moreover, the Diets will soon refuse to grant the
sums required for all such luxuries.”
_Thursday, September 8th._--The Chancellor gives a great dinner, the
guests including the Hereditary Grand Duke of Mecklenburg-Schwerin,
Herr Stephan the Chief Director of the Post Office, and the three
Americans. Amongst other matters mentioned at table were the various
reports as to the affair at Bazeilles. The Minister said that peasants
could not be permitted to take part in the defence of a position. Not
being in uniform they could not be recognised as combatants--they
were able to throw away their arms unnoticed. The chances must be
equal for both sides. Abeken considered that Bazeilles was hardly
treated, and thought the war ought to be conducted in a more humane
manner. Sheridan, to whom MacLean has translated these remarks, is of a
different opinion. He considers that in war it is expedient, even from
the political point of view, to treat the population with the utmost
rigour also. He expressed himself roughly as follows: “The proper
strategy consists in the first place in inflicting as telling blows as
possible upon the enemy’s army, and then in causing the inhabitants
so much suffering that they must long for peace, and force their
Government to demand it. The people must be left nothing but their eyes
to weep with over the war.” Somewhat heartless it seems to me, but
perhaps worthy of consideration.
_Friday, September 9th._--Engaged all the forenoon and until 3 o’clock
in writing various articles, amongst others one on the inconceivable
attachment of the Alsacians to France, their voluntary helotry, and
the blindness which will not permit them to see and feel that the
Gauls only regard them as a kind of second-rate Frenchmen, and in many
respects treat them accordingly. News has arrived that Paris is not
to be defended against us nor regarded as a fortress. This is very
questionable, as, according to other reports, the French have still
some regular troops at their disposal, although not many.
_Saturday, September 10th._--The Chief dined with the King to-day, but
also joined us at table for half an hour. Bohlen, who had visited the
Imperial château at Mourmelon, near Châlons, told us how the people had
wrecked the whole place, breaking the furniture, mirrors, &c. After
dinner the Chancellor had a long talk alone with Boyen and Delbrück,
who were amongst the guests. I was afterwards summoned to the Minister
to receive instructions respecting a _communiqué_ to the two French
newspapers published here, namely the _Courier de la Champagne_ and the
_Indépendant Rémois_. It was to the following effect: “If the Reims
press were to declare itself in favour of the proclamation of a French
Republic, and recognise the new Government by publishing its decrees,
it might be inferred that as the town is occupied by German troops the
organs in question were acting in harmony with the views of the German
Government. This is not the case. The German Government respects the
liberty of the press here as at home. It has however up to the present
recognised no Government in France except that of the Emperor Napoleon.
Therefore until further notice it can only recognise the Imperial
Government as authorised to enter upon international negotiations.”
I give the following from my diary merely to show the genuine
kindness and simple good-heartedness of our Chief. After giving me my
instructions he remarked that I had not been looking well; and when I
told him I had been rather unwell for the last few days, he inquired
minutely into the details, and asked me whether I had consulted any
doctor. I said I had not much faith in physicians.
“Well,” he replied, “they certainly are not of much use as a rule,
and often only make us worse. But this is no laughing matter. Send to
Lauer--he is really a good man. I cannot tell you how much my health
owes to him during this campaign. Go to bed for a couple of days and
you will be all right again. Otherwise you will have a relapse and may
not be able to stir for three weeks. I often suffer in the same way,
and then I take thirty to thirty-five drops from that little bottle
on the chimney-piece. Take it with you, but bring it back again. And
when I send for you tell me if you are not able to come and I will go
to you. You can perhaps write in bed.”
_Sunday, September 11th._--The Chief’s bottle has had an excellent
effect. I was again able to rise early and work with ease. The contents
of the _communiqué_ were forwarded to the newspaper at Nancy as well as
to the German press. It was pointed out, in correction of the remarks
of the _Kieler Zeitung_ and the Berlin _Volkszeitung_, that Prussia did
not conclude the Peace of Prague with France, but with Austria, and
that, consequently, the French have as little to do with paragraph 5 as
with any other paragraph of that treaty.
In the course of the day one M. Werle called upon the Chief. He was
a tall, haggard man, with the red ribbon in his button-hole which
appears to be indispensable to every well-dressed Frenchman. He is
understood to be a member of the Legislative Chamber, and a partner
in the firm of Veuve Clicquot. He wished to speak to the Chief as to
measures for mitigating the distress which prevailed in the town, and
for providing against popular riots. It was feared that the working
classes here, being in a state of ferment, would declare in favour of
a Red Republic. As Reims was an industrial centre, with ten or twelve
thousand _ouvriers_ within its walls, there might be general ground for
apprehension on the withdrawal of our troops. That also was a thing one
could have hardly dreamed of a month ago--German soldiers protecting
the French from Communism!
After dinner I was summoned several times to the Chief to receive
instructions. In Belgium and Luxemburg our wounded were received in
an unfriendly manner, and it is suspected, probably not without
reason, that ultramontane influence is at the bottom of this conduct.
Favre, “who does not exist for us,” as the Chief declared to-day, has
asked, indirectly through London, whether we are disposed to grant an
armistice and to enter into negotiations. Favre seems to consider this
question as very pressing. The Chancellor, however, does not.
When Bölsing brought in the despatch from Bernstorff, stating that
Lord Granville requested an early reply from the Chancellor of the
Confederation to Favre’s inquiry, the Minister simply remarked, “There
is no hurry to answer this rubbish.”
After 10 P.M. the Chief joined us at tea.
The conversation ultimately turned on the politics of recent years. The
Chancellor said: “What I am proudest of, however, is our success in
the Schleswig-Holstein affair, in which the diplomatic intrigues would
furnish matter for a play. In the first place, Austria could not well
have sided with the Augustenburger in presence of her previous attitude
as recorded in the proceedings of the Germanic Diet, for which she
was bound to show some regard. Then she wanted to find some tolerable
way out of the embarrassment in which she had involved herself with
the Congress of Princes at Frankfurt. Immediately after the death
of the King of Denmark I explained what I wanted in a long speech
at a sitting of the Council of State. The official who drew up the
minutes of the sitting omitted the most important part of my speech;
he must have thought that I had lunched too well, and would be glad
if he left it out. But I took care that it was again inserted. It was
difficult, however, to carry my idea into execution. Everything was
against it--Austria, the English, the small States--both Liberal and
anti-Liberal, the Opposition in the Diet, influential personages at
Court, and the majority of the Press.
“Yes, at that time there was some hard fighting, the hardest being with
the Court, and it demanded stronger nerves than mine. It was about the
same at Baden-Baden before the Congress at Frankfurt, when the King of
Saxony was in Baden, and wanted our King to go to that Assembly. It
was literally in the sweat of my brow that I prevented him from doing
so.” I asked the Chief, after some further remarks, if the King had
really wished to join the other Princes. “He certainly did,” replied
the Minister, “and I only succeeded with the utmost difficulty in
preventing him, literally hanging on to his coat-tails.” The Chief
then continued to the following effect: “His Majesty said he could not
well do otherwise when a King had come to him as a courier to bring
the invitation. All the women were in favour of his going, the Dowager
Queen, the reigning Queen, and the Grand Duchess of Baden. I declared
to the Dowager that I would not remain Minister nor return to Berlin if
the King allowed himself to be persuaded. She said she was very sorry,
but if I seriously meant that, she must surrender her own view and use
her influence with the King in the other direction, although it was
greatly opposed to her own convictions. The affair was, however, still
made quite disagreeable enough for me. After the King of Saxony and
Beust had been with him, his Majesty lay on the sofa and had an attack
of hysterical weeping; and when at length I had succeeded in wringing
from him the letter of refusal, I was myself so weak and exhausted that
I could scarcely stand. Indeed, I actually reeled as I left the room,
and was so nervous and unhinged that in closing the outer door I tore
off the handle. The aide-de-camp asked me if I was unwell. I said, ‘No,
I am all right again _now_.’ I told Beust, however, that I would have
the regiment stationed at Rastatt brought over to guard the house,
and to prevent anybody else having access to the King in order to put
fresh pressure upon him.” Keudell also mentioned that the Minister had
intended to get Beust arrested. It was getting late when the Chief had
finished his narrative of those events, so he retired, saying: “Yes,
gentlemen, a delicate nervous system has to endure a good deal. I shall
therefore be off to bed. Good night.”
_Monday, September 12th._--Engaged writing various paragraphs till noon.
According to some of the German papers the Chief had declared that
in the battle of Sedan, Prussia’s allies fought best. What he said,
however, was only that they co-operated in the best possible way. “The
Belgians,” said the Minister, “display such hatred towards us and such
warm attachment for the French, that perhaps after all something might
be done to satisfy them. It might at any rate be well to suggest that
arrangements even with the present French Government are not entirely
out of the question, which would gratify Belgian yearnings towards
France. Call attention,” added the Chief, “to the fact that the present
animosity in Belgium is due chiefly to ultramontane agitation.”
The Bavarian Count Luxburg, who is staying with Kühlwetter, has
distinguished himself by his talent and zeal. In future he is to take
part in the consideration of all important questions.
A report has been received to the effect that America has offered her
services as a mediator between ourselves and the new French Republic.
This mediation will not be declined, and as a matter of fact would
be preferred to that of any other State. It may be assumed that the
authorities at Washington are not disposed to interfere with our
necessary military operations, which would however probably be the
consequence of such mediation. The Chief appears to have been for a
considerable time past well disposed towards the Americans, and not
long ago it was understood that he hoped to secure permission to fit
out ships in the American harbours against the French navy. Doubtless
there is no longer any probability of this being done.
To conclude from a communication which he has forwarded to Carlsruhe,
the Minister regards the general situation as follows:--“Peace
seems to be still very remote, as the Government in Paris does not
promise to be permanent. When the proper moment for negotiations has
arrived, the King will summon his allies to consider our demands. Our
principal object is and remains to secure the South-Western German
frontier against the danger of a French invasion, to which it has now
been subjected for centuries. A neutral buffer State like Belgium or
Switzerland would not serve our purpose, as it would unquestionably
join France in case of a fresh outbreak of war. Metz and Strassburg,
with an adequate portion of surrounding territory, must belong to all
Germany, to serve as a protective barrier against the French. The
partition of this territory between single States is inexpedient.
The fact that this war has been waged in common cannot fail to have
exercised a healthy influence in other respects on the cause of German
unity; but nevertheless Prussia will, as a matter of course, after the
war as before it, respect the views of the South, and avoid even the
suspicion of any kind of pressure. In this matter a great deal will
depend upon the personal disposition and determination of the King of
Bavaria.”
Before dinner to-day Prince Luitpold of Bavaria had a long interview
with the Chief. In the evening at tea the Minister, referring to this
interview, said: “The Prince is certainly a good fellow, but I rather
doubt whether he understood the historical and political statements
which I made to him to-day.”
I have reason to believe that this interview was the beginning of
negotiations (which were several times interrupted) between the
Chancellor of the Confederation and the Emperors of Austria and Russia,
which gradually led to an understanding and finally resulted in the
so-called _Drei Kaiser Bündniss_, or Three Emperors’ Alliance. The
object of these “historical and political statements” was to induce
Prince Luitpold to write a letter to his brother-in-law, the Archduke
Albrecht, submitting certain views to the personal consideration of
the Emperor Francis Joseph. This was one of the few ways in which it
appeared possible for those considerations to reach the Emperor’s own
ear in an ungarbled form. They were as follows: The turn which events
have taken in Paris renders it possible to regard the present war
between Germany and France as a defence of monarchical conservative
principles against the republican and socialistic tenets adopted by the
present holders of power in France. The proclamation of the Republic
in Paris has been welcomed with warm approval in Spain, and it is to
be expected that it will obtain a like reception in Italy. In that
circumstance lies the great danger for those European States that are
governed on a monarchical system. The best security for the cause of
order and civilisation against this solidarity of the revolutionary
and republican elements would be a closer union of those countries
which, like Germany, Russia, and Austria, still afford a firm support
to the monarchical principle. Austria, however, can only be included
in such an understanding when it is recognised in that country that
the attempts hitherto made in the Cisleithan half of the monarchy to
introduce a liberal system are based on a mistaken policy, as are
also the national experiments in a Polish direction. The appointment
of Klaczko, a Polish literary man, to a position in which he is in
close relations with Beust, the Chancellor of the Empire, whose policy
and tendency are well known, together with the latest declarations
of Klaczko, must be regarded as indications of Beust’s own views and
intentions. This co-operation with the Polish revolutionists, together
with the hostility to Russia which is manifested thereby, is for the
Chancellor of the German Confederation a serious hindrance to good
relations with Austria, and must at the same time be regarded as an
indication of hostility to ourselves. In connection with the above
the position of the Cisleithan half of the dual State must be taken
into consideration, and the difficulties which it presents cannot be
overcome except by a conservative _régime_. It is only through the
frank adoption of relations of mutual confidence towards united Germany
and Russia that Austria can find the support which she requires against
revolutionary and centrifugal forces, a support which she has lost
through the disastrous policy of Count Beust.
Prince Luitpold’s letter giving expression to these views failed to
produce the desired result. It is true the Archduke Albrecht submitted
it to the Emperor, but he showed it at the same time to Beust. His
answer, which was inspired by Beust, was in the main to the effect that
Austria, so long as no special political advantages were offered by
us, did not feel any need of support. If Prussia, as it would appear,
regarded a _rapprochement_ with Austria as desirable or requisite,
nothing had been heard so far as to what she had to offer in return
to the dual monarchy, whose interests were complex. The Emperor would
gladly consider any suggestions that reached him in a direct way.
The Tsar Alexander was informed of the attempt made in Vienna through
the Bavarian Prince, his attention being at the same time called to the
notorious understanding which existed between the present Government
in Paris and the revolutionary propagandists throughout Europe. The
desirability of a close co-operation of the Eastern Powers against this
movement was urged upon him on the one hand, while on the other the
necessity was pointed out for Germany to avoid, when concluding peace,
anything which might look like disregard for the real requirements of
the country in the matter of frontier protection and security, and
thus give the German revolutionary party an opportunity of poisoning
the public mind. The Tsar declared himself in perfect agreement with
these views, and expressed a strong desire for the realisation of the
proposed union of the monarchical elements against the revolutionary
movement.
Subsequently, after the insurrection of the Communists in Paris, the
progress of the International, upon which considerable stress was also
laid in the Press, was used as a further argument for the combination
of the conservative Powers against the republican and socialistic
propaganda. This time the representations in question met with more
success in Vienna.
_Tuesday, September 13th._--In the course of the forenoon I was called
in to the Chancellor six times, and wrote as many paragraphs for the
press. Amongst them were two for the local French papers, which also
received some information from us yesterday. Arrangements were made
to secure the insertion of the portrait and biography of General von
Blumenthal in the illustrated papers with which we entertain friendly
relations, a distinction which he has well deserved. “So far as one
can see,” said the Chief, “the papers make no mention of him, although
he is chief of the staff to the Crown Prince, and, next after Moltke,
deserves most credit for the conduct of the war.
“I should like a grant to be made to him. He won the battles of
Weissenburg and Wörth, and afterwards those of Beaumont and Sedan, as
the Crown Prince was not always interfering with his plans, as Prince
Frederick Charles did in 1866. The latter fancied that he understood a
great deal about these matters.”
In the evening the Count sent for me once more. It was merely to
show me a telegram, which he handed to me with a smile. It was a
message from the Grand Duke of Weimar to the Grand Duchess, couched
in the style of the King’s despatches to the Queen, in which the Duke
reported, “My army has fought very bravely.” Greatness, like murder,
will out. But still there are cases in which imitation had better be
avoided.
On the 14th of September, shortly before 10 o’clock, we started for
Château Thierry, and reached Meaux on the next day.
Before dinner we heard that a _parlementaire_ has arrived from Paris,
a slight dark-haired young gentleman, who is now standing in the
courtyard before the Chief’s house. From his language he would appear
to be an Englishman. In the evening he has a long conversation with the
Chief over a bottle of kirschwasser, and turns out to be Mr. Edward
Malet, an _attaché_ of the British Embassy in Paris. As I had to pass
through the antechamber I noticed the attendant, Engel, with his ear
to the keyhole, curious to know what they were talking about. He had
brought a letter from Lord Lyons asking whether the Count would enter
into negotiations with Favre as to the conditions of an armistice. The
Chancellor is understood to have replied: “As to conditions of peace,
yes; but not for an armistice.”[8]
I see from the letters of some Berlin friends that many well-meaning
and patriotic persons cannot bring themselves to accept the idea that
the conquered territory is not to be annexed to Prussia. According to a
communication from Heinrich von Treitschke, of Freiburg, it is feared
that Alsace and Lorraine may be handed over to Bavaria, and that a
new dual system may thus arise. In a letter to the Chief he says: “It
is obvious that Prussia alone is capable of once more Germanising the
Teutonic provinces of France.” He refers to a “circumstance to which
too little attention is paid in the North--namely, that all sensible
men in South Germany desire to see Alsace handed over to Prussia;” and
declares that “it is a great mistake if it is thought in the North that
the South must be rewarded by an increase of territory and population.”
I cannot imagine where Treitschke can have heard such erroneous views.
So far as I am aware they are held by none of our people. I fancy it
is thought here that the South will be sufficiently rewarded in being
at length secured against French lust of conquest. Other ideas of the
writer can only be regarded as sound in certain circumstances. Our
Chief’s plan, to which I have previously referred, is unquestionably
more just and better adapted to the existing situation--namely, to make
those provinces the common property of all Germany. By taking that
course the conquered territory would not become an object of envy and
a cause of dissatisfaction to Prussia’s allies; but, on the contrary,
would serve as a bond of union between North and South.
I hear from Willisch that certain apprehensions are entertained in
Berlin, which are understood to originate in the _entourage_ of the
Queen. Owing to the anxiety occasioned by the blowing-up of the citadel
at Laon, objections are raised to the King entering Paris, where, it
is apprehended, something might happen to him. Wrangel has telegraphed
in this sense to the King, and it is stated that as a matter of fact
his Majesty is now no longer inclined to go to Paris, and is disposed
to await the further development of affairs at Rothschild’s place in
Ferrières, which lies about half-way between Meaux and Paris.
Prince Hohenlohe dines at our table, where the Chief also joins us
after returning from dinner with the King. We learn that Reims will
be the administrative centre of the French provinces occupied by our
troops, with the exception of Alsace and Lorraine. The Grand Duke
of Mecklenburg is Governor-General, and will be at the head of the
administration, and Hohenlohe will take a position under him.
The Chief remarked to his cousin, who complained of not feeling well:
“At your age” (Bohlen is now thirty-eight) “I was still as sound as a
bell, and could take all sorts of liberties with myself. It was at St.
Petersburg that my health first sprang a leak.”
Somebody turned the conversation on Paris and the subject of the
French and the Alsacians. The Chief gave his views on this matter very
fully, addressing his remarks to me at the close, which I took to be
a permission, or a hint, that I should either get his words or their
purport into the newspapers. The Alsacians and the Germans of Lorraine,
he declared, supply France with numbers of capable men, especially
for the army, but they are not held of much account by the French,
and seldom attain to high positions in the service of the State,
while they are laughed at by the Parisians, who make caricatures and
stories out of them, just as the Irish are laughed at in London. “Other
French provincials are treated in the same way,” added the Minister,
“if not quite so badly. To a certain extent, France is divided into
two nations, the Parisians and the Provincials, and the latter are
the voluntary helots of the former. The object to be aimed at now is
the emancipation, the liberation of France from Parisian rule. When
a provincial feels that he is capable of making a future for himself
he comes to Paris, and is there adopted into, and becomes one of, the
ruling caste. It is a question whether we should not oblige them to
take back the Emperor as a punishment. That is still possible, as the
peasants do not wish to be tyrannised from Paris. France is a nation
of ciphers--a mere herd. The French are wealthy and elegant, but they
have no individuality, no consciousness as individuals, but only as a
mass. They are like thirty million obedient Kaffirs, each one of whom
is in himself featureless and worthless, not fit to be compared with
Russians and Italians, to say nothing of ourselves. It was an easy task
to recruit out of this impersonal, invertebrate mass a phalanx ready to
oppress the remainder of the country so long as it was not united.”
After dinner wrote several paragraphs in accordance with the Chief’s
instructions and explanations. The subjects were: The German friends
of the Republic--men like Jacoby, the Socialistic Democrats, and
others holding similar views--will not hear of the annexation of
French territory, being in the first place Republicans, and only in a
secondary sense, to a certain extent, German. The security afforded
to Germany by the seizure of Strassburg and Metz is detestable to
them, as it is a bulwark against the Republic which they want to see
established, weakening their propaganda, and injuring their prospects
on our side of the Rhine. They place their party higher than their
country. They welcomed the opposition to Napoleon, because he was an
opponent of their doctrines, but since he has been replaced by the
Republic they have become Frenchmen in sentiment and disposition.
Russia has expressed a desire for a revision of the treaty entered
into as the result of her defeat in the Crimean war. The alterations
proposed in certain points of that instrument must be regarded as just.
The Peace of Paris includes conditions respecting the Black Sea which
are unfair, in view of the fact that a great part of the coast belongs
to Russia. This must, however, be cautiously expressed.
The conjecture that the Crown Prince is of opinion that the Bavarians
and Suabians, if they are not disposed willingly to form part of united
Germany, must be compelled to do so, is correct. He is inclined to act
on the maxim, _Der Bien muss_. I hear that at Donchery, or near that
town, he had a long conversation on the subject with the Chancellor,
who declared himself strongly against this idea.
_Saturday, September 17th._--I did a good deal of work this morning
and afternoon from instructions received yesterday. Amongst other
things, I embodied in an article the following ideas, which are very
characteristic of the Chancellor’s manner of thinking:
“The morning edition of the _National Zeitung_ of September 11th
contains a paragraph entitled ‘From Wilhelmshöhe,’ in which the writer,
after lamenting the considerate treatment of the Prisoner of Sedan,
falls into further errors. Nemesis should have shown no indulgence
towards the man of December 2nd, the author of the laws of public
safety, the prime mover in the Mexican tragedy, and the instigator of
the present terrible war. The victor has been ‘far too chivalrous.’
That is the way in which the matter is regarded by ‘public opinion,’
as endorsed apparently by the writer. We do not in any way share those
views. Public opinion is only too much disposed to treat political
relations and events from the standpoint of private morals, and,
amongst other things, to demand that in international conflicts the
victor, guided by the moral code, should sit in judgment upon the
vanquished, and impose penalties not only for the transgressions of
the latter towards himself, but also, if possible, towards others.
Such a demand is entirely unjustifiable. To advance it shows an utter
misapprehension of the nature of political affairs, with which the
conceptions of punishment, reward, and revenge have nothing in common.
To accede to it would be to pervert the whole character of politics.
Politics must leave to Divine Providence and to the God of Battles
the punishment of princes and peoples for breaches of the moral law.
The statesman has neither the authority nor the obligation to assume
the office of judge. In all circumstances the sole question he has to
consider is what, under the conditions given, is to the advantage of
the country, and how that advantage is to be best secured. The kindlier
affections have as little place in the calculations of politics as
they have in those of trade. It is not the business of politics to
seek vengeance for what has been done, but to take precautions that it
shall not be done again. Applying these principles to our case, and
to our conduct towards the vanquished and imprisoned Emperor of the
French, we take the liberty to ask by what right are we to punish him
for the 2nd of December, the law of public safety, and the occurrences
in Mexico, however much we may disapprove of those acts? Political
principles do not even permit us to think of taking revenge for the
present war, of which he was the author. Were we to entertain such
an idea, then it is not alone on Napoleon but almost on every single
Frenchman that we should wreak the Blücher-like vengeance mentioned by
the _National Zeitung_; for the whole of France, with her thirty-five
million inhabitants, showed just as much approval of, and enthusiasm
for, this war as for the Mexican expedition. Germany has simply to ask
herself the further question, Which is more advantageous in the present
circumstances, to treat Napoleon well or ill? And that, we believe,
is not difficult to answer. Upon the same principles we also acted
in 1866. If certain of the measures taken in that year and certain
provisions in the Treaty of Prague could be regarded as acts of revenge
for former affronts, and punishment for the offences that led to the
war in question, the parties affected by those measures and conditions
were not exactly those who had deserved the severest punishment or had
done most to excite a desire for vengeance. Herr von Beust’s Saxony
suffered no reduction of territory in consequence of that crisis, and
Austria just as little.” This last sentence, which appeared literally
as it now stands in the Chief’s instructions, was afterwards struck out
by him. He remarked with a smile, “It is better not to mention names.”
_Sunday, September 18th._--Early in the day wrote paragraphs for
Berlin, Hagenau, and Reims, dealing, _inter alia_, with Favre’s
declaration that “La République c’est la paix.” It was in the main to
the following effect. During the last forty years France has always
declared herself in favour of peace in every form, and has invariably
acted in an entirely contrary spirit. Twenty years ago the Empire
declared peace to be its ideal, and now the Republic does the same.
In 1829 Legitimacy made a similar declaration, and at the same time
a Franco-Russian alliance was concluded with the object of attacking
Germany; and the execution of that plan was only prevented by the
Revolution of 1830. It is also known that the “peaceful” administration
of the “Citizen King” desired to seize the Rhine in 1840; and it will
be remembered that under the Empire France has conducted more wars than
under any other form of government. These facts show what we have to
expect from M. Favre’s assurances respecting his Republic. Germany has
one answer to all these representations, namely, “La France c’est la
guerre!” and will act in accordance with that conviction in demanding
the cession of Metz and Strassburg.
The Minister joined as at lunch to-day, at which two dragoon guardsmen
were also present. Both wore the Iron Cross. One of them, Lieutenant
Philip von Bismarck, was the Chancellor’s nephew, an official of
the Supreme Court of Judicature in times of peace. The Chief asked
him whether the Prince of Hohenzollern, who was attached to the
lieutenant’s regiment, was “also a soldier, or merely a Prince?” The
answer was favourable. The Minister replied: “I am glad of that. The
fact of his having announced his election as King of Spain to his
superior officer, in accordance with the regulations, impressed me in
his favour.”
The conversation turned upon the cost of maintaining Napoleon at
Wilhelmshöhe, which is stated to be something enormous. On this the
Chief remarked: “It is at the Queen’s instance that Napoleon has been
allowed to maintain a Court at the King’s expense. His Majesty had
only proposed to give him one domestic who was to keep watch over
him. But he himself observed to me that women are always addicted to
extravagance.”
Mention was made of General Ducrot, who was taken prisoner at Sedan,
and who, being allowed greater liberty on pledging his word not
to escape, disgraced himself by absconding on the way to Germany.
The Chief remarked: “When one catches scoundrels of that kind who
have broken their word (of course, I don’t blame those who get away
without it) they ought to be strung up in their red breeches with
the word _Parjure_ written on one leg, and _Infâme_ on the other. In
the meantime that must be put in its proper light in the press. The
fellow must be shown up.” The barbarous manner in which the French were
conducting the war having been again referred to, the Minister said:
“If you peel the white hide off that sort of Gaul you will find a Turco
under it.”
_Added later._--Von Suckow, the Würtemberg Minister of war, has been a
considerable time with the Chief to-day, and it is understood that the
German cause is making excellent progress amongst the Suabians. Things
appear to be going less well in Bavaria, where the Minister, Bray,
seems to be as hostile to the national cause as he well can be in the
present circumstances.
_Monday, September 19th._--It is said to be certain that Favre will
arrive here to-day at noon for the purpose of negotiating with the
Chief. He will have fine weather for his business. About 10 o’clock
Count Bismarck-Bohlen comes from the Chief. We are to start immediately
for the Château of Ferrières, four or five hours’ journey from here. So
we pack up in all haste.
CHAPTER VIII
BISMARCK AND FAVRE AT HAUTE-MAISON--A FORTNIGHT IN ROTHSCHILD’S CHÂTEAU
Jules Favre not having arrived up to midday on the 19th of September,
our party started. The Minister, however, left a letter for Favre at
the Mairie, and told a servant to mention the fact to him in case he
came. The Chief and the Councillors rode on ahead of the carriages, of
which I had one entirely to myself. We first passed by the residence of
the King, who was quartered in a handsome château on the Promenade, and
between the villages of Mareuil and Montry we met a two-horse hackney,
in which a Prussian officer sat with three civilians. One of the latter
was an elderly gentleman with a grey beard and a protruding under lip.
“That’s Favre,” I said to Kruger, the Chancery attendant who sat behind
me. “Where is the Minister?” He was not to be seen, but had probably
gone on before us, and the long train of conveyances cut off our view
in front. We drove on rapidly, and after a while I met the Chief and
Keudell riding back in the opposite direction.
“Favre has driven by, Excellency,” I said.
“I know,” he replied, smiling, and trotted on.
Next day Count Hatzfeldt gave us some particulars of the meeting
between the Chancellor of the Confederation and the Parisian lawyer,
now one of the rulers of France. The Minister, Count Hatzfeldt and
Keudell were half an hour ahead of us when _Hofrath_ Taglioni, who
drove with the King’s suite, told them that Favre had passed by. He
had come by another route and had only reached its junction with our
road after the Chief had ridden by. The Minister was very angry at
not having been sooner informed of this. Hatzfeldt galloped after
Favre, with whom he returned, finally meeting the Chief at Montry.
Here the attention of the Minister was called to the little château of
Haute-Maison, situated on a height some ten minutes from the village,
as a suitable place for the interview with the Frenchman. There the
party found two Würtemberg dragoons, one of whom was instructed to take
his carbine and mount guard before the house. They also met there a
French peasant, who looked as if he had just received a good thrashing.
While our people were asking this man whether it was possible to get
anything to eat or drink, Favre, who had gone into the house with the
Chancellor, came out for a moment and addressed his countryman in a
speech full of pathos and noble sentiments. Disorderly attacks had been
made, he said, which must be stopped. He, Favre, was not a spy, but,
on the contrary, a member of the new government which had undertaken
to defend the interests of the country and which represented its
dignity. In the name of international law and of the honour of France
he called upon him to keep watch, and to see that the place was held
sacred. That was imperatively demanded by his, the statesman’s, honour,
as well as by that of the peasant, and so forth. The honest rustic
looked particularly silly as he listened open-mouthed to all this high
falutin, which he evidently understood as little as if it were so much
Greek. Keudell remarked, “If this is the individual who is to preserve
us from a surprise, I for my part prefer to trust to the sentry.”
On the same evening I learnt from another source that lodgings had been
taken for Favre in the village near the Château of Ferrières, as he
desired to have a further conference with the Chief. He was accompanied
by MM. Rink and Hell, formerly Secretaries of Embassy under Benedetti,
and Prince Biron. Keudell said, “As the Chancellor left the room where
his interview with Favre had taken place, he asked the dragoon who
was on guard before the door whence he came. The man replied, ‘From
Schwäbisch-Hall.’ ‘Well, then, you may be proud,’ he continued, ‘of
having stood guard over the first negotiation for peace in this war.’”
In the meantime the remainder of us had a long wait at Cheffy for the
return of the Chancellor, and then--probably with his permission--drove
on to Ferrières, which we reached in about two hours. On the way we
passed along the edge of the zone which the French had designedly laid
waste all round Paris. Here the destruction was not very marked, but
the population of the villages seemed to have been in great part driven
away by the Gardes Mobiles.
At length, just as it began to grow dark, we entered the village of
Ferrières, and shortly afterwards Rothschild’s estate. The King and the
first section of his suite took up their quarters for a considerable
time in this château. The Minister was to lodge in the last three rooms
on the first floor of the right wing, looking out on the meadows and
the park. A large drawing-room on the ground floor was selected for
the bureau, and a smaller one of the same corridor as a breakfast and
dining-room. Baron Rothschild was in Paris, and only left behind him
three or four female domestics and a housekeeper, who gave himself
great airs of importance.
It was already dark when the Chief arrived, and shortly after we sat
down to dinner. While we were still at table a message was received
from Favre, asking when he could come to continue the negotiations. He
had a conference _tête-à-tête_ with the Chancellor in our bureau from
9.30 P.M. until after 11. On leaving he looked distressed, crestfallen,
almost in despair--my diary remarks that possibly this expression was
assumed with the object of impressing the Minister.
In connection with the news that the King has gone to Clayes in order
to prevent an attack being made by our troops, the Chief, in the course
of conversation at dinner, said, amongst other things, that “many
of our generals have abused the devotion of the troops in order to
secure victory.” “Possibly,” he added, “the hard-hearted reprobates
of the general staff are right when they say that even if the whole
five hundred thousand men whom we have now in France were to be wiped
out, that should merely be regarded as the loss of so many pawns,
so long as we ultimately won the game. It is very simple strategy,
however, to plunge in head foremost in that way without counting the
cost. Altogether, those who conduct the operations are often not worth
much--armchair strategists. A plan is prepared in which the whole
calculation is based first of all upon the extraordinary qualities
of both soldiers and regimental officers. It is these who alone have
achieved everything. Our success is due to the fact that our soldiers
are physically stronger than the French, that they can march better,
have more patience and sense of duty, and are more impetuous in attack.
If MacMahon had commanded Prussian soldiers and Alvensleben Frenchmen,
the latter would have been defeated--although he is my friend.” “It
is no longer possible, as it was in the Seven Years’ War, to direct
a battle from the saddle--the armies are too large. There is also no
genuine co-operation and mutual assistance. Battles begin usually
like those described by Homer. Some of the men commence with small
provocations, and go on taunting each other, then they begin to shoot;
the others see this and rush forward, and so finally the engagement
becomes general.” “The plan of surrounding the enemy is the right one,
and properly speaking that was only adopted at Sedan. The engagement of
the 16th at Metz was quite correct, as it was necessary there at any
cost to prevent the French from escaping. The sacrifice of the guards
on the 18th however was not necessary. It was a piece of pure folly,
occasioned by jealousy of the Saxons. They ought to have waited at
Saint Privat until the Saxons had completed their manœuvre for cutting
off the enemy.”
Keudell and Bohlen afterwards ascribed this unfavourable criticism to
a quarrel which the Chief had had with Moltke at Reims.
While still at table we had a specimen of the hospitality and
gentlemanly feeling of the Baron, whose house is honoured by the
presence of the King, and whose property has, in consequence, been
treated with every consideration. M. de Rothschild, the hundred-fold
millionaire, who, moreover, was, until recently, the Prussian
Consul-General in Paris, has declined, through his housekeeper, to
let us have the wine we require, although I informed that functionary
that it would be paid for, just as everything else was. When summoned
before the Chief, he had the audacity to persist in his refusal, first
denying absolutely that there was any wine in the house, and afterwards
admitting that there were a few hundred bottles of a common Bordeaux.
As a matter of fact, there were some seventeen thousand bottles. The
Minister, however, explained the situation to him in a few sharp words,
pointing out how niggardly and discourteous it was of his master to
requite the King in such manner for the honour done to him in taking
up his quarters there. As the fellow still seemed obstinate, the
Chancellor asked him sternly if he knew what a bundle of straw was.
The man made no answer, but seemed to suspect what it meant, as he
became deadly pale. He was then informed that it was a contrivance on
which obstinate and impudent housekeepers were laid face downwards--he
could imagine the rest for himself. Next day we got everything that
we required, and, so far as I am aware, there was no further cause of
complaint.
Next morning the Chief came into the _chambre de chasse_ of the
château, which we occupied as our bureau. Turning over the game
book which lay on the table he pointed out the entry for the 3rd of
November, 1856, which showed that he himself, with Galiffet and other
guests, had that day shot forty-two head of game--fourteen hares, one
rabbit, and twenty-seven pheasants. He is now engaged with Moltke and
others in chasing a nobler quarry--the bear to which he referred at
Grand Pré.
At 11 o’clock the Chief had his third meeting with Favre, after which
followed a conference with the King, at which Moltke and Roon were also
present.
In the evening I was called to the Chief, who had not appeared at
table, and who, it was understood, did not feel quite well. A narrow
stone winding stairs, which was distinguished with the title,
“Escalier particulier de M. le Baron,” led to a very elegantly
furnished room, where I found the Chancellor sitting on the sofa in his
dressing gown.
_Wednesday, September 21st._--As the Chief had recovered from his
indisposition, we had plenty to do, and though most of it cannot be
made public, I am now at liberty to quote the following passage from my
diary:--
“The imperial emigrants in London have established an organ, _La
Situation_, to represent their interests. Its contents are to be
reproduced in the newspapers we have founded in the eastern districts
of France, but the sources are to be so indicated as not to identify us
with the views therein expressed: _i.e._, it must be understood that
we are not endeavouring to promote the restoration of the Emperor.
Our object is merely to maintain the sense of insecurity and discord
between the various French parties, which are all equally hostile to
us. The retention of the imperial symbols and formulas in despatches
will prove of service in this respect; otherwise Napoleon or a Republic
is a matter of indifference to us. We merely desire to utilise the
existing chaos in France. The future of that country does not concern
us. It is the business of the French themselves to shape it as best
they can. It is only of importance to us in so far as it affects our
own interests, the furtherance of which must be the guiding principle
in politics generally.” Under instructions from the Chief I telegraphed
in the above sense to the principal officials at Nancy and Hagenau.
At tea some further particulars were given of the last conference
between the Chancellor and Jules Favre. Favre was, it seems, informed
that we could not communicate to him the exact conditions of peace
until they had been settled at a conference of the German Powers
engaged in the war. No arrangement could be come to, however, without
a cession of territory, as it was absolutely essential to us to have
a better frontier as security against French attack. The conference
turned less upon peace and its conditions than on the nature of French
concessions, in consideration of which we might agree to an armistice.
On the mention of a cession of territory Favre became terribly
excited, drew a deep sigh, raised his eyes to heaven, and even shed
some patriotic tears. The Chief does not expect that he will return.
Doubtless an answer in this sense has been forwarded to the Crown
Prince, who telegraphed this morning to ask whether he should attend
the negotiations.
_Thursday, September 22nd, evening._--The French are indefatigable in
denouncing us to the world as cruel and destructive barbarians; and
the English press--particularly the _Standard_, which is notoriously
hostile to us--willingly lends them its assistance. The grossest
calumnies respecting our conduct towards the French population and
the prisoners in our hands are circulated almost daily by that
newspaper, and always purport to come either from eye-witnesses or
other well-informed sources. Thus, for instance, the Duc de FitzJames
recently drew a horrible picture of the abominations of which we had
been guilty in Bazeilles, adding the assurance that he exaggerated
nothing; and a M. L., who represents himself to be a French officer
whom we had captured at Sedan and subjected to ill-treatment, complains
in a lamentable tone of Prussian inhumanity. Bernstorff sent the
article in question to the Chief, with the suggestion that the charges
should be refuted. The complaint of M. L. might, perhaps, be left to
answer itself, but that of the Duke is calculated to affect even those
across the Channel who are disposed in our favour. Besides, impudent
calumny is always apt to leave some traces behind it. A refutal of
these shameful slanders is accordingly being despatched to-day to
certain London newspapers that are friendly to us. As the greater
part of this communication was dictated by the Chief, it is worthy of
special attention.
“In this war, as in every other, a great number of villages have been
burned down, mostly by artillery fire, German as well as French. In
these cases women and children who had sought refuge in the cellars
and had not escaped in time, lost their lives in the flames. That was
also the case in Bazeilles, which was several times stormed by our
infantry. The Duc de FitzJames is only an eye-witness so far as the
ruins of the village are concerned, which he saw after the battle,
just as thousands more saw and regretted its fate. All the rest of
his report is based on the stories of the unfortunate and exasperated
villagers. In a country where even the Government has developed an
unexampled talent for systematic lying, it is not to be expected that
angry peasants, standing on the ruins of their homes, would bear
truthful witness against their enemies. It is established by official
reports that the inhabitants of Bazeilles, not in uniform but in their
blouses and shirt-sleeves, fired out of their windows at our troops
and wounded soldiers, and that they killed whole batches of the latter
in their houses. It has been likewise proved that women armed with
knives and guns were guilty of the greatest cruelty towards the fatally
wounded, and that other women, certainly not in the uniform of the
National Guards, took part in the fight with the male inhabitants,
loading their rifles and even firing themselves, and that, like the
other combatants, some of them were in these circumstances wounded or
killed. Naturally these particulars were not communicated to the Duc de
FitzJames by his informant. They would have fully excused the burning
of the village even if it had been done intentionally with the object
of forcing the enemy out of that position. But there is no evidence of
any such intention. That women and children were driven back into the
fire is one of those infamous lies with which the French terrorise the
population, and incite their hatred against us. In this way they cause
the peasants to fly on our approach. The latter return, however, as a
rule, a few days after the entrance of the Germans, and are astounded
to find that they are better treated by them than by the French troops.
When this sort of terrorism is not sufficient to force the inhabitants
to flight, the Government sends a mob of armed civilians, sometimes
supported by African troops, to drive the peasants from their homes at
the point of the sword, and to burn down their houses as a punishment
for their want of patriotism. The letter of ‘an imprisoned officer’
(Bouillon, September 9th) also contains more falsehood than truth.
With respect to the treatment of the prisoners, Germany can call
150,000 better witnesses than this anonymous and mendacious officer,
whose whole communication is merely an expression of the vindictive
disposition which will for a long time to come inspire the vain and
arrogant elements of the French people, by whom, unfortunately, that
country allows itself to be ruled and led. From this spirit of revenge
arises the certainty of further attacks on the part of France, for
which Germany must be prepared. We are thus unquestionably compelled
to think solely of the security of our frontier in concluding peace.
It is true, as stated in the letter of this imprisoned officer, M. L.,
that there was a scarcity of provisions after the surrender of Sedan,
not only for the prisoners, but also for the victors, who shared with
them what they had. When their own stock was exhausted the prisoners
also had to do without. L.’s complaint that he had been obliged to
bivouac in the rain and mud furnishes the best evidence that he is no
officer, and has not even followed the campaign up to that point. He
is some hireling scribe who has never left his own room, and one must
therefore assume that the man’s whole story of his imprisonment is
an invention; as, had he been an officer in the field, he would have
known that most of his comrades (that is certainly the case with the
Germans) have spent at least thirty nights out of the forty or so that
have elapsed since the beginning of the war under similar conditions.
When it rained in the night they had to lie in the rain, and when the
ground was muddy they had to lie in the mud. Only one who had not
followed the campaign could have any doubt or manifest any surprise on
that score. That M. L. prides himself on having retained his leather
purse is the clearest proof that he was not plundered. There can hardly
be a single soldier, who, if he happens to have money, does not carry
it just as M. L. carried his, and in just such a purse; so that if our
men had wanted his money, they must have known very well where to find
it. The few Germans who fell into French hands can tell how quickly
their opponents could open a prisoner’s tunic, and if his purse was
a little too firmly fastened on, hack it off with their sabres or a
knife, without paying too much regard to his skin. We declare the
assertions respecting the ill-treatment of prisoners at Sedan to be
wilful and audacious lies. A great number of the French prisoners,
perhaps one-fourth, were in a state of bestial drunkenness, having
during the last few hours before the capitulation plundered the wine
and brandy stores in the town. It is obvious that it is not so easy to
manage men in a state of drunkenness as when they are sober, but such
ill-treatment as the article describes occurred neither at Sedan nor
elsewhere, owing to the discipline which prevails amongst the Prussian
troops. It is well known that this discipline has won the admiration
of the French officers themselves. Unfortunately one cannot speak as
highly of the French soldiers in this respect as with regard to their
gallantry in action. The French officers have on several occasions been
unable to prevent their men from murdering severely wounded soldiers,
even when individual officers of high rank endeavoured at the risk of
their own lives to defend the wounded, and that was not merely the
case with African regiments. It is known that the German prisoners who
were taken into Metz were spat upon and struck with sticks and stones
on their way through the streets, and on their release had to run the
gauntlet of a double line of African soldiers, who beat them with canes
and whips. We can prove these facts by official records, which have
more claim to credence than the anonymous letter of M. L. But are such
things to be wondered at when the newspapers of a city like Paris,
which now implores considerate treatment on the hypocritical plea of
civilisation, can propose, without eliciting the slightest protest,
that when the French troops are unable to take our wounded with them
they should split their heads open; and further, that the Germans
should be used like dead wolves to manure their fields? The utter
barbarism of the French nation, covered with a thin veneer of culture,
has been fully disclosed in this war. French insolence formerly said,
‘Grattez le Russe et vous trouverez le barbare.’ Whoever is in a
position to compare the conduct of the Russians towards their enemies
in the Crimean War with that of the French in the present campaign, can
have no doubt that this statement recoils upon its authors.”
When he had finished, the Minister added: “Write to Bernstorff that
I decline in future to notice any suggestion for entering into a
controversy with English newspapers. The Ambassador must act on his own
responsibility.”
Just as we sat down to table, one of the Court officials announced
that the Crown Prince proposed to come to dinner and to stay for the
night. The Prince’s secretary at the time asked that the bureau and the
large salon next the Chancellor’s room, should be prepared for the five
gentlemen who accompanied his Royal Highness. The Chief replied, “We
cannot give up the bureau, as we want it for our work.” He then placed
his dressing room at their disposal, and further proposed that either
Blumenthal or Eulenburg should sleep in his bedroom. He required the
salon for the reception of the French negotiators and any Princes who
might call upon him. The Court official went off, pulling a long face,
and was impertinent enough to make some remarks in the corridor about
“discourtesy” and so forth.
Count Lehndorff dined with us, and the conversation was very lively.
Some allusion having been made to Frederick the Great’s statue in
Unter den Linden, which had been decorated with black, red and yellow
flags, the Minister condemned Wurmb for allowing this controversy to
be stirred up. “This stupid quarrel about the colours should not have
been reopened, and it once more proves Wurmb’s incapacity. For me the
question is settled and done with since the North German flag has been
adopted. Otherwise this battle of colours is a matter of indifference
to me. As far as I am concerned they may be green, yellow, and all
the colours of a fancy dress ball, or they can take the banner of
Mecklenburg-Strelitz. Only the Prussian soldier will have nothing to do
with the black, red, and yellow.”
The Chief then spoke of the peace, which he still considered remote,
adding: “If they (the French Government) go to Orleans, we shall follow
them there, and further--right down to the sea shore.” He read out
some telegrams, including one giving a list of the troops in Paris.
“There are supposed to be 180,000 men in all, but there are hardly
60,000 real soldiers amongst them. The mobile and national guards with
their snuffboxes (a reference to their obsolete weapons) are not to be
reckoned as soldiers.”
I asked if I should telegraph about the report of artillery and
rifle-fire in the streets of Paris, which people fancied they had
heard. He said I was to do so. “But not yet, I suppose, about the
negotiations with Favre?” “Yes,” he replied, and then went on as
follows: “First at Haute-Maison, near Montry, then the same evening at
Ferrières, and next day a third conversation, but without effect, as
regards the armistice and the peace. Other French parties have also
entered into negotiations with us,” he said, and gave some indications
from which I gathered that he referred to the Empress Eugénie.
Something else led him to speak of his skill in shooting. He said that
as a young man he could hit a sheet of paper with a pistol at a hundred
yards, and had shot off the heads of ducks in the pond.
He then mentioned that he had again complained to Treskow of the
“short commons at the Royal table,” at which Treskow pulled a long
face. “But if I am to work well I must have sufficient food. I cannot
make a proper peace if I do not get enough to eat and drink. That’s a
necessity of my trade, and therefore I prefer to dine at home.”
The conversation then turned on the dead languages--I cannot now say
how. “When I was in the first class at the high school,” he said,
“I was able to write and speak Latin very well. I should now find
it extremely difficult; and I have quite forgotten Greek. I cannot
understand why people take so much trouble with these languages. It
must be merely because learned men do not wish to lessen the value
of what they have themselves so laboriously acquired.” I ventured to
remind him of the mental discipline thus provided. The Chief replied,
“Yes; but if you think Greek is a _disciplina mentis_, the Russian
language is far better in that respect. It might be introduced instead
of Greek--and it has immediate practical value in addition.”
We then spoke of the way in which the Schleswig-Holstein question was
treated by the Bundestag in the fifties. Count Bismarck-Bohlen, who
had come in in the meantime, remarked that those debates must have
been dull enough to send every one to sleep. “Yes,” said the Chief,
“in Frankfurt they slept over the negotiations with their eyes open.
Altogether it was a sleepy and insipid crowd, and things only became
endurable after I had added the pepper.” He then told us a delightful
story about Count Rechberg, who was at that time Austrian Minister to
the Bundestag. “On one occasion he said something to me which I was
obliged to answer very roughly. He replied that unless I withdrew my
words it would be a case of going out on to the Bockenheimer Haide (a
place where it was customary to settle affairs of honour). ‘I never
withdraw my words,’ said I, carelessly, ‘so we must settle it in that
way, and it occurs to me that the garden down stairs would be a very
suitable place. But in order that people may not think that I represent
my King pistol in hand, without further ceremony I shall write down
here the cause of our quarrel. After you have read it over you will
sign it, and thus testify to its correctness. In the meantime there
is one of our officers lodging here who will oblige me, and you can
choose one of your own officers.’ I rang the bell and sent word to the
officer, requesting him to call upon me; and then went on writing while
Rechberg strode up and down the room--and gluck, gluck, gluck (here
the Minister mimicked the act of drinking) he swallowed one glass of
water after another. Of course not because he was afraid, but because
he was considering whether he ought not first to ask permission of
his Government. I quietly continued to write. The officer came and
said he would gladly oblige me. I begged him to wait a moment. On my
return Rechberg said he would think over the matter until morning,
to which I agreed. As I did not hear from him next day, however,
I sent the Mecklenburg Minister, old Oertzen, to deliver a formal
challenge. Oertzen was told he was not at home. He went again next
day, but Rechberg was still not to be seen. He had evidently written
to Vienna and was waiting for an answer. At length Oertzen came to me
after having spoken to him. Rechberg was prepared to withdraw what he
had said and offer an apology, either in writing or verbally, just as
I liked. He would also come to me if I wished. I went to his place,
however, and the affair was settled.”
I asked him then about the celebrated story of the cigars. “Which
do you mean?” “Why, about the cigar which you lit, Excellency, when
Rechberg was smoking in your presence.” “Thun, you mean. Yes, that
was very simple. I went to him while he was at work, and he was
smoking. He begged me to excuse him for a moment. I waited a while
and finding it rather slow, as he did not offer me a cigar, I took
one of my own and asked him for a light--which he gave me with rather
a surprised look. But I have another story of the same kind. At the
sittings of the Military Commission, when Rochow represented Prussia
at the Bundestag, Austria was the only one who smoked. Rochow, who was
passionately addicted to smoking, would gladly have done the same, but
had not sufficient confidence. When I came I also felt a longing for
a cigar, and as I could not see why I should deny myself I begged the
presiding power to give me a light, apparently much to his and the
other gentlemen’s astonishment and displeasure. It was evidently an
event for them all. For the time being only Austria and Prussia smoked.
But the remaining gentlemen obviously considered the matter of so much
importance that they wrote home for instructions as to how they were
to act in the circumstances. The authorities were in no hurry. The
affair was one that demanded careful consideration, and for nearly six
months the two great Powers smoked alone. Then Schrenkh, the Bavarian
Minister, began to assert the dignity of his office by lighting his
weed. Nostitz, the Saxon, had certainly a great desire to do the same,
but had probably not yet received the permission of his Minister.
On seeing Bothmer, of Hanover, however, allow himself that liberty,
Nostitz, who was strongly Austrian in his sympathies, having sons in
the Austrian army, must have come to an understanding with Rechberg,
with the result that he too at the next sitting pulled out his cigar
case and puffed away with the rest. Only the representatives of
Würtemberg and Darmstadt now remained, and they were non-smokers. The
honour and dignity of their States, however, imperiously demanded that
they should follow suit, and so as a matter of fact the Würtemberger
pulled out a cigar at the next sitting--I can still see it in my mind’s
eye, a long, thin, yellow thing of the colour of rye straw--and smoked
at least half of it as a burnt-offering on the altar of patriotism.
Hesse-Darmstadt was the only one who finally refrained--probably
conscious that he was not strong enough to enter into rivalry with the
others.”[9]
_Friday, September 23rd._--Beautiful weather this morning. I took a
walk in the park before the Chief got up. On my return I met Keudell,
who called out “War! A letter from Favre rejecting our demands.
The Chief has given instructions to communicate the letter to the
press with certain comments, hinting that the present occupant of
Wilhelmshöhe is after all not so bad and might be of use to us.”
The conversation afterwards turned on Pomeranian affairs, and the Chief
spoke amongst other things of the great estate of Schmoldin. The former
proprietor had become bankrupt through treating the people on the
estate--mostly Slav fishermen and sailors--with too much consideration.
The place, which consisted of about 8,000 acres of arable land, and
12,000 to 16,000 acres of forest and downs, worth at least 200,000
thalers, was purchased by the Royal Treasury for 80,000 thalers. The
change of proprietors had not benefited the tenants, as there was no
question of forbearance or abatements. Many of them have fallen into
a state of pauperism, and instead of being provided for by the Royal
Treasury, they have become a burden on the local authorities. That is
not as it ought to be. It was believed that Obstfelder was to blame for
this hard and unfair treatment.
_Saturday, September 24th._--The Minister spoke at dinner about the
ostentatious decorations of the great hall of the château, which he
had now seen for the first time. Amongst other things it contains a
throne or table which some French marshal or general inadvertently
packed up with his baggage somewhere in China, or Cochin China, and
afterwards sold to our Baron. The Chief’s verdict was:--“All extremely
costly, but not particularly beautiful, and still less comfortable.”
He then continued:--“A ready-made property like this would not give me
any genuine satisfaction. It was made by others, and not by myself.
True, there are many things in it really beautiful, but one misses the
pleasure of creating and altering. It is also quite a different thing
when I have to ask myself if I can afford to spend five or ten thousand
thalers on this or that improvement, and when there is no need to think
about the cost. In the end it must become tiresome to have always
enough and more than enough.”
In an article written this evening we returned to our good friends
the French Ultramontanes, who are as active in war as they had been
in peace in opposing the German cause, inciting people against us,
circulating lies about us in the newspapers, and even leading the
peasants to take up arms against our troops, as at Beaumont and
Bazeilles.
_Sunday, September 25th._--At table we somehow came to discuss
the Jews. “They have no real home,” said the Chief. “They are
international--Europeans, cosmopolitans, nomads. Their fatherland is
Zion, Jerusalem. Otherwise they are citizens of the whole world, and
hold together everywhere. There are amongst them some good, honest
people, as for instance one at our own place in Pomerania, who traded
in hides and such things. Business cannot have prospered with him,
as he became bankrupt. He begged of me not to press my claim, and
promised that he would pay by instalments, when he could. Yielding to
my old habit, I agreed, and he actually paid off the debt. I received
instalments from him while I was still in Frankfurt as Minister to the
Bundestag, and I believe that if I lost anything at all, I must have
lost less than his other creditors. Certainly not many such Jews are
to be met with in our large towns. They have also their own special
virtues. They are credited with respect for their parents, faithfulness
in marriage, and benevolence.”
_Monday, September 26th._--In the morning wrote various paragraphs for
the press on the following theme: It is urged that we cannot be allowed
to bombard Paris, with its numerous museums, beautiful public buildings
and monuments; that to do so would be a crime against civilisation.
But why not? Paris is a fortress, and if it has been filled with
treasures of art, if it possesses magnificent palaces and other
beautiful structures, that does not alter this character. A fortress is
an instrument for warlike operations which must be rendered powerless
without regard to whatever else may be bound up with it. If the French
wanted to preserve their monuments and collections of books and
pictures from the dangers of war they should not have surrounded them
with fortifications. Besides, the French themselves did not hesitate
for a moment to bombard Rome, which contained monuments of far greater
value, the destruction of which would be an irretrievable loss. Also
sent off an article on the bellicose tendencies of the French Radicals
previous to the declaration of war, for use in our newspapers in Alsace.
At dinner, as we were discussing military matters, the Chief declared,
_inter alia_, that the uhlans were the best cavalry. The lance gave
the men great self-confidence. It was urged that it was a hindrance in
getting through underwood, but that was a mistake. On the contrary,
the lance was useful in moving aside the branches. He knew that
from experience, as, although he first served in the rifles, he was
afterwards in the Landwehr cavalry. The abolition of the lance in the
entire mounted Landwehr was a blunder. The curved sabre was not much
use, particularly as it was often blunt. The straight thrusting sword
was much more practical.
After dinner a letter was received from Favre, in which he requested,
first, that notice should be given of the commencement of the
bombardment of Paris, in order that the diplomatic corps might
remove; and, second, that the city should be permitted to remain in
communication with the outer world by letter. Abeken said, as he
brought the letter down from the Chief’s room, that the answer would be
sent by way of Brussels. “But then the letter will arrive late or not
at all, and be returned to us,” observed Keudell. “Well, that does not
matter,” answered Abeken. From the further conversation it appears that
the answer agrees to the French proposals under certain conditions.
In the evening I was again called to the Chief on several occasions
to take instructions. Amongst other things, I ascertained that,
“while Favre’s report respecting his interviews with the Chancellor
shows, it is true, a desire to give a faithful account of what
passed, it is not quite accurate, which is not surprising in the
circumstances, especially as there were three different meetings.”
In his statement the question of an armistice occupies a secondary
position, whereas, in fact, it was the chief point. Favre was prepared
to pay a considerable cash indemnity. In the matter of a truce two
alternatives were discussed. First, the surrender to us of a portion
of the fortifications of Paris, namely, at a point which would give us
the command of the city, we on our part to allow free communication
with the outer world. The second was that we should forego that
condition, but that Strassburg and Toul should be surrendered to us.
We put forward the latter demand because the retention of these towns
in the hands of the French increases our difficulties of commissariat
transport. The Chancellor stated that with respect to a cession of
territory, he could only disclose its extent and frontiers when our
demand had been accepted in principle. On Favre requesting to have
at least an indication of what we proposed in this respect, he was
informed that for our security in the future we required Strassburg,
“the key of our house,” the departments of the Upper and Lower Rhine,
Metz, and a portion of the Moselle department. The object of the
armistice was to submit the question of peace to a National Assembly to
be summoned for the purpose.
Again called to the Chief. “The King wishes to see some of the
newspapers, and he desires to have the most important passages marked.
I have proposed Brass to him, and when the papers come, put that one
(the _Norddeutsche Allgemeine Zeitung_) always aside for him.” He
added, smiling, “Just mark some places for the sake of appearances, it
does not much matter what, and send me up the paper.”
At tea we hear a great piece of news:--the Italians have occupied Rome,
the Pope and the diplomatists remaining in the Vatican.
_Tuesday, September 27th._--Bölsing, on the Chief’s instructions, shows
me the answer to Favre’s letter, which the Minister has rewritten in
a shorter and more positive form. It says, 1. It is not usual in war
to announce the commencement of an attack; 2. A besieged fortress
does not appear to be a suitable residence for diplomatists; open
letters containing nothing objectionable will be allowed to pass. It
is hoped that the _corps diplomatique_ will agree with this view of
the matter. They can go to Tours, whither it would appear the French
Government also intends to remove. The answer is written in German,
a course already begun by Bernstorff, but which was carried out more
consistently by Bismarck. “Formerly,” said Bölsing, “most of the
Secretaries in the Foreign Office belonged to the French colony, of
which Roland and Delacroix still remain. Almost all the Councillors
also wrote in that language. Even the register of the despatches was
kept in French, and the Ambassadors usually reported in that language.”
Now the speech of the “vile Gaul,” as Count Bohlen calls the French,
is only used in exceptional cases, that is, in communicating with
Governments and Ambassadors to whom we cannot write or reply in their
mother tongue. The registers have for years past been kept in German.
The Chief has been at work since 8 o’clock in the morning--unusually
early for him. He has again been unable to sleep.
Prince Radziwill and Knobelsdorff, of the general staff, joined us at
dinner. In speaking of that part of Favre’s report in which he says
that he wept, the Minister thinks he can only have pretended to do so.
“It is true,” he said, “that he looked as if he had done so, and I
tried to some extent to console him. On my observing him more closely,
however, I felt quite certain that he had not succeeded in squeezing
out a single tear. It was all merely a piece of acting on his part.
He thought to work upon me in the same manner as a Parisian lawyer
tries to move a jury. I am perfectly convinced that he was painted at
Ferrières--particularly at the second interview. That morning he looked
much greyer and quite green under the eyes--I am prepared to bet that
it was paint--grey and green, to give himself an appearance of deep
suffering. It is, of course, possible that he was deeply affected; but
then he can be no politician or he would know that pity has nothing to
do with politics.” After a while the Minister added: “When I hinted
something about Strassburg and Metz, he assumed a look as if he thought
I was jesting. I could have given him, the answer which the great fur
dealer of Unter den Linden in Berlin once gave me. I went there to
choose a fur coat, and on his naming a very high price for one to which
I had taken a fancy, I said, ‘Surely you are joking.’ ‘No,’ he replied,
‘I never make jokes in business.’”
The conversation then turned upon the occupation of Rome and the Pope’s
position in the Vatican, on which point the Chief said, amongst other
things: “He must remain a Sovereign. The only question is, how? It
would be possible to do more for him if the Ultramontanes were not so
much opposed to us everywhere. I am accustomed to pay people back in
their own coin. I should like to know how our Harry (von Arnim, the
North German Ambassador to the Holy See) now feels. Probably, like
his reports, his feelings change three times within the twenty-four
hours. He is really too distinguished an Ambassador for such a small
Sovereign. The Pope, however, is not merely the ruler of the Papal
States, he is also the head of the Catholic Church.”
After dinner, just as we had finished our coffee, the American general,
Burnside, who had called whilst we were at table, presented himself
again, accompanied by an elderly gentleman who wore a red woollen shirt
and a paper collar. The general, a rather tall, portly gentleman, with
thick, bushy eyebrows, and an exceptionally fine set of beautifully
white teeth and close-cut, mutton-chop whiskers, might pass for an
elderly Prussian major in plain clothes. The Chief sat with him on the
sofa, and had a lively conversation in English over a couple of glasses
of kirschwasser, which were afterwards replenished. Prince Radziwill,
in the meantime, had a talk with the general’s companion.
After the Minister had observed to his visitor that he had come rather
late to see the fighting, he went on to say that in July we had not
the least desire for war, and that when we were surprised by the
declaration of hostilities, no one, neither the King nor the people,
had thought of any conquests. Our army was an excellent one for a
war of defence, but it would be difficult to use it for schemes of
aggrandisement, because with us the army was the people itself, which
did not lust after glory, as it required and wished for peace. But for
that very reason both popular sentiment and the press now demanded
a better frontier. For the sake of the maintenance of peace we must
secure ourselves in future against attack from a vainglorious and
covetous nation, and that security could only be found in a better
defensive position than we had hitherto had. Burnside seemed inclined
to agree, and he praised very highly our excellent organisation and the
gallantry of our troops.
_Wednesday, September 28th_.--The general conversation at dinner
gradually adopted a more serious tone. The Chancellor began by
complaining that Voigts-Rhetz in his report had not said a single word
about the gallant charge of the two regiments of dragoon guards at Mars
la Tour, which nevertheless he himself had ordered, and which had saved
the 10th Army Corps. “It was necessary--I grant that; but then it ought
not to have been passed over in silence.”
The Minister then began a lengthy speech, which ultimately assumed the
character of a dialogue between himself and Katt. Pointing to a spot of
grease on the table-cloth, the Chief remarked: “Just in the same way
as that spot spreads and spreads, so the feeling that it is beautiful
to die for one’s country and honour, even without recognition, sinks
deeper into the skin of the people now that it has been bathed in
blood--it spreads wider and wider.... Yes, yes, the non-commissioned
officer has the same views and the same sense of duty as the lieutenant
and the colonel--with us Germans. That feeling in general goes very
deep through all classes of the nation.... The French are a mass that
can easily be brought under one influence, and then they produce a
great effect. Amongst our people everybody has his own opinion. But
when once a large number of Germans come to hold the same opinion,
great things can be done with them. If they were all agreed they
would be all-powerful.... The French have not that sense of duty which
enables a man to allow himself to be shot dead alone in the dark. And
that comes from the remnant of faith which still abides in our people;
it comes from the knowledge that there is Someone there Who sees me
even if my lieutenant does not see me.”
“Do you believe that the soldiers reflect on such things, Excellency?”
asked Fürstenstein.
“‘Reflect?’ no. It is a feeling--a frame of mind; an instinct, if
you like. When once they reflect they lose that feeling; they argue
themselves out of it.... I cannot conceive how men can live together
in an orderly manner, how one can do his duty and allow others to do
theirs without faith in a revealed religion, in God, Who wills what is
right, in a higher Judge and a future life.”
The Grand Duke of Weimar was announced. But the Minister continued,
it might well be for a quarter of an hour longer, at times suddenly
departing from his proper theme, and frequently repeating the same idea
in other words: “If I were no longer a Christian I would not serve the
King another hour.
“If I did not put my trust in God I should certainly place none in
any earthly masters. Why, I had quite enough to live on, and had a
sufficiently distinguished position. Why should I labour and toil
unceasingly in this world, and expose myself to worry and vexation if
I did not feel that I must do my duty towards God?[10] If I did not
believe in a Divine Providence which has ordained this German nation
to something good and great, I would at once give up my trade as a
Statesman or I should never have gone into the business. Orders and
titles have no attraction for me. A resolute faith in a life after
death--for that reason I am a Royalist, otherwise I am by nature a
Republican. Yes, I am a Republican in the highest degree; and the firm
determination which I have displayed for ten long years in presence of
all possible forms of absurdity at Court is solely due to my resolute
faith. Deprive me of this faith and you deprive me of my fatherland. If
I were not a firm believer in Christianity, if I had not the wonderful
basis of religion, you would never have had such a Chancellor of the
Confederation. If I had not the wonderful basis of religion I should
have turned my back to the whole Court--and if you are able to find me
a successor who has that basis I will retire at once. But I am living
amongst heathens. I do not want to make any proselytes, but I feel a
necessity to confess this faith.”
Katt said that the ancients had also shown much self-sacrifice and
devotion. They also had the love of country, which had spurred them
on to great deeds. He was convinced that many people nowadays acted
in the same way through devotion to the State, and a sense of duty to
society.
The Chief replied that this self-sacrifice and devotion to duty towards
the State and the King amongst us was merely a remnant of the faith of
our fathers and grandfathers in an altered form,--“more confused, and
yet active, no longer faith, but nevertheless faithful.” “How willingly
would I go away! I enjoy country life, the woods and nature. Sever my
connection with God and I am a man who would pack up to-morrow and be
off to Varzin, and say ‘Kiss my ----,’ and cultivate his oats. You
would then deprive me of my King, because why?--if there is no Divine
commandment, why should I subordinate myself to these Hohenzollerns?
They are a Suabian family, no better than my own, and in that case no
concern of mine. Why, I should be worse than Jacoby, who might then be
accepted as President or even as King. He would be in many ways more
sensible, and at all events cheaper.”
Keudell told me this evening that the Chief had already, while standing
outside the château, several times expressed himself in a similar
manner.
After dinner the Chancellor received in his own salon the Grand Duke of
Weimar, as also Reynier, and subsequently Burnside and his companion of
the day before.
_Thursday, September 29th._--In the morning wrote articles on the folly
of certain German newspapers that warned us against laying claim to
Metz and the surrounding district because the inhabitants spoke French,
and on Ducrot’s unpardonable escape during the transport of prisoners
to Germany. The second article was also sent to England.
The newspapers contain a report on the prevailing public sentiment in
Bavaria, which evidently comes from a thoroughly reliable and highly
competent source.[11] We are accordingly to note the principal points
contained therein. The news given in the report is for the most part
satisfactory--in some particulars only is it possible to wish it were
better. The idea of German unity has evidently been strengthened and
extended by the war, but the specific Bavarian _amour propre_ has also
increased. The part taken by the army in the victories of the German
forces at Wörth and Sedan, as well as the severe losses which it has
suffered, has not failed to excite enthusiasm throughout all classes
of the population, and to fill them with pride at the achievements of
their countrymen. They are convinced that their King sincerely desires
the victory of the German arms, and has used every effort to secure
that end. His immediate _entourage_ is well disposed. That cannot
however be said of all his Ministers. The Minister of War is without
doubt sincerely anxious, and is doing his utmost to see the campaign
brought to a satisfactory conclusion. He is in that respect thoroughly
reliable, and he will no doubt be found on the right side in the matter
of the conditions of peace. Count Bray, on the other hand, is and
remains ultramontane and Austrian in his views. In his heart of hearts
he is opposed to the war, and for him our successes have been too
rapid, and our victories too complete. He would like to see the neutral
Powers take steps to restrain us, and if he could he would support such
measures.
No conclusion is to be drawn from the very confident tone of the press
as to an eventual rearrangement of German relations which, through
the brotherhood in arms during the war, might develop into a permanent
and closer union also in times of peace. As a matter of course Bray
would be opposed to the entrance of Bavaria into the North German
Confederation. But there are also other influential personages who do
not contemplate such a course, or who regard the effective co-operation
of the Bavarians in the German victories less as a means to promote the
closer union of Germany than as a proof of the power of Bavaria and
an assertion of her independence. The non-ultramontane particularists
take up a somewhat similar position. They are pleased at our victories
and proud of Bavaria’s share in them. They admire the manner in which
the Prussians conduct the war, and, like us, they desire to secure
Germany against future attack from the West. But they will not hear of
Bavaria joining the North German Confederation. The partition of the
conquered French territory is also much discussed in such circles. They
would like to see Alsace annexed to Baden on condition that the Baden
Palatinate were ceded to Bavaria. The more penetrating minds amongst
them are forced to reckon with the probability that Baden, and in all
likelihood also Würtemberg, will after the peace demand admission into
the Federal State already formed by the North. The Ultramontanes remain
what they always were, although they are now silent through fear.
Fortunately they have lost all confidence in Austria, so that they
lack support, while, on the other hand, the Bavarians, who are now in
the field, have an entirely different opinion of the Prussians to that
which they entertained before the war. They are full of the highest
praise for their northern comrades, and not merely for their military
qualities and achievements, but also for their readiness to help the
Bavarians when they have earlier or better supplies than the latter.
More than one of them has written home that their priests have maligned
the Prussians. It is not true that they are all Lutherans. Many of them
are Catholics, and they had even seen some Catholic military chaplains
with them. As the officers share these feelings the army on its
return will carry on an effective propaganda against Ultramontanism,
and probably also against extreme particularism. It will be easily
understood that men of national sentiment in Bavaria should feel more
confident than ever. They will also do what they can for the cause. But
they are a minority in the Lower Chamber, and in the Upper House they
have scarcely two or three representatives.
At dinner the conversation turned on the Grand Duke of Weimar and such
matters. The Minister said that the Grand Duke had been to see him
the evening before, and wished to obtain some information which he
(the Chief) was unable to give him. “He thinks that I am also _his_
Chancellor. On my politely declining, he said he must then apply to
the King. ‘Yes,’ I replied, ‘but in that case his Majesty will have to
refer in the first place to his Minister.’ ‘And the Minister?’ (Here
the Chief bent his head a little to one side and smiled sweetly.) ‘He
will maintain an impenetrable silence.”’
The Chancellor then said that he had been asked what was to be done
with the Garde Mobiles captured at Strassburg. They were disposed to
set them at liberty and let them go home. “God forbid,” said I; “send
them to Upper Silesia.”
_Friday, September 30th._--Received another letter from Bamberger, who
is in Baden-Baden. He continues to use his talents and influence in the
press to advance the Chancellor’s views. In my answer I begged him to
counteract the ill-considered arguments of certain German journalists
who now, while we are still at war, and have hardly done the heaviest
part of our task, are already strongly urging moderation. The worst
of these is Dr. Kruse, of the _Kölnische Zeitung_, with whom the idea
that Metz must not be annexed because the inhabitants speak French
has become almost a monomania. These gentlemen offer their advice as
to how far we can or may go in our demands, and plead in favour of
France, while they would do much better to insist upon still heavier
demands, “in order,” as the Minister said in complaining of this being
“preposterous” behaviour, “that we may at least get something decent,
if not all that we ask for. They will compel me in the end to claim
the Meuse as our frontier. Write also to Bamberger that I had credited
him with more political acumen than to imagine that we really want to
replace Napoleon on the French throne.”
_Sunday, October 2nd._--At teatime to a remark that the poorer classes
suffered comparatively more than the upper and wealthier, the Chief
replied that this reminded him of Sheridan’s observation at Reims,
for it was perhaps after all as well it should be so, as there were
more poor people than well-to-do, and we must always keep in mind the
object of the war, which was to secure an advantageous peace. The
more Frenchmen suffered from the war the greater would be the number
of those who would long for peace, whatever our conditions might be.
“And their treacherous franctireurs,” he continued, “who now stand in
blouses with their hands in their pockets, and in the next moment when
our soldiers have passed by take their rifles out of the ditch and fire
at them. It will come to this, that we will shoot down every male
inhabitant. Really that would be no worse than in battle, where they
fire at a distance of 2,000 yards, and cannot recognise each other’s
faces.”
The conversation then turned on Russia, on the communistic measure
of dividing the land between the village communities, on the minor
nobility, “who had invested their savings in the purchase of peasants,
out of whom they squeezed their interest in the form of Obrok,” and
of the incredible wealth of many of the old Boyar families. The Chief
mentioned several examples, and gave a full account of the Yussupoffs,
whose fortune, although nearly half of it had been several times
confiscated on account of their complicity in conspiracies, was still
much larger than that of most German Princes. It was so great that
“two serfs, father and son, who had acted in succession as managers of
the estate, were able to bleed it of three millions without the loss
being felt.” “The palace of these princes in St. Petersburg contained
a large theatre in the style of the Weisser Saal in the palace at
Berlin, and had magnificent rooms in which 300 to 400 persons could
dine with comfort. Forty years ago the old Yussupoff kept open table
daily. A poor old officer on the retired list had dined there almost
every day for years, although no one knew who he was. The name and rank
of their constant guest was only discovered on inquiries being made of
the police when on one occasion he had remained away for a considerable
time.”
_Monday, October 3rd._--We were joined at table by the Grand
Chamberlain, Perponcher, and a Herr von Thadden, who was to be
appointed a member of the Administration at Reims. The Chief told
several anecdotes of the old Rothschild of Frankfurt. He had on one
occasion heard Rothschild talking to a corn-dealer who wanted to buy
some wheat. The latter said that such a rich man ought not to put
the price of wheat so high. “What have my riches got to do with it?”
replied the old gentleman. “Is my wheat any the worse because I am
rich?” “He gave dinners however which did all honour to his wealth. I
remember once when the present King, then Prince of Prussia, was in
Frankfurt and I invited him to dinner. Rothschild had also intended
to invite him. The Prince told him, however, that he must settle that
with me, otherwise he would be quite as pleased to dine with him as
with me. Rothschild then wanted me to give up his Royal Highness to
him. I refused, whereupon he had the _naïveté_ to propose that his
dinner should be brought to my house, as of course he did not partake
of it himself--he only ate meat prepared in Jewish fashion. Naturally
I also declined this proposal, although there can be no doubt that
his dinner would have been better than mine.” The Chief was once told
by old Metternich,--“who, by the way, was very well disposed towards
me,”--that at one time when he had lodged with Rothschild, on his way
to Johannisberg (Metternich’s estate), his host had put six bottles of
Johannisberg wine into his lunch basket for the road. These were taken
out unopened on Metternich’s arrival at Johannisberg, where the Prince
asked his chief cellarer what they cost per bottle. “Twelve florins,”
was the answer. “Well then,” said Metternich, “send these six bottles
back to Baron Rothschild when he gives his next order, but charge him
fifteen florins a piece for them then, as they will have grown older by
that time.”
_Tuesday, October 4th._--In the forenoon again called to the Chief
Bucher, Councillor of Embassy; and Wiehr, a decipherer, arrived after
lunch. Bucher appears to have been summoned here in order to replace
Abeken, who has been ill and ought to have gone home, but who has
now nearly recovered. No one could have filled his place better than
Bucher, who is unquestionably the best informed, most intelligent
and unprejudiced of all the principal workers by whom the Chief is
surrounded, and who help to propagate his ideas. In the evening the
Chancellor talked about Moltke, remarking how gallantly he had attacked
the punch bowl on a recent occasion, and in what excellent spirits he
was. “I have not seen him looking so well for a long time past. That is
the result of the war. It is his trade. I remember, when the Spanish
question became acute, he looked ten years younger. Afterwards, when I
told him that the Hohenzollern had withdrawn, he suddenly looked quite
old and infirm. And when the French showed their teeth again ‘Molk’
was once more fresh and young. The matter finally ended in a _diner à
trois_--Molk, Roon and I--which resulted (here the Chancellor smiled a
cunning smile) in the Ems telegram.”
We start early to-morrow morning, as we have a long journey to make.
Our next halt will be at Versailles.
CHAPTER IX
THE JOURNEY TO VERSAILLES--MADAME JESSE’S HOUSE, AND OUR LIFE THERE
We left Ferrières about 7 o’clock on the morning of the 5th of October.
At first we drove along by-roads, which were however in excellent
condition, passing a large wood, several parks and châteaux and a
number of respectable villages that appeared to be entirely deserted
by their inhabitants and were now occupied solely by German soldiers.
Everywhere an appearance of exceptional prosperity. Later on we reached
a pontoon bridge decorated with the Prussian colours, which took us
over the Seine. On the other side we met the Crown Prince and his
suite, who had ridden out to welcome the King. The latter, accompanied
by the Chancellor, was to proceed from this point on horseback to a
review of troops. We then drove on alone, turning into a high road
which led to the village of Villeneuve le Roi.
I had long been looking forward to my first glimpse of Paris. It was
however out off on the right by a rather high range of wooded hills, on
the sides of which we now and then, noticed a village or small white
town. At length we come to an opening, a little valley, and we observe
the blue outline of a great cupola--the Pantheon! Hurrah! we are at
last outside Paris.
We shortly afterwards turned into a broad paved highway where a
Bavarian picket was stationed to watch a road which crossed it at this
point and led towards Paris. To the left an extensive plain, and on
the right a continuation of the chain of wooded heights. A white town
half way up the slope, then, lower down, two other villages, and we
finally pass through an iron gateway partially gilt, traverse some busy
streets, and a straight avenue with old trees, and then find ourselves
in front of our quarters in Versailles.
On the 6th of October, the day after our arrival in the old royal town
of France, Keudell remarked that we might possibly remain here for some
three weeks. Nor did I think it improbable, as the course of the war up
to that time had accustomed us to speedy success. We remained however
five long months. But, as will be seen later on, the Minister must have
suspected that our stay would not be a short one. For this reason,
and as our lodging was the scene of very important events, a fuller
description of it will probably be welcome.
The house which was occupied by the Chancellor of the Confederation
belonged to one Madame Jesse, widow of a wealthy cloth manufacturer,
who shortly before our arrival fled to Picardy with her two sons,
leaving her property to the care of her gardener and his wife. It is
No. 14 in Rue de Provence, which connects the Avenue de St. Cloud with
the Boulevard de la Reine. The Rue de Provence is one of the quietest
in Versailles. Many of the houses are surrounded by gardens. Ours is a
slate-roofed house of three stories, the third of these being a garret.
From the entrance in the courtyard a flight of stone steps leads up to
the hall door. On the right of this hall is the principal staircase,
and the following rooms open on to it; the dining-room looking out on
the garden, the salon, a billiard-room, a conservatory, and the library
of the deceased M. Jesse.
On the table in the salon stood an old-fashioned chimney clock with
a fiendish figure in bronze biting his thumb. This demon grinned
sarcastically at all the negotiations which led to the treaties with
the South German States, the proclamation of the German Emperor and
Empire, and afterwards to the surrender of Paris and the preliminaries
of peace, all of which were signed in this salon, thus securing it a
place in the world’s history.
The billiard-room was arranged as an office for the councillors,
secretaries, and decipherers. In January, when there was a severe
frost, a portion of the winter garden was assigned to the officers on
guard. The library was occupied by orderlies and Chancery attendants.
The principal staircase led to a second hall, which received a dim
light from a square flat window let into the roof. The doors of the
Minister’s two rooms opened off this hall. Neither of them was more
than ten paces by seven. One of these, the window of which opened on
the garden, served at the same time as study and bed-chamber, and was
very scantily furnished.
The other chamber, which was somewhat better furnished, although not
at all luxuriously, served, in addition to the salon on the ground
floor, for the reception of visitors. During the negotiations for the
capitulation of Paris it was put at the disposal of Jules Favre for his
meditations and correspondence.
Count Bismarck-Bohlen had a room to the left of the Chancellor’s,
which also opened on the park and garden, Abeken having the opposite
room looking on the street. Bölsing had a small chamber near the
back-stairs, while I was lodged on the second floor over Bohlen’s room.
The park behind the house, though not large, was very pretty, and
there during the bright autumn nights the tall figure and white cap of
the Chancellor was frequently to be seen passing from the shade into
the moonlight as he slowly strolled about. What was the sleepless man
pondering over? What ideas were revolving through the mind of that
solitary wanderer? What plans were forming or ripening in his brain
during those still midnight hours?
It will be seen that the whole Field Foreign Office was not quartered
at Madame Jesse’s. Lothar Bucher had a handsome apartment in the Avenue
de Paris, Keudell and the decipherers were lodged in a house somewhat
higher up than ours in the Rue de Provence, and Count Hatzfeldt lived
in the last house on the opposite side of the way. There was some talk
on several occasions of providing the Chancellor with more roomy and
better furnished lodgings, but the matter went no further, possibly
because he himself felt no great desire for such a change, and perhaps
also because he liked the quiet which prevailed in the comparatively
retired Rue de Provence.
During the day, however, this stillness was less idyllic than many
newspaper correspondents described it at the time. I am not thinking
of the fifes and drums of the troops that marched through the town and
which reached our ears almost daily, nor of the noise which resulted
from two sorties made by the Parisians in our direction, nor even of
the hottest day of the bombardment, as we had become accustomed to all
that, much as the miller does to the roar and rattle of his wheels. I
refer principally to the numerous visitors of all kinds, many of them
unwelcome, who were received by the Chancellor during those eventful
months. Our quarters was often like a pigeon house from the constant
flow of strangers and acquaintances in and out. At first non-official
eavesdroppers and messengers came from Paris, followed later by
official negotiators in the persons of Favre and Thiers, accompanied
by a larger or smaller retinue. There were princely visitors from
the Hôtel des Reservoirs. The Crown Prince came several times, and
the King once. The Church was also represented amongst the callers
by high dignitaries, archbishops, and other prelates. Deputations
from the Reichstag, individual party leaders, higher officials, and
bankers arrived from Berlin, while Ministers came from Bavaria and
other South German States for the purpose of concluding treaties.
American generals, members of the foreign diplomatic body in Paris,
including a “coloured gentleman,” and envoys of the Imperialist party
wished to speak to the busy statesman in his small room upstairs,
and, as a matter of course, English newspaper correspondents eagerly
tried to force their way into his presence. Then there were Government
couriers with their despatch bags, Chancery attendants with telegrams,
orderlies with messages from the general staff, and besides all these
a superfluity of work which was as difficult as it was important. In
short, what with deliberating on old schemes and forming new ones,
seeking how to overcome difficulties, vexation and trouble, the
disappointment of well-grounded expectations, now and then a lack of
support and readiness to meet his views, the foolish opinions of the
Berlin press and their dissatisfaction notwithstanding our undreamt
of success, together with the agitation of the Ultramontanes, it was
often hard to understand how the Chancellor, with all these calls
upon his activity and patience, and with all this disturbance and
friction, was, on the whole, able to preserve his health and maintain
that freshness which he showed so frequently late in the evening in
conversations both serious and humorous. During his stay at Versailles
he was only once or twice unwell for three or four days.
The Minister allowed himself little recreation--a ride between 3 and
4 o’clock, an hour at table with half an hour for the cup of coffee
which followed it in the drawing-room, and now and then, after 10 P.M.,
a longer or shorter chat at the tea-table with whoever happened to be
there, and a couple of hours sleep after daybreak. The whole remainder
of the day was devoted to business, studying or writing in his room, or
in conversations and negotiations,--unless a sortie of the French or
some other important military operation called him to the side of the
King, or alone to some post of observation.
Nearly every day the Chancellor had guests to dinner, and in this way
we came to see and hear almost all the well-known and celebrated men
prominently connected in the war. Favre repeatedly dined with us,
reluctantly at first, “because his countrymen within the walls were
starving,” but afterwards listening to wise counsel and exhortation and
doing justice like the rest of us to the good things of the kitchen and
cellar. Thiers, with his keen intelligent features, was on one occasion
amongst the guests, and the Crown Prince once did us the honour to
dine at our table, when such of the Chief’s assistants as were not
previously known to him were presented. At another time Prince Albrecht
was present. Of the Minister’s further guests, I will here only
mention Delbrück, President of the Bundeskanzleiamt, who was frequently
in Versailles for weeks at a time, the Duke of Ratibor, Prince Putbus,
von Bennigsen, Simson, Bamberger, Friedenthal and von Blankenburg, the
Bavarian Ministers Count Bray and von Lutz, the Würtemberg Ministers
von Wächter and Mittnacht, von Roggenbach, Prince Radziwill, and
finally Odo Russell, who was subsequently British Ambassador to the
German Empire. When the Chief was present the conversation was always
lively and varied, while it was frequently instructive as illustrating
his manner of regarding men and things, or as throwing light upon
certain episodes and incidents of his past life.
Madame Jesse put in an appearance a few days before our departure and,
as previously observed, did not produce a good impression. She seems to
have made charges against us which the French press, even papers that
lay claim to some respectability, circulated with manifest pleasure.
Amongst other things we are alleged to have packed up her plate and
table linen. Furthermore, Count Bismarck tried to compel her to give
him a valuable clock.
The first assertion was simply an absurdity, as there was no silver
in the house, unless it was in a corner of the cellar which was
walled up, and which--on the express directions of the Chief--was
left unopened. The true story about the clock was quite different
to that circulated by Madame Jesse. The article in question was the
timepiece in the drawing-room with the small bronze demon. Madame Jesse
offered the Chancellor this piece of furniture, which in itself was of
comparatively little value, at an exorbitant price, on the assumption
that he prized it as a witness to the important negotiations that had
taken place in her room. I believe she asked 5,000 francs for it. But
she overreached herself, and her offer was declined. “I remember,”
said the Minister afterwards in Berlin, “observing at the time that
possibly the impish figure on the clock, which made such faces, might
be particularly dear to her as a family portrait, and that I should be
sorry to deprive her of it.”
CHAPTER X
AUTUMN DAYS AT VERSAILLES
The day after our arrival at Versailles I forwarded the following
statement with regard to the measures taken against Jacoby, in
accordance with the Chief’s views. It was an answer to the protests
which had been made by the German press against his arrest, and not
merely by the democratic and the progressist organs, which invariably
criticise political and military affairs from the standpoint of private
morals.
“We still hear a great deal about the alleged illegality committed in
arresting Jacoby. That measure might have been inopportune; perhaps
less importance might have been attached to his demonstrations. But
there was nothing illegal in the course adopted, as we are now in a
state of war, when the civil code must yield to military necessity. The
imprisonment of Jacoby falls within the military jurisdiction, with
which the police and the judicial authorities have nothing to do. It is
in no sense to be regarded as a punishment. Jacoby is simply a prisoner
of war, just as would be a spy arrested in Germany, with whom of course
we do not wish otherwise to compare him. In other words, he was one of
the forces that increased the difficulty of attaining the object of
the war, and had accordingly to be rendered harmless.
“This will be made clear by a glance at the numerous instances in
which those entrusted with the conduct of war are obliged to over-ride
the rights of person and property recognised by the Constitution.
For purposes of successful defence private property may be destroyed
without previously arranging the terms of compensation, houses may
be burned and trees cut down, an entrance may be forced into private
residences, street traffic may be stopped and every other means of
transport such as ships, carts, &c., can be either seized or destroyed
without the previous permission of the owner, that rule applying to
our own as well as to the enemy’s country. The removal of persons who
afford the enemy either moral or material support, or who merely give
rise to suspicion that they do so, comes under the same category of
laws which apply to countries in a state of war.
“These principles are not contested in so far as they are applicable
to the immediate seat of war. The idea upon which they are based is
not, however, affected by the locality. Those who wield the power of
the State must exercise the rights and fulfil the duties accorded to
and imposed upon them for the purpose of securing the object of the
war, without regard to the distance from the actual scene of warfare
of the obstacles which require removal. They are bound to prevent
the occurrence of such incidents as render the attainment of peace
less easy. We are now carrying on a war for the purpose of enforcing
conditions which will hinder the enemy from attacking us in future.
Our opponents resist these conditions and will be greatly encouraged
and strengthened in their resistance by a declaration on the part of
Germans that these conditions are inexpedient and unjust. The Brunswick
working class manifesto and the Königsberg resolution have been
utilised to the utmost by the French press and have obviously confirmed
the Republicans now holding power in Paris in the idea that they are
right in rejecting those conditions. These French Republicans measure
the influence of their German sympathisers on the Governments of
Germany by the standard of their own experience. The impression which
those demonstrations at Brunswick and Königsberg produced in Germany
was probably little; but the point is, what effect did they have in
Paris? The effect there is such that similar demonstrations must be
rendered impossible in future, and their instigator must accordingly be
put out of harm’s way.”
In the morning Keudell said to me we might remain in Versailles for
about three weeks. Metz would soon be obliged to capitulate, as they
now had only horseflesh to eat and no salt. They were still confident
in Paris, although there was great mortality amongst their cattle,
which were fed on compressed food. Burnside, who had been in the city,
confirmed this news. The Minister was less sanguine. The question
of uniforms for the secretaries was again brought up, and in this
connection the Chief remarked that the war might yet continue for a
considerable time, perhaps till Christmas, possibly till Easter, and
probably a portion of the troops would remain in France for years
to come. Paris should have been immediately stormed on the 19th of
September, or left entirely on one side. He then told his valet to send
to Berlin for his fur coats.
In the further course of conversation the Minister said: “I heard
something really characteristic to-day. The host of Princes who have
followed us and who are lodging at the Hôtel des Reservoirs are living
at the expense of the town! They let the municipality feed them, though
they have merely come out of curiosity, and are nothing more than
distinguished loafers. It is particularly shabby of the Duke of Coburg,
who is a rich man, with an annual revenue of a million thalers. Such a
piece of meanness ought to be noticed in the press. It is shameful for
a Prince to allow himself to be fed by a town already so impoverished.”
The Chief again returned to this subject a little later, “The royal
household is a very comprehensive conception, and so it is impossible
to object to these gentlemen being fed. The King pays for the Crown
Prince, and the Crown Prince for the other princely personages. But it
is mean of the latter to help to suck the town dry, and the newspapers
should not overlook it.”
I afterwards asked the Minister, who was alone with me in the
drawing-room, where he remained behind after taking a cup of coffee,
whether I should send the press particulars of the not very gentlemanly
conduct of the Princes. “Certainly, why not?” he replied; “and you can
also give the name of the Coburger--not in our own papers, however.”
The bolt was accordingly despatched to Metzler, of the Foreign Office
in Berlin, who was to pass it on to the _Kölnische Zeitung_.
“An Englishman at the headquarters at Meaux” wrote to the _Daily
Telegraph_ that the Chief on the conclusion of his interview with Malet
said: “What gives myself and the King most anxiety is the influence
of a French Republic in Germany. We are very well aware how American
Republicanism has reacted upon Germany, and if the French oppose
us with a republican propaganda it will do us more harm than their
armies.” The Minister wrote on the margin of this statement: “An
absurd lie.”
_Friday, October 7th._--Hatzfeldt informed us at lunch that the Greek
Minister in Paris, with a “family” of twenty-four or twenty-five
persons, has come out to us on his way to Tours to join the delegation
of the Government of National Defence. His boy told the Count that he
did not at all like Paris. They got too little meat to eat there.
Prepared an article for the press from the following sketch: “We are
carrying on war, not with a view to a permanent occupation of France,
but to secure a peace on the conditions which we have laid down. For
that reason we desire to negotiate with a Government which represents
the will of France, and whose declarations and concessions will bind
France as well as ourselves. The present Government has not that
character. It must be confirmed by a National Assembly, or replaced by
another Government. A general election is necessary for that purpose;
and we are quite prepared to permit this to take place in those parts
of the country which we occupy, so far as strategic considerations
will allow. The present holders of power in Paris, however, have no
disposition to adopt this course. For personal considerations they
injure the interests of the country by inflicting upon it a continuance
of the evils of war.”
Hatzfeldt complained at dinner that the Greeks, who are anxious to
get away, pestered him with their lamentations. “Yes,” said the
Chief, “they too must be regarded with suspicion. They must first
be identified according to their descriptions, and it must then be
seen whether they have been properly circumcised. But no, that is not
customary among the Greeks. What seems to me, however, more suspicious
even than this enormous diplomatic family, is Wittgenstein, who comes
out at the risk of his life on pretence of having despatches for me,
and who afterwards turns out to have none. I wonder do they fancy that
we shall tolerate this running to and fro between Paris and Kutusow?”
“But,” said Hatzfeldt, “he might be able to bring us news from the
city.”
The Chief: “For that purpose he should bear a character that inspires
confidence, and that he does not do.”
The conversation then turned on the exhausted condition of the town
of Versailles, which has had heavy expenses to bear during the last
fortnight. The new Mayor, a M. Rameau, was granted an audience with the
Chief to-day. Referring to this the Minister said: “I told him that
they should raise a loan. ‘Yes,’ he replied, ‘that would be possible,
but then he must ask permission to go to Tours, as he required the
authority of his Government for such a measure.’ Of course I could not
promise him that, and besides they would hardly give him the necessary
authority there. Probably they think at Tours that it is the duty of
the Versailles people to starve in order that we may be starved with
them. But they forget that we are the stronger and take what we want.
They have absolutely no idea what war is.”
A reference to the neighbourhood between the palace and the Hôtel des
Reservoirs brought up the subject of the distinguished guests who are
staying at the latter house. Amongst other remarks upon the “troop of
princes,” the Chancellor said: “They have nothing decent to eat at that
hotel, possibly because the people think their highnesses wish to have
it gratis.”
Finally some one broached the question of tolerance, and at first the
Chancellor expressed himself much in the same sense as he had done
at St. Avold. He declared in decided terms for tolerance in matters
of faith. “But,” he added, “the Freethinkers are also not tolerant.
They persecute believers, not indeed with the stake, since that is
impossible, but with insult and mockery in the press. Amongst the
people, so far as they are non-believers, there has also not been
much progress. What pleasure it would afford them to see Pastor Knack
hanged!”
Somebody having mentioned that early Protestantism had shown no
tolerance, Bucher called attention to the fact that, according to
Buckle, the Huguenots were zealous reactionaries, as was, indeed, the
case with all the reformers of that period. “They were not exactly
reactionaries,” replied the Chief, “but petty tyrants--each parson was
a small Pope.” He then referred to the course taken by Calvin against
Servetus, and added “Luther was just the same.” I ventured to recall
Luther’s treatment of the followers of Karlstadt and Munzer, as well
as the case of the Wittenberg theologians after him, and Chancellor
Krell. Bucher related that towards the end of the last century the
Scottish Presbyterians punished a person for merely lending Thomas
Paine’s _Rights of Man_ with twenty-one years’ transportation, the
offender being immediately cast into chains. I pointed to the rigid
intolerance of the New England States towards the members of other
religious communions and to their tyrannical liquor law. “And the
Sabbath-keeping,” said the Chief, “that is a horrible tyranny. I
remember the first time I went to England on landing at Hull I whistled
in the street. An Englishman, whose acquaintance I had made on board
said to me, ‘Pray, sir, don’t whistle!’ I asked ‘Why not? is it
forbidden here?’ ‘No,’ he said, ‘but it is the Sabbath.’ That made
me so angry that I immediately took a ticket on another steamer for
Edinburgh, as it did not at all suit me not to be able to whistle when
I had a mind to.” Bucher remarked that in general the Sunday in England
was not so bad. He himself had always greatly enjoyed the stillness
after the rush and roar of the working day in London, where the noise
began early in the morning. The Chancellor then continued: “In other
respects I am not at all opposed to keeping the Sabbath holy. On the
contrary, as a landed proprietor, I promote it as much as possible.
Only I will not force the people. Every one must know best for himself
how to prepare for the future life. No work should be done on Sunday,
because it is wrong as being a breach of the Divine commandment, and
unfair to man, who requires rest. That of course does not apply to
the service of the State and in particular to the diplomatic service,
in which despatches and telegrams are delivered on Sundays which must
be dealt with at once. There can also be no objection to our country
people saving their hay or corn on a fine Sunday after a long spell
of bad weather. I could not bring myself to coerce my farmers in
those things.... I can afford to do as I think right myself, as the
damage done by a possible rainy Monday would not affect me. Our landed
proprietors consider that it is not respectable to allow their people
to work on Sunday even in such an emergency!” I mentioned that pious
families in America do not even cook on the Sabbath, and that on being
once invited to dinner in New York on a Sunday there was only cold
meat on the table. “In Frankfurt,” said the Chief, “when I had more
liberty we always dined very simply on Sundays, and I never ordered
the carriage out on account of the servants.” I ventured to remark
that in Leipzig all shops were closed on Sunday, with the exception of
the bakers’ and some tobacconists. “Yes, that is as it should be; but
I do not want to put pressure on anybody. I might possibly do it in
the country by not buying from a tradesman--that is if his goods were
not of exceptionally high quality, for then I do not know whether I
should be able to stand firm. Care should be taken, however, that noisy
trades, such as that of the blacksmith, should not be carried on in the
neighbourhood of a church on Sunday.”
I was summoned to the Minister in the evening. “Thile[12] writes
to me,” he said, “that the _Norddeutsche Allgemeine Zeitung_ has a
terrible article against the Catholics. Is it by you?” “I do not know
which he alludes to, as I have recently called attention on several
occasions to the proceedings of the Ultramontanes.” He then searched
for the extract, which he read over half aloud. “But that is perfectly
true and correct. Yes, that’s quite right. Our good Thile has been
thoroughly taken in by Savigny. He has gone out of his wits and howls
because we have not rescued the Pope and his whole family.”
We were thirteen at table to-day, Dr. Lauer being one of the number. I
pointed this out to Bucher, who sat near me. “Don’t speak so loud,” he
replied. “The Chief has a very sharp ear, and he is superstitious on
that point.”[13]
_Monday, October 10th._--Called to the Chief twice during the morning.
He went subsequently to the Crown Prince’s quarters, where he remained
for lunch.
The conversation at dinner at first turned on the interview of the King
with Napoleon at Bellevue, near Sedan, respecting which Russell sent a
full report to _The Times_, although the two Sovereigns were alone and
the Chancellor himself was only aware of what had passed in so far as
the King had assured him that there had been absolutely no reference
to politics. “As a matter of fact,” said the Chancellor, “it would not
have been nice of ‘our Most Gracious’ to have maintained silence only
towards his Ministers. Russell must unquestionably have received his
news from the Crown Prince.”
I now forgot how and by whom the subject of dangerous touring
expeditions was introduced, but the Minister himself related some
daring enterprises of his own. “I remember,” he said, “being once with
a party, amongst whom were the Orloffs, in South France, near the Pont
du Gard. An old Roman aqueduct of several stories crossed the valley.
Princess Orloff, a very spirited lady, proposed that we should go
across over it. There was a very narrow path, about a foot and a half
wide, along one side of the old water channel, and on the other side a
wall of big slabs of stone. It looked a very hazardous undertaking, but
I could not allow myself to be beaten by a woman. We two accordingly
started on this enterprise, Orloff going with the rest of the company
down by the valley. For some time we walked on all right along the
stone wall, from which we could see a depth of several hundred feet
beneath us. Further on, however, the stones had fallen off and we had
to pick our way along the narrow ledge. Then we came to another stretch
of relatively easy going, but after there was another very bad bit on
an unsafe ledge. Screwing up my courage I stepped out quickly after
the Princess, and grasping her with one arm, jumped down with her into
the channel some four to five feet deep. Our companions below, who had
suddenly lost sight of us, were in the greatest anxiety until at length
we came out on the other side.”
In the evening I was called to the Chief to receive instructions
respecting Garibaldi, who, according to a telegram from Tours, had
arrived there and offered his services to the French Republic. The
Chancellor said: “But just tell me why you sometimes write in such
a sledge-hammer style? It is true I have not seen the text of your
telegram about Russell, but your recent article on the Ultramontanes in
the _Norddeutsche Allgemeine Zeitung_ was very strongly worded. Surely
the Saxons are usually regarded as a very polite race, and if you have
any ambition to become Court Historian to the Foreign Office, you must
not be so violent.” I ventured to reply that I could also be polite,
and was capable of irony without rudeness. “Well, then,” he said, “be
polite but without irony. Write diplomatically. Even in a declaration
of war one observes the rules of politeness.”
_Tuesday, October 11th._--It appears from the conversation at dinner
that an assembly of a congress of German Princes at Versailles has
been for some time past under consideration. It is hoped that the King
of Bavaria will also come. In that case Delbrück thinks “it would be
well to place at his disposal one of the historic apartments in the
palace--possibly the bedroom of Louis XIV. With his character he would
be certainly delighted at such an arrangement, and would not be too
exacting in the matter of comfort.” The Chief dined to-day with the
Crown Prince, and did not return until 10 o’clock, when he had an
interview with Burnside.
_Wednesday, October 12th._--Amongst other things I wrote to-day another
article on the hostile attitude assumed by the Ultramontanes towards us
in this war.
It was directed against the _Schlesische Haus-Blätter_, and concluded
as follows: “We should have thought that it was impossible at this
time of day to be misunderstood in using the terms ‘ultramontane’ and
‘ultramontanism.’ We should have thought that honest Catholics would
as clearly understood what was meant thereby as do other Christians,
and that as honest Catholics they could not possibly take offence
at strictures upon ultramontane agitation and attacks. Acting on
this supposition, we called attention to the resistance offered
by that party to the latest development of German affairs. To our
great astonishment, however, we learn through a Silesian journal
that our article, in which the party in question was described as
ultramontane, has actually given offence, and been regarded as a
censure and impeachment of Catholicism itself. We deprecate any
such interpretation of our meaning. Nothing was more remote from our
intention. From our standpoint Ultramontanism has just as little in
common with the faith of the Catholic Church as Atheism and Nihilism
have with the Protestant Church. Ultramontanism is of a purely
political character. It is the spirit of a sect with exclusively
worldly aims, namely, the restoration as far as possible of universal
empire on a mediæval theocratic basis. It does not recognise the claims
of patriotism, and it considers the end to justify the means. In
speaking of the Ultramontanes as zealous opponents of Germany in the
present war, the examples which we gave made it sufficiently clear to
whom we referred. For the purpose of removing all doubt on this point,
however, and to prevent the possibility in future of circles for whom
we entertain feelings of respect taking unnecessary offence at remarks
which were not intended for them, we will here add a few further
examples.
“When we complained of the hostility of the Ultramontanes we were
thinking of those French priests who were convicted upon trustworthy
evidence of having fired upon our soldiers. In repeating these charges
we have other priests in mind who, a few days ago, under the pretext of
bringing the last consolation to the dying, sneaked through our camp
outside Paris as spies; and to the manifesto of the former ultramontane
deputy, Keller, an Alsacian, published in the _Union_, which declares
that the war against us is a ‘holy war,’ and that every shot fired at a
German is an _œuvre sainte_. We imagine that after this explanation our
Silesian contemporary will no longer doubt our respect for the Catholic
Church, and will not itself desire to identify the Catholic cause with
those who thus act and speak, and are guilty of such a gross abuse of
the conception of ‘holiness.’”
On my submitting the article to the Chief he said: “You still write
too bluntly for me. But you told me that you were capable of delicate
irony. Here, however, there is much more irony than delicacy.” (I
had only reproduced his own expressions, which, however, shall be
avoided in future.) “Write it all in a different strain. You must
write politically, and in politics the object is not to give offence.”
The Chief then altered the article in part, the first paragraph
assuming the following form: “We had not believed that at this time
of day the use of the expressions ‘ultramontane’ and ‘ultramontanism’
could lead to any misunderstanding. We imagined that Catholics had
as clear a conception of the meanings of those words as the members
of other Christian communities, and that they would understand that
no offence was intended to them in complaining of the attacks of the
Ultramontanes. It was on this supposition that we dealt with the
opposition of the party in question to the latest development of German
affairs, and we are surprised to find that a Silesian newspaper,
notorious for its violence of language, has inverted our meaning,
substituting the Catholic Christian world for the coterie which we
attacked.” The Minister struck out the adjective “zealous” before
“opponents of Germany,” and also the following sentence beginning
with the words “For the purpose of removing.” The concluding passage
read as follows after the Minister had corrected it: “In complaining
of the Ultramontanes we were thinking, as we expressly stated, of
the party of the _Münchener Volksboten_ and similar organs, whose
slanderous jibes stir up the Germans against each other, and who
encouraged the French to attack Germany and are partly responsible
for the present war, inasmuch as they represented French victory to
be easy and certain, and the German people to be disunited; we had in
mind the priests of Upper Alsace and the French priests who instigated
the country population to murderous attacks upon our troops in which
they themselves took part; we had further in view those priests who
sullied the cloth, sneaking into our camp as spies under pretence of
bringing the last consolation to the dying, and who are at the present
moment being tried by court-martial for this conduct; and we were
also thinking of a manifesto published in the _Union_ by the former
ultramontane deputy, Keller, an Alsacian, in which the present war was
represented as a crusade, and every shot fired at a German as an _œuvre
sainte_. We imagine that the Silesian journal in question will hardly
succeed in obtaining credence when it casts doubt upon our respect
for the Catholic Church. It will not desire to identify the cause of
Catholicism with that of men who have been guilty of such a wicked
abuse of sacred things and of genuine faith.”
The Chief dined with the King to-day, but afterwards joined us at
table, where he complained of the way in which the smaller potentates
worried “their” Chancellor with all sorts of questions and counsels,
“until Prince Charles noticed my appealing glance and saved me from
their clutches.”
After dinner a gentleman who has come from Paris, supposed to be
a Spanish diplomat, succeeded in obtaining an interview with the
Chancellor, and remained with him for a long time. Like other gentlemen
who have come from the city he will not be allowed to return. Some of
us considered the visit rather suspicious.
Burnside came in while we were at tea. He wishes to leave here and
go to Brussels, in order to find apartments for his wife, who is
now at Geneva. He says that Sheridan has left for Switzerland and
Italy. Apparently the Americans can do nothing further in the way of
negotiations. The general wished to see the Chief again this evening.
I dissuaded him, pointing out that although, owing to his great
regard for the Americans, the Chancellor would receive him if he were
announced, yet consideration ought to be paid to the heavy pressure
upon his time. This was quite in accord with the Chief’s wishes, as on
my being summoned to him at 10.30 P.M. he said: “As you know Burnside,
please point out to him how much I am occupied, but in such a way that
he will not think I have prompted you. He never quite finishes what he
has got to say, but always keeps back something for another time. It is
only fair that he should know how busy I am, and that I am a matter of
fact man. I have a weakness for these Americans, and they know it, but
they ought to have some consideration for me. Point that out to him,
and say that I must make short work of it, even with crowned heads.
Besides, I require six or seven hours daily for my work, and must
therefore remain at it until late into the night.”
_Thursday, October 13th._--Read and made use of a report from Rome
giving the result of the plebiscite, which shows that there is no
longer any Papal party there. It would appear as if the whole political
organisation of the Papal State has fallen into dust, like a corpse
that, after remaining unchanged for a thousand years in its leaden
shell, has been suddenly exposed to the air. There is nothing left
of it--not a memory nor even a void which it had filled. The voting,
which had to be conducted according to the Italian Constitution, is a
voluntary manifestation of opinions which either involve no sacrifice
or a very slight one, except, of course, to the emigrants. So far as
those opinions indicate an antipathy to the political _régime_ of the
Papacy, there can be no possibility of a reaction. On the other hand,
whether the Romans will desire to be and to remain subjects of the
King of Italy will depend, so far as the permanence of his rule is
concerned, upon the manner in which they are governed.
I received this report from the Chancellor, with instructions to
utilise it in the press. The statistical information, however, was all
that was to be taken. “It would appear therefrom,” he added, “that
there has been some trickery. But do not draw any moral against either
the Pope or Italy.”
To judge by a letter from Saint Louis, dated the 13th of September,
national sentiment amongst the Germans in America would seem to have
been greatly stimulated by the success of the war, and to be now much
stronger than their republican leanings. “A German who has lived here
for twenty years, who was formerly your deadly foe, but whose ideal you
now are,” thus enthusiastically addresses the Chancellor: “Forward,
Bismarck! Hurrah for Germany! Hurrah for William the First, Emperor of
Germany!” Bravo! But it appears that our Democrats must emigrate before
they can be brought to entertain such feelings.
The conversation at dinner was not of particular interest to-day. While
taking our coffee, the Chancellor again read us a portion of a letter
from “Johanna” (his wife), which contained some very severe judgments
upon the French, referring, amongst other things, to Paris as an
“abominable Babel.”
_Friday, October 14th._--Busy working for the post up to midday.
Telegraphed afterwards to London and Brussels respecting the false
assertions of Ducrot in the _Liberté_. Also reported that General
Boyer, Bazaine’s first adjutant, had arrived at Versailles from Metz
for the purpose of negotiating with us. The Chief, however, does not
seem to wish to treat seriously with him, at least to-day. He said in
the bureau: “What day of the month is it?” “The 14th, Excellency.” “Ah,
that was Hochkirchen and Jena, days of disaster for Prussia. We must
not begin any business to-day.” It may also be observed that to-day is
a Friday.
At dinner the Chief, after thinking for a moment, said, smiling: “I
have a lovely idea in connection with the conclusion of peace. It
is to appoint an International Court for the trial of all those who
have instigated the war, newspaper writers, deputies, senators, and
ministers.” Abeken added that Thiers would also be indirectly involved,
especially on account of his Chauvinistic _History of the Consulate
and Empire_. “The Emperor also,” said the Chief. “He is not quite so
innocent as he wants to make out. My idea was that each of the great
Powers should appoint an equal number of judges, America, England,
Russia and so forth, and that we should be the prosecutors. But the
English and the Russians would of course not agree to it, so that the
Court might after all be composed of the two nations who have suffered
most from the war, that is to say, of Frenchmen and Germans.” The
Minister also said: “I have read the article in the _Indépendance
Belge_, which Grammont is believed to have written. He blames us for
not having set Napoleon at liberty at Sedan, and he is not pleased at
our marching on Paris, instead of merely occupying Alsace and Lorraine
as a pledge. I thought at first it might have come from Beust or some
other good friend in Austria, but I am now convinced that it must have
been written by a Frenchman.” He gave his reasons for this opinion,
and then continued: “His argument would be just if his assumption
were correct, namely, that we really did not want Alsace, but only an
indemnity. But as it is it will be better to have Paris as well as
Alsace as pledges. When one wants something decent the pledge can never
be of too great value.”
A reference was made to Boyer, who created a great sensation in the
town, where the uniform of a French general has not been seen for a
long time past, and who was greeted by the crowd with shouts of “Vive
la France!” He declared, it is said, that the army in Metz remained
faithful to the Emperor, and would have nothing to do with the republic
of Parisian lawyers. The Chancellor also expressed himself to this
effect, adding: “The General is one of those people who become suddenly
lean when they grow excited. Unquestionably he is also a thorough
scoundrel, but he can still blush.” In reading the following further
remarks by the Minister, it must be remembered that Gambetta had
already preached war _à outrance_, and that the Parisian press almost
daily recommended some new infamy.
The Chancellor referred to various horrors that had again been
committed recently by bands of guerillas. He quoted the proverb,
_Wie es in den Wald schallt, so schallt es wieder heraus_, (The
wood re-echoes what is shouted into it,) and said that to show any
consideration to these treacherous franctireurs was a “culpable
laziness in killing.” “It is treason to our country.” “Our people are
very good marksmen, but bad executioners. Every village in which an act
of treachery has been committed should be burnt to the ground, and all
the male inhabitants hanged.”
Count Bismarck-Bohlen then related that the village of Hably, where
a squadron of Silesian hussars was set upon by franctireurs with the
knowledge of the inhabitants so that they only succeeded in bringing
away eleven horses, was actually burnt to the ground. The Chief, as was
only right and proper, commended this act of energy.
Bohlen further stated that sixty Bavarian infantrymen who were with
the cavalry detachment had not kept proper watch, and that when the
franctireurs poured in from all sides at 3 o’clock in the morning they
took to their heels. The Chief said: “That fact should be published in
order that we may take proper precautions later when we enter into a
military convention with Bavaria.”
The Chancellor’s policy appears to be hampered by other influences. He
said at table: “It is really a great nuisance that I must first discuss
every plan I form with five or six persons, who as a rule know nothing
about the matter. I must listen to their objections, and am forced to
refute them politely. In this way I have been recently obliged to spend
three whole days over an affair that I could otherwise have settled
in three minutes. It is exactly as if I began to give my opinion on
the position of a battery, and the officer--whose business I do not
understand--were obliged to reply to my argument.”
The Chief afterwards related the following: “Moltke and Roon were with
me yesterday, and I explained to them my ideas. Roon, who is accustomed
to Parliamentary procedure, was silent and let me speak, and then
agreed with what I said. ‘Molk,’ whose profile resembles more and more
every day that of a bird of prey, also appeared to be listening. But
when I had finished he came out with something utterly different, and
I saw that he had not paid the least attention to my explanation, but
had on the contrary been spinning out some ideas of his own which had
nothing to do with the matter. ‘Molk’ is an exceedingly able man, and I
am convinced that whatever he gave his attention to he would do well.
But for years past he has devoted himself to one single subject, and
he has come to have no head and no interest for anything else. It put
me in a temper to find I had been talking to deaf ears, but I took my
revenge. Instead of repeating my explanation I observed to Roon: ‘You
have given me your opinion, therefore you have followed what I said.
Will you now have the kindness to explain the matter once more?’”
_Sunday, October 16th._--This morning I received another letter from
Bamberger, who writes from Lausanne. He thinks Bismarck can do what he
likes if he will only follow a sound German policy, that is to say,
“if a United German State is now firmly established.” “In Germany
people are convinced that this solution rests with the Chancellor of
the Confederation, and all opposition offered to it is attributed by
public opinion to the Minister. People say to themselves that if Count
Bismarck did not secretly encourage that opposition it would not dare
to manifest itself in such a great crisis.” Finally Bamberger asked
whether he should come here. At his request I submitted a number of
points in his letter to the Minister. The Chief said he would be very
pleased to see Bamberger here, as his local knowledge of Paris would be
very useful once we got in the city. “Then he can also on his return
explain many things in his own circles which it would be difficult to
write. It is strange, though, that they should think I do not desire
to see Germany united. The cause is not progressing as it ought to do,
owing to the constant tergiversation of Bavaria and Würtemberg, and
because we do not know exactly what King Lewis thinks. For the same
reasons, if this unity is at length secured, many things to which many
people look forward will still be wanting.”
_Monday, October 17th._--In the evening we were told to pack our boxes,
and that the carriages were to take their place behind those of the
King’s suite opposite the Prefecture, in case of an alarm in the night.
A sortie has been expected since yesterday.
_Tuesday, October 18th._--The Chief took lunch with us to-day, a thing
which has seldom happened recently.
The Chief then read a number of particularly edifying private letters
to the Emperor Napoleon which had been published by the Provisional
Government, his comments upon them also containing occasional
references to personages in Berlin. The Minister said, with reference
to a letter from Pourtales: “Schleinitz was very discreet in speaking
of his colleagues, but being a vain old coxcomb he was exceedingly
loquacious with women of all sorts and conditions.” (Turning to
Delbrück:) “You should just have a glance at the police reports which
Manteuffel had prepared on this subject.”
The Minister afterwards referred to a statement in the _Kraj_, and in
connection therewith to the Poles in general. He spoke a good deal
about the victories of the Great Elector in the East, and the alliance
with Charles the Tenth of Sweden, which had promised him great
advantages. It was a pity, however, that his relations with Holland
prevented him from following up those advantages and fully availing
himself of them. He would otherwise have had a good prospect of
extending his power in Western Poland. On Delbrück remarking that then
Prussia would not have remained a German State, the Chief replied: “It
would not have done any great harm. In that case there would have been
a northern State somewhat similar to Austria in the South. Poland would
have been for us what Hungary is to Austria.” This observation reminded
me of what he had previously said on one occasion, namely, that he had
advised the Crown Prince to have his son taught the Polish language,
which, however, to his regret, was not done.
_Wednesday, October 19th._--At dinner, at which Count Waldersee joined
us, the Minister remarked: “It would be a good plan if the inhabitants
of a few square miles of those districts where our troops are fired at
from behind hedges, and where the rails are loosened and stones laid
upon the railway lines, were transported to Germany and kept under
close watch there.” Bucher related how, on his journey hither, an
officer had borrowed his revolver and played with it ostentatiously
while they were passing under a bridge from which French scamps were
accustomed to spit down upon our people. The Chief exclaimed: “Why
_play_? He should have waited till they had done it, and then fired at
them.”
If I rightly understand, Weimar had “commanded” the Chancellor to call
upon him this evening, as he wished to obtain information on some
subject. The Chief said: “I sent him word that I was detained by my
health and the business of State.”
Waldersee understands that, during the burning of the Palace of Saint
Cloud, some of the minor Princes had “saved for themselves” various
“souvenirs,” such as vases, trinkets and books, but were forced to
return them by order of the Crown Prince. Bohlen made some outrageous
jokes upon the Weimar Order of the White Falcon, which led to a
discussion on Orders in general, and the plentiful crop of this species
of fruit which many people have already harvested. “Yes,” said the
Chief, “such quantities of tinplate! If it were only possible to give
away the Orders of which one has too many! To you, for instance, Dr.
Busch. How would you like it?” “No, thank you, Excellency,” I replied;
“very many thanks. But, yes; if I could have one of those that you
have worn yourself, as a memento, that would be something different.
Otherwise I do not want any.”
_Thursday, October 20th._--Morning and afternoon busy writing various
articles and telegrams.
The arrest of Jacoby by the military authorities was one of the
subjects discussed at dinner, and the Chief once more expressed great
doubts as to its expediency. Bismarck-Bohlen was highly pleased that
“the chattering scoundrel had been locked up!” The Chancellor’s reply
was very characteristic. He said: “I am not at all pleased. A party
man might be, because it would gratify his vindictiveness. A statesman
knows no such feeling. In politics the only question is, what good
result will it do to ill-treat a political opponent?”
Some one remarked that the Grand Duke of Weimar was very angry because
the Chief had not gone to see him as desired, whereupon the Minister
turned to Keudell, and said rather sharply: “Tell ---- (I could not
catch the name) immediately that I was indignant at his Gracious
Master making such claims upon my time and health, and that he should
have such an erroneous idea of the duties which I have to discharge.”
“I can now understand how poor Wartsdorf came to die so young.” “The
Coburger worries me almost as much. He has written me a twelve-page
letter on German politics, but I have given him a proper answer. I told
him that of all the points he mentioned there was only one which had
not been long since dealt with, and that one was not worth discussing.
He did us a good service, however, in 1866. It is true that previously
he was bad enough--when he wished to be Emperor of Germany, and put
himself at the head of a secret shooting club. At that time I seriously
intended to have him kidnapped by a regiment of hussars and brought to
Magdeburg, and I submitted my proposal to the King. He is eaten up with
vanity.” The Minister then related that the Duke had ordered a picture
to be painted of himself as the victor of Eckernförde, seated on a
prancing charger with a bombshell exploding at his feet; while, as a
matter of fact, “he did not on that occasion display any heroism, but,
on the contrary, kept at a respectable distance from gunshot--which was
quite a sensible thing for him to do.”
The German liberal press is still uneasy with respect to the arrest of
Jacoby. The Chief seems to consider it of great importance that his
view of the affair should not be misunderstood, and that it should
be generally adopted. The _Weser Zeitung_ of the 16th instant, which
arrived to-day, has an article which criticises the Minister’s previous
declarations on this subject in a hostile spirit. It concludes as
follows: “To sum up, we must hold to our view that Jacoby has been
treated unjustly, and although we anticipate no fearful consequences
from this action, we nevertheless regret this episode in the history of
a glorious epoch.”
The Chief dictated the following reply:--
“The _Weser Zeitung_ of the 16th instant heads its columns with
an article which speaks of the advice forwarded to the Königsberg
magistrates by the Chancellor of the Confederation, through the Chief
President von Horn, respecting the Jacoby affair. Be good enough to
permit a few words of explanation in connection with that criticism.
The remarks of the _Weser Zeitung_ refer to two different subjects. The
statement of the Chancellor in his communication to the Chief President
is a purely theoretical discussion as to whether action inadmissible in
peace may not be taken by military authorities after war has actually
broken out. The opinions therein expressed are almost the same as
these which must have been entertained by the _Weser Zeitung_ itself
when it remarked, ‘We can easily conceive cases in which we should be
prepared with all our hearts to grant not only an indemnity but a vote
of thanks for the somewhat illegal arrest of any worthless individual
who obstructed this holy war.’ That is exactly the opinion of the
Chancellor. If that much were not granted, it would then be impossible
on an invasion of North German territory to deliver battle on our
own soil, unless some extensive and entirely uninhabited heath were
discovered and retained for the purpose, and even then the proprietor
of that piece of ground would be afterwards able to claim compensation
for the damage done to his property.
“Either the authorities entrusted with the conduct of the military
operations must, notwithstanding the actual outbreak of hostilities,
be bound by the Constitution and the law, or they must be held at
liberty to take such reasonable measures as they consider necessary
with a view to the fulfilment of their task. Theoretically, this
question must be answered with a bare affirmative or negative. If it
be answered in the negative it is hard to say by how many judicial
officials every detachment of the fighting force on native soil would
have to be accompanied, and what legal formalities gone through in the
case of each separate house and person before the military authorities
could feel that they were constitutionally within their rights in
the course they desired to adopt. If the question is answered in the
affirmative, then it must be recognised that it is impossible to codify
the regulations governing the discretionary power which must be vested
in the military commander in war, in such a manner that the general or
soldier who executes his orders on native soil can in every instance
refer to the particular paragraph of the Constitution or the law
justifying his action.
“The Chancellor of the Confederation cannot possibly have had any other
intention than to lay down the principles just stated theoretically,
since, as a constitutional Prussian Minister of State, it is not
competent for him to express any opinion as to whether the military
commander has acted rightly in exercising the power vested in him,
or as to the extent to which he may have exercised it. The military
governors, who are appointed before the outbreak of war, are neither
nominated by the Minister nor are they under his control. They are,
on the contrary, appointed without his concurrence on the authority
of the commander-in-chief, like all other military commanders. The
Chancellor of the Confederation and the other Ministers of State are
not the superiors of the military governors, and the latter would not
obey the directions of the Ministers, but only those of the military
authorities which reach them without any Ministerial co-operation.
“It is therefore an entirely unpractical course for those who
consider themselves unjustly treated under the orders of the military
authorities to direct their complaints to the Ministers of State. They
can only demand redress from the military superiors of those against
whom they enter complaint. It may therefore be taken for granted that
the Chancellor of the Confederation has not considered himself to be
in a position to officially express an opinion on the expediency of
the course adopted in a single instance, such as that of Jacoby, but
has, on the contrary, merely dealt from a theoretical standpoint, with
the question whether, during war and in the interest of its successful
prosecution, the arrest of individuals whose action in the judgment of
the military authorities is injurious to us and advantageous to the
enemy is temporarily permissible.
“Stated in these general terms, the question can hardly be answered
in the negative by practical politicians and soldiers, although they
may entertain many scruples both on theoretical and judicial grounds
against martial law as a whole. The concrete question, however,
whether this right, if it exists, was properly exercised in the case
of Jacoby, is as much beyond the competence of the Ministry as, say,
the question whether it is necessary or desirable in delivering battle
on native soil to set a particular village on fire, or to arrest
without legal process a private person at a distance of fifty miles
from the battle-field because he is suspected of favouring the enemy.
A discussion of the means by which the military commander could be
rendered responsible for what the parties concerned may consider a
false, hasty or improper course is foreign to our purpose. We have
merely been at pains to show that the constitutional attributes of the
Ministry do not give it any authority to interfere directly in such
cases.”
_Friday, October 21st._--The heavy firing which began early this
morning increased as the day wore on. We did not allow this to disturb
us, however. Various articles were completed, including one on the
departure of the Nuncio and other diplomats from Paris.
At lunch Keudell stated that the French artillery had destroyed the
porcelain factory at Sèvres. Hatzfeldt told us that his mother-in-law,
an American lady who had remained in Paris, had sent him good news
respecting the ponies of which he had often spoken to us. They were
fine and fat. The question was whether she should now eat them. He was
about to answer, “Yes, in God’s name!” but he intended to get the price
of these animals included in the indemnity to be paid by the French
Government.
Between 1 and 2 o’clock the firing seemed to have approached the woods
to the north of the town. The artillery fire was severe, the reports
following each other in rapid succession, while the rattle of the
mitrailleuse could also be recognised. It gave the impression that a
regular battle had developed, and was drawing nearer to us. The Chief
ordered his horse to be saddled, and rode off. The rest of us also
followed in the direction in which the fight seemed to be raging. We
saw the familiar white clouds that accompany shell fire rise and burst
in the air to the left, over the wood through which the road to Jardy
and Vaucresson leads. Orderlies were galloping along the road thither,
and a battalion was marching towards the point where the engagement was
taking place. The fight continued until after 4 o’clock, and then one
only heard isolated discharges from the large fort on Mont Valérien,
and finally they too ceased. As was only natural, great excitement
prevailed during the afternoon amongst the French in the town, and the
groups who stood before the houses probably expected every moment, as
the noise of the firing came nearer and nearer, to see our troops in
full flight before the red breeches. They afterwards drew long faces
and shrugged their shoulders.
In the evening the Chief said we ought not to permit groups of people
to collect in the streets on the occasion of an engagement, and that
the inhabitants should be ordered in such circumstances to remain
within doors, the patrols being instructed to fire upon those refusing
obedience.
_Sunday, October 22nd._--This has now been done, Voigts-Rhetz, the
Commandant of Versailles, having issued an order to the effect that
on the alarm signal being given, all the inhabitants must immediately
return to their houses, failing which the troops had received
instructions to fire upon them.
The Parisian Prefect of Police, Keratry, has appeared in Madrid with
the object of submitting two proposals to General Prim. The first is
that France and Spain should enter into an offensive and defensive
alliance, under which the latter country should send an army of fifty
thousand men to the assistance of the French. The object of the
alliance would be the common defence of the nations of the Latin race
against the supremacy of the Germanic race. On Prim declining this
strange offer (strange inasmuch as the Spanish support of France, which
but three months before had in the most arrogant manner forced its own
policy upon Spain, would be an unexampled piece of self-renunciation
and a misconception of the clearest interests of the Spanish people),
the French intermediary asked that at least a decree should be issued
permitting the import of arms into France. This suggestion was also
rejected by Prim.
The surrender of Metz is expected within the next week. Prince
Frederick Charles desires, if I rightly understand, a capitulation on
the same conditions as at Sedan and Toul; while the Chancellor, for
political reasons, is in favour of a more considerate treatment of the
garrison. The King seems to hesitate between the two courses.
The Chief said yesterday to the Mayor of Versailles: “No elections, no
peace. But the gentlemen of Paris will not hear of them. The American
generals who were in Paris with the object of inducing them to hold
the elections tell me that there is no getting them to consider the
matter. Only Trochu said they were not yet so hard pressed that they
need enter into negotiations,--the others would not hear of them, not
even of submitting the question to the country.” “I told him finally,”
said the Minister, “that we should have no alternative but to come to
an understanding with Napoleon, and to force him back upon the French
again. He did not believe we would do that, as it would be the grossest
insult we could offer them. I replied that it was nevertheless in the
interests of the victor to leave the defeated nation under a _régime_
which would have to rely solely upon the army. In such circumstances it
would be impossible to think of foreign wars. In conclusion, I advised
him not to make the mistake of thinking that Napoleon had no hold upon
the people. He had the army on his side. Boyer had negotiated with me
in the name of the Emperor. How far the present Government in Paris had
the support of the people remained to be seen. The rural population
could hardly share the opinion that peace was not to be thought of.
He then gave his own view respecting the conditions of peace, namely,
the razing of their fortresses and ours, and the disarmament of both
countries in proportion to the population, &c. As I told him at the
commencement, these people have no right conception of what war really
is.”
The _Nouvelliste_ being now the only newspaper in Versailles, and as
it sensibly avoids unnecessarily hurting the patriotic sentiments of
the French, the people here take some account of it. Löwinsohn tells
us that the number of copies sold varies, some issues have been quite
cleared out, while of others he has only thirty to fifty, and of
yesterday’s 150 copies on hand. Up to the present his weekly balance
shows no loss.
In the evening wrote an article for the _Norddeutsche_ in which the
following ideas are developed. The first condition upon which the
Chancellor of the Confederation insisted in speaking to the various
persons who have desired to negotiate with him respecting peace was
the election of an Assembly representing the will of France. He
addressed the same demand to the emissaries of the Republicans and to
the Imperialists, and to another third party. He desires to grant all
possible facilities for thus consulting the wishes of the population.
The form of government is a matter of entire indifference to us. But we
can only deal with a real Government recognised by the nation.
The _Nouvelliste_ will shortly publish the following ideas in a
French dress: “At the present moment in France, events are constantly
occurring which are not only opposed to common sense, but are
frequently an outrage on all moral feeling. Former Papal Zouaves, and
not alone Frenchmen, serve without scruple in the army of a Republic
which is governed by Voltairians. Garibaldi comes to Tours, and offers,
as he says, what remains of his life to the service of France. He can
hardly have forgotten that this same France, twenty years before,
destroyed the Roman Republic, while the wounds which it inflicted upon
his country at Mentana must be still fresh in his memory. Nor can we
have forgotten how his native town of Nice was filched from the Italian
fatherland by this same France, and that it is at the present moment
only restrained by a state of siege from throwing off the French yoke.”
Delbrück mentioned that during the preliminary negotiations for the
reorganisation of Germany, Bavaria laid claim to a kind of joint
participation in the representation of the Federal State in foreign
countries, the Bavarian idea being that when the Prussian, or
rather the German, Minister or Ambassador was absent, the Bavarian
representative should have the conduct of affairs. The Chief said: “No,
whatever they like, but that is really impossible. The question is not
what Ambassador we are to have, but what instructions he is to receive,
and under that arrangement there would be two Ministers for Foreign
Affairs in Germany.” The Count then proceeded to further develop this
point of view, illustrating it by examples.
_Monday, October 24th._--Strange news comes from Marseilles. It appears
that the Red Republicans have there gained the upper hand. Esquiros,
the Prefect of the Mouths of the Rhone, belongs to this variety of
French Republicans. He has suppressed the _Gazette du Midi_, because
the clubs of his party maintain that it favours the candidature of
the Comte de Chambord, whose proclamation it has published. He has
also expelled the Jesuits. A decree has been issued by Gambetta,
declaring the Prefect to be dismissed, and his measures against the
newspaper mentioned and the Jesuits to be abrogated. Esquiros, however,
supported by the working classes, has declined to obey this order of
the Government Delegation at Tours, and continues to hold his post. The
_Gazette du Midi_ is still suppressed, and the Jesuits are expelled.
Just as little heed was paid to Gambetta’s decree disbanding the Civic
Guard, which was recruited from Red Republicans, and is not to be
confounded with the Marseilles National Guard. The Chief remarked with
reference to this news: “It looks as if things were tending towards
civil war; and it is possible that we may shortly have a Republic of
South France.” I worked up this news into paragraphs, written in the
sense of the foregoing comment.
At 4 o’clock M. Gauthier, who comes from Chislehurst, called upon the
Chancellor.
_Tuesday, October 25th._--This morning the Chief said, in reference to
a statement in the _Pays_ mentioning an indemnity of three and a half
milliards: “Nonsense! I shall demand much more than that!”
During dinner the subject of “William Tell” was introduced, I cannot
now remember how, and the Minister confessed that, even as a boy, he
could not endure that character; first, because he shot at his own son,
and secondly, because he killed Gessler in a treacherous way. “It would
have been more natural and noble to my mind if, instead of shooting at
the boy, for after all the best archer might hit him instead of the
apple, he had immediately shot down the Governor. That would have been
legitimate wrath provoked by a cruel command. But the lurking and
skulking is not to my taste. It is not the proper style for a hero, not
even for franctireurs.”
Two copies of the _Nouvelliste_ are pasted up daily in different parts
of the town, and are read by the people, although, when a German passes
by, the group engaged in perusing them greets him with such criticisms
as, “_Mensonges!_” or “_Impossible!_” One of Stieber’s attendant
spirits, or some other guardian of the truth, caught a working man
to-day in the act of writing the word “Blague” on one of the copies
posted up in the neighbourhood of the Prefecture. It is said that he is
to be transported to Germany.
_Wednesday, October 26th._--In the morning I translated Granville’s
despatch for the King, and afterwards prepared an abstract of it for
the press. The latter was accompanied by the remark that we had already
twice offered the French an armistice on favourable terms, once through
Favre, and again, on the 9th of October, through Burnside, but that
they would not accept it because we desired it. Then telegraphed to
London that Thiers is receiving a safe conduct to our headquarters and
permission to proceed thence to Paris. Also that the Comte de Chambord
had a meeting at Coppet with the Comte de Paris.
In the evening I wrote another article on the instructions of the Chief
to the following effect. It is rumoured that Vienna diplomacy has again
taken steps to induce the Germans to grant an armistice. We find it
difficult to credit this report. The only advantage to the French of an
armistice at the present moment would be to strengthen their resistance
and to render it more difficult for us to enforce the conditions which
we recognise as essential. Can that be the object Austria has in view
in taking this measure? The following considerations are of an obvious
nature. If the authorities in Vienna deprive us of the fruits of our
victory, if we are prevented from securing that safe western frontier
which we are striving to win, a new war with France is unavoidable, or
rather the continuation of the one thus interrupted. It is quite clear
where in such circumstances France would seek allies and probably find
them. It is equally certain that in that case Germany would not wait
until the recovery of France from her present chaotic condition, which
would be promoted by a cessation of the war now in progress. Germany
would be obliged to deal first with this future ally of France and
to seek to render it powerless, and the latter standing alone would
have to bear the cost of its own act in preventing us from attaining
our present object. In other words, it might then happen that Austria
would have to compensate us by the cession of Bohemia for the loss of
Lorraine, which it once before alienated from the German Empire.
_Friday, October 28th._--In the afternoon Moltke sent the Chief a
telegram which reported that the capitulation of Metz was signed to-day
at 12.45 P.M. The French army thus made prisoners number in all 173,000
men, including 16,000 sick and wounded. Bennigsen, Friedenthal, and Von
Blankenburg, a friend of the Chancellor’s in his youth, joined us at
dinner. From the French officers captured at Metz and their approaching
transportation to Germany, the conversation turned upon General Ducrot
and his disgraceful escape from Pont à Mousson. The Minister said: “He
has written me a long letter explaining that there is no foundation for
the charge of breach of faith we have brought against him, but he has
not materially modified my view of the case.” The Chief then related
that recently an “intermediary of Gambetta’s” had called upon him, and
that towards the close of the conversation he asked whether we would
recognise the Republic. “I replied,” continued the Chief, “certainly,
without any doubt or hesitation. Not only the Republic, but, if you
like, a Gambetta dynasty; only it must secure us the advantages of a
safe peace.” “Or for the matter of that any dynasty, whether it be a
Bleichröder or a Rothschild one.”
The _Nouvelliste_ is to be stopped, and to be replaced by a journal of
larger size bearing the title, _Moniteur Officiel de Seine et Oise_,
which will be published at the expense of the Government.
_Saturday, October 29th._--At dinner our great success at Metz was
discussed. “That exactly doubles the number of our prisoners,” said
the Minister--“no, it does more. We now have in Germany the army which
Napoleon had in the field at the time of the battles of Weissenburg,
Wörth, and Saarbrücken, with the exception of those whom we killed.
The troops which the French now have were afterwards brought from
Algiers and Rome, and newly recruited, together with a few thousand men
under Vinoy who made off before Sedan. We have also nearly all their
generals.” The Chief then said Napoleon had requested that Marshals
Bazaine, Lebœuf, and Canrobert, who had been taken at Metz, should be
sent to him at Wilhelmshöhe. The Minister added: “That would make a
whist party. I have no objection, and shall recommend the King to do
so.” He then went on to say that so many extraordinary events which
no one could have imagined previously were now of daily occurrence
that one might regard the most wonderful as being within the range of
possibility. “Amongst other things it might well happen that we should
hold a German Reichstag in Versailles, while Napoleon might summon the
Legislative Chamber and the Senate to Cassel to consider the terms of
peace. Napoleon is convinced that the former representative body is
still legally in existence, an opinion against which there is little
to be said, and that he could summon it to meet wherever he liked--of
course, however, only in France. Cassel would be a debatable question.”
The Chief then said that he had invited the representatives of the
parties “with whom it is possible to discuss matters”--Friedenthal,
Bennigsen, and Blankenburg--to come here in order to ascertain their
views respecting a session of our Parliament at Versailles. “I was
obliged to omit the Progressist party, as they only desire what is not
possible. They are like Russians, who eat cherries in winter and want
oysters in summer. When a Russian goes into a shop he asks for _Kaknje
bud_, that is to say, for what does not exist.”
After the first course Prince Albrecht, the father, came in and took a
seat on the Chief’s right. The old gentleman, like a genuine Prussian
Prince, always gallant and loyal to his duty, has pressed forward
with his cavalry beyond Orleans. He tells us that the engagement in
Châteaudun was “horrible.” He warmly praised the Duke of Meiningen, who
had also shirked no danger or privation. On this the Chief remarked:
“I have nothing to say against Princes who go with the army and as
officers and leaders share the dangers and hardships of the soldiers.
But I should prefer to see those who loaf around here at Pückler’s
expense, and who are mere spectators of the man-hunt, anywhere rather
than at headquarters. It is all the more unpleasant to me to have them
here, as they storm me with questions and force wise counsels upon
me respecting matters that are in course of development and which are
now being worked out.”... “May I ask,” said the Prince (doubtless to
get away from this subject), “how the Countess is?” “Oh, she is quite
well,” replied the Chief, “now that our son is better. She still
suffers from her ferocious hatred of the Gauls, all of whom she would
wish to see shot and stabbed to death, down to the little babies--who
after all cannot help having such abominable parents.”
CHAPTER XI
THIERS AND THE FIRST NEGOTIATIONS FOR AN ARMISTICE AT VERSAILLES
On the morning of the 30th of October, while taking a walk along the
Avenue de Saint Cloud, I met Bennigsen, who was to start for home with
Blankenburg in a few days. On my asking what progress had been made
in Germany with the question of unity he said that the prospects were
very good. The only point which the Bavarians still insisted upon was a
certain degree of independence for their army. The feeling amongst the
majority of the people was all that could be desired.
On my return to the house a little after 10 o’clock Engel told me
that Thiers had arrived shortly before, but had left again almost
immediately. He had come from Tours, and had only called to get a safe
conduct through our lines, as he wished to go to Paris. Hatzfeldt had
breakfasted with Thiers at the Hôtel des Reservoirs, and afterwards
saw him into the carriage, in which, accompanied by Lieutenant von
Winterfeldt, he was conducted to the French outposts. He told us at
lunch that Thiers “still remained the same bright witty old gentleman,
but was weak as a baby.” Hatzfeldt had been the first to recognise
him on his calling at our place, and told him that the Chief was
just getting up. He then showed him into the salon, and informed the
Minister, who hastily finished his toilet and shortly afterwards came
down. They were, however, only together alone for a few minutes, the
Chief then instructing Hatzfeldt to make the necessary preparations for
Thiers’ visit to Paris. The Minister afterwards told Hatzfeldt that
Thiers said to him immediately after they had exchanged greetings, that
he had not come to speak to him. “That strikes me as quite natural,”
added Hatzfeldt, “as although Thiers would like to conclude peace
with us (just because it would be Thiers’ peace, since he is terribly
ambitious) he does not know what the people in Paris would say to it.”
In the meantime the Chief had ridden off with his cousin to the review
of 9,000 Landwehr Guards which was being held this morning by the King.
At lunch the Chief referred to the Landwehr, who had arrived that
morning, and said they were tall, broad-shouldered fellows, who must
have impressed the people of Versailles. “The front of one of their
companies is at least five feet broader than that of a French company,
particularly in the Pomeranian Landwehr.” The Minister then turned to
Hatzfeldt, and said: “I hope you have not mentioned anything about Metz
to Thiers.” “No, and he also said nothing about it, although there is
no doubt that he knows.” “He certainly does, but I did not speak about
it either.” Hatzfeldt then observed once more that Thiers was very
charming in his manner, but had lost nothing of his old vanity and
self-complacency. As evidence of this Hatzfeldt mentioned that Thiers
had told him that a few days before he met a peasant whom he asked
whether he desired to see peace concluded. “Certainly, very much.”
“Whether he knew who he (Thiers) was?” “No,” the peasant replied, and
appealed to a neighbour who had come on the scene, and who passed as
the oldest inhabitant. This ancient was of opinion that M. Thiers must
be a member of the Chamber. Hatzfeldt added, “It was obvious that
Thiers was angry at not being better known.”
The Chief went out for a moment, and brought back a case containing
a gold pen, which a jeweller of Pforzheim presented to him for the
purpose of signing the Treaty of Peace.
At dinner the Chief again spoke at some length of the possibility of
holding a Session of the German Reichstag at Versailles, while the
French Legislative Chamber should at the same time meet at Cassel.
Delbrück observed that the hall of the Diet at Cassel would not be
large enough for such an assembly. “Well then,” said the Chief, “the
Senate could meet somewhere else--in Marburg or Fritzlar, or some
similar town.”
_Monday, October 31st._--In the morning wrote some articles, one of
which advocated the idea of an international court for the trial of
those who had instigated this war against us. Also directed attention
to the case of M. Hermieux, the commandant of a French battalion, who
like Ducrot had broken his word by making his escape from hospital, and
whose description was now published in the newspapers.
Gauthier called again at 12 o’clock, and had another long interview
with the Chief.
Hatzfeldt announced at tea that on paying a visit early in the evening
at the Hôtel des Reservoirs he learned by accident that M. Thiers
had returned, and he had afterwards spoken to him. Thiers informed
him that on the day before he had been engaged from 10 o’clock at
night until 3 in the morning in negotiating with the members of the
Provisional Government; he rose again at 6 A.M. and from that time
until 2 in the afternoon received visitors of all descriptions, after
which he drove back here. He wishes to have a conference with the
Chancellor to-morrow. “He began to speak of disturbances having taken
place yesterday in Paris,” continued Hatzfeldt, “but on an exclamation
of surprise escaping me he immediately changed the subject.”
In the evening I was instructed to see that the decree addressed to
Vogel von Falkenstein and published in the _Staatsanzeiger_ of the 27th
instant, was reproduced by our other papers. It was to be accompanied
by a collection of newspaper reports respecting the ill-treatment
of German prisoners by the French. I then began a second article
against Beust’s intervention in our quarrel with the French, based
on the suggestions of the Chief, who said it was to be “very sharply
worded.” This however was not sent off, as the situation altered in the
meantime. I reproduce the article here as being characteristic of the
position of affairs at the moment. It ran as follows:--
“If in a struggle between two Powers, one of whom proves obviously
weaker and is at length on the point of being defeated, a third Power,
which has hitherto been neutral, urges an armistice, its motive must
certainly be regarded less as a benevolent desire for the welfare
of both parties than as anxiety for the weaker State and as evident
partisanship in favour of the same. It is, in fact, an armistice in
favour of the Power that is on the point of being defeated, and to the
disadvantage of that which has won the upper hand. If this third Power
furthermore endeavours to induce other neutral States to take similar
action, thus strengthening and giving more weight to its own proposal,
then it is clearly departing still further from a neutral attitude.
Its one-sided warnings are transformed into partisan pressure, its
proceedings become intrigues, and its whole action presents an
appearance of threatened violence.
“This is the case with Austria-Hungary if it be true, as the Vienna
official organs boast, that it has taken the initiative in an attempt
of the neutral Powers to negotiate an armistice between defeated France
and victorious Germany. The conduct of Count Beust becomes more clearly
offensive when it is known that it was suggested by M. Chaudordy,
Favre’s representative at Tours, and originated in a previous
understanding between the Vienna Cabinet and the Delegation of the
Provisional Government in that city. The true character of this action
on the part of Austro-Hungarian diplomacy as a hostile interference in
our settlement with France becomes more manifest from the manner in
which its representative in Berlin supports the English suggestions.
The British Foreign Office adopts a tone of perfect impartiality, and
of benevolence towards Germany; the Italians do the same, while the
Russian representative has kept entirely aloof from all intervention.
All three Powers have done their utmost at Tours to promote an
unprejudiced and reasonable view of the situation on the part of the
French. On the other hand, the despatches read by Herr von Wimpffen
in Berlin (we do not know what Austria-Hungary has advised at Tours)
speak in a tone which is anything but friendly. They emphasise the
statement that Vienna still believes in general European interests. The
authorities there fear that history would condemn the neutral Powers
if the catastrophe which is threatening Paris were to occur without a
voice being raised on their part to avert it. It is evidently intended
as a severe and offensive censure when they say humanity demands that
the conditions of peace should be made less onerous for the vanquished,
but that Germany will not permit any voice to reach the ears of its
defeated foe except that which proclaims the commands of the victor.
The whole despatch is characterised throughout by a vein of irony which
distinguishes it in a manner little to its advantage from that of the
English Government.
“From all these circumstances it is as clear that the action of
Count Beust is guided by hostile intentions towards us as that Lord
Granville’s attitude is based on good will. We wonder if the Vienna
Chancellor well considered the possible consequences of this new
manœuvre. It is not probable after the fall of Metz that the attempt
made by Austria to hinder Germany in the complete attainment of that
peace which we have in view with the object of securing a safe Western
frontier will be successful. But we shall remember that attempts to
prejudice our interests and the good impression made in Germany by
the previous neutrality of Austria-Hungary will be destroyed, and a
friendly _rapprochement_ with the dual monarchy, a basis for which
was being laid, will be postponed--probably for a considerable time.
But let us consider another possibility. Take it that through the
intervention of Count Beust the demands which we make upon France are
curtailed, and that we are actually obliged to renounce a portion of
the old and new debts which we are on the point of collecting--does the
Chancellor of the Austro-Hungarian Empire believe that we shall not
remember at the first opportunity to make our ill-disposed neighbour
on the South-East compensate us for what he helped to deprive us of in
the West? Does he believe that we shall foolishly put off the day of
reckoning with a neighbour who takes every opportunity of displaying
his hostility, until his French _protégé_ has recovered sufficiently to
give him the support of a more valuable alliance in gratitude for the
assistance given against Germany?”
_Tuesday, November 1st._--At dinner Bohlen reported that the Coburger
is doing his utmost to create a feeling of discontent--he says nothing
happens, nothing is being done, no progress is being made. “What! He!”
exclaimed the Chief, with an indescribable expression of contempt on
his features. “He should be ashamed of himself. These Princes that
follow the army like a flight of vultures! These carrion crows, who
themselves do nothing whatever except inspect the battle-fields, &c.”
Some one then spoke of the last engagement, and said that a portion of
the 1200 prisoners that had been taken were franctireurs. “Prisoners!”
broke in the Chief, who still seemed to be extremely angry. “Why do
they continue to make prisoners? They should have shot down the whole
1200 one after the other.”
Mention was made of the decree of the Minister of War or of the
Commandant of the Town, ordering that particulars should be published
of all valuables found in houses deserted by their owners, and that if
not reclaimed within a certain time they were to be confiscated for
the benefit of the war chest. The Minister said that he considered
this decree to be perfectly justified, adding: “As a matter of fact
such houses should be burned to the ground, only that punishment
would also fall in part on the sensible people who have remained
behind; and so unfortunately it is out of the question.” The Chief then
observed, after a pause, and apparently without any connection with
what had been previously said: “After all, war is, properly speaking,
the natural condition of humanity.” He remained silent for a while,
and then remarked: “It just occurs to me that the Bavarian proposes
to surprise me to-day,” by which he meant that Count Bray was about
to visit him. This led the conversation to the Bavarian Ambassador in
Berlin, Pergler von Perglas, of whom the Chief does not appear to have
a high opinion. “He is as bad as he can be. I do not say that because
he is a Particularist, as I do not know how I should think myself if I
were a Bavarian. But he has always been in favour of the French.” (The
Minister maintained, if I heard him rightly, that this was owing to his
wife.) “I never tell him anything when he comes to me, or at least not
the truth.”
Shortly afterwards the Chief told us that Thiers had been with him for
about three hours to-day with the object of negotiating an armistice.
Probably however it would not be possible to come to an understanding
as to the conditions which he proposes or is prepared to grant. Once
during the conversation Thiers wished to speak of the supply of
provisions now in Paris; but the Minister interrupted him, saying,
“Excuse me, but we know that better than you who have only been in the
city for one day. Their store of provisions is sufficient to last until
the end of January.” “What a look of surprise he gave me! My remark was
only a feeler, and his astonishment showed that what I had said was not
true.”
At dessert the Minister spoke of the large quantity he had eaten. “But
then it is my only meal. It is true I take breakfast, but then it is
merely a cup of tea without milk and two eggs,--and after that nothing
till evening. Then I over-eat myself, like a boa-constrictor, and can’t
sleep. Even as a child, and ever since that time, I have always gone
to bed late, never before midnight. I usually fall asleep quickly, but
wake soon again and find that it is not more than half-past 1 o’clock.
All sorts of things then come into my head, particularly if I have been
unfairly treated,--and that must be all thought out. I afterwards write
letters, and even despatches, but of course without getting up--simply
in my head. Formerly, for some time after my appointment as Minister, I
used to get up and actually write them down. When I read them over next
morning however they were worth nothing,--mere platitudes, confused
trivial stuff such as might have appeared in the _Vossische Zeitung_,
or might have been composed by his Serene Highness of Weimar. I do not
want to, I should prefer to sleep. But the thinking and planning goes
on. At the first glimmer of dawn I fall off again, and then sleep till
10 o’clock or even later.”
_Wednesday, November 2nd._--On returning from a long walk at about
4.30 P.M. I heard that Thiers had remained with the Chief until a
few minutes before, and looked rather pleased on taking his leave.
During dinner the Minister observed, referring to his visitor of
to-day: “He is a clever and amiable man, bright and witty, but
with scarcely a trace of the diplomatist--too sentimental for that
trade.” “He is unquestionably a finer nature than Favre. But he is
no good as a negotiator (_Unterhändler_)--not even as a horsedealer
(_Pferdehändler_).” “He is too easily bluffed, betrays his feelings,
and allows himself to be pumped. Thus I have ascertained all sorts of
things from him, amongst others that they have only full rations in
Paris for three or four weeks.”
With respect to our attitude towards the approaching French elections,
I called attention in the press to the following example, which may
decide us to exclude Alsace-Lorraine from the voting, and to which we
can refer those who allege such an exclusion to be unprecedented. An
American informs us that in the last war between the United States
and Mexico an armistice was agreed upon with the object of giving
the Mexicans time to choose a new Government, which should conclude
peace with the United States. The provinces, the cession of which was
demanded by the United States, were not permitted to take part in
this election. This is the sole precedent, but it entirely covers the
present case.
_Thursday, November 3rd._--A fine bright morning. Already at 7 A.M.
the iron lions on Mont Valérien began to fill the surrounding wooded
valleys with their roaring.
I make abstracts for the King of two articles that appeared in the
_Morning Post_ of the 28th and 29th of October, which are understood
to have come from Persigny or Prince Napoleon. The assertion in these
articles that in the negotiations with the delegate of the Empress our
demand extended only to Strassburg, and a narrow strip of land in the
Saar district, with about a quarter of a million inhabitants, is (the
Chief tells me) based on a misunderstanding.
I am instructed to telegraph that in consequence of yesterday’s
negotiations the Chancellor has offered M. Thiers a truce of
twenty-five days on the basis of the military _status quo_. Thiers
returned at 12 o’clock, and negotiated with the Chief until 2.30 P.M.
The demands of the French are exorbitant. At lunch we hear that in
addition to a twenty-eight days’ armistice for the elections and the
meeting of the National Assembly thus chosen to determine the position
of the Provisional Government, they demand nothing less than the right
to provision Paris and all other fortresses held by them and besieged
by us, and the participation of the Eastern provinces, of which we
require the cession in the elections. Ordinary logic finds it difficult
to conceive how the provisioning of fortresses can be deemed consistent
with the maintenance of the military _status quo_.
Amongst other subjects discussed at dinner were the elections in
Berlin. Delbrück was of opinion that they would be more favourable
than hitherto. Jacoby, at any rate, would not be re-elected. Count
Bismarck-Bohlen thought otherwise. He anticipated no change. The
Chancellor said: “The Berliners must always be in opposition and have
their own ideas. They have their virtues--many and highly estimable
ones--they fight well, but they would not consider themselves to be as
clever as they ought to be unless they knew everything better than the
Government.” That failing, however, was not confined to Berliners, the
Chief added. All great cities were much the same in that respect, and
many were even worse than Berlin. They were in general more unpractical
than the rural districts, where people were in closer contact with
nature, and thus not only got into a more natural and practical way
of thinking. “Where great numbers of men are crowded together they
easily lose their individuality and dissolve into one mass. All sorts
of opinions are in the air, they arise from hearsay and repetition,
and are little or not at all founded on facts, but are propagated by
the newspapers, popular meetings and conversations over beer, and then
remain firmly, immutably rooted. It is a sort of false second nature,
a faith or superstition held collectively by the masses. They reason
themselves into believing in something that does not exist, consider
themselves in duty bound to hold to that belief, and wax enthusiastic
over narrow-minded and grotesque ideas. That is the case in all
great cities, in London for instance, where the cockneys are quite a
different race to other Englishmen--in Copenhagen, in New York, and
above all in Paris. The Parisians, with their political superstitions,
are quite a distinct people in France,--they are caught and bound up in
a circle of ideas which are a sacred tradition to them, although when
closely examined they turn out to be mere empty phrases.”
So far as Thiers was concerned, the Minister only told us that shortly
after the commencement of their conference to-day he suddenly asked him
whether he had obtained the authority necessary for the continuance of
the negotiations. “He looked at me in astonishment, on which I said
that news had been received at our outposts of a revolution having
broken out in Paris since his departure, and that a new Government
had been proclaimed. He was visibly perturbed, from which it may
be inferred that he considers a victory of the Red Republicans as
possible, and the position of Favre and Trochu as insecure.”
Thiers was again with the Chief from 9 o’clock till after 10.
_Friday, November 4th._--Beautiful bright morning. At the desire of
the Minister I send the _Daily News_ an account of his conversation
with Napoleon at Donchery. He had principally conversed with the
Emperor within the weaver’s house, upstairs--for about three-quarters
of an hour--and spent but a short time with him in the open air,
as the Minister himself stated in his official report to the King.
Furthermore, in speaking to Napoleon, he had not pointed the forefinger
of the left hand into the palm of his right, which was not at all
a habit of his. He had not once made use of the German language in
speaking to the Emperor--he had never done so, and also not on that
occasion. “I did, however,” the Minister continued, “speak German to
the people of the house, as the man understood a little and the woman
spoke it very well.”
From 11 o’clock onwards Thiers conferred once more with the Chancellor.
He yesterday sent his companion, a M. Cochery, back to Paris, to
ascertain if the Government of the 4th of September still existed. The
answer appears to have been in the affirmative.
Bamberger dined with us. The Chief said, amongst other things: “I see
that some newspapers hold me responsible that Paris has not yet been
bombarded. I do not want anything serious to be done, I object to a
bombardment. Nonsense! They will ultimately make me responsible for
our losses during the siege, which are certainly already considerable,
as we have probably lost more men in these small engagements than a
general attack would have cost us. I wanted the city to be stormed at
once, and have all along desired that to be done--or it would have been
still better to have left Paris on one side and continued our march.”
Thiers was once more with the Chief from 9 P.M. until after 11 o’clock.
While they were conferring a telegram arrived announcing that Beust has
abandoned his former attitude in so far as he declares that if Russia
raises objections to the Prussian demands upon France, Austria will do
the same, but otherwise not. This telegram was at once sent in to the
Chief.
_Saturday, November 5th._--About 1 o’clock there was a short conference
between the Chancellor, Delbrück, and other German Ministers. We
afterwards ascertained that the Chief reported the result of his
negotiations with Thiers, and also announced the impending arrival of
the German Sovereigns not yet represented at Versailles.
On our sitting down to dinner Delbrück was at first the only Minister
present. Later on we were joined by the Chancellor, who had dined with
the King. While Engel was pouring him out a glass of spirits the Chief
recalled a pretty dictum. Recently a general (if I am not mistaken it
was at Ferrières, and I fancy I heard the name of the great thinker,
Moltke), speaking of the various beverages of mankind, laid down the
following principle:--“Red wine for children, champagne for men, and
brandy for generals.”
The Chancellor, who had been dining with the King, joined us in the
evening and complained to Delbrück of the way in which he had been
beset at the King’s quarters by the Princes, who prevented him from
discussing something of importance with Kutusow. “I really could
not talk to him properly. The Serene Highnesses fluttered about me
like crows round a screech-owl, and tore me away from him. Each of
them seemed to delight in being able to buttonhole me longer than
the others. At length I asked Prince Charles if he could not get his
brother-in-law to wait until I had finished what I had to say to
Kutusow, as it was an important matter of State. But although I have
often spoken to him previously in the same sense he did not seem to
understand me, and the end of it was that he took offence.”... “At
last they heard that the leg or the back of the old coronation chair
had been discovered in one of the other rooms, and they all trooped
off to inspect the wonder, while I took this opportunity to bolt.” At
that moment a despatch was delivered stating that Favre and the other
members of the Government in Paris had once more got on the high horse,
and proclaimed that they would not hear of a cession of territory,
and that their sole task was the defence of the fatherland. The Chief
observed: “Well, then, we need not negotiate any further with Thiers.”
Later on the Minister said that Thiers probably still intended to write
another historical work. “Time after time he spins out our negotiation
by introducing irrelevant matters. He relates what has occurred or been
advised here and there, inquires as to the attitude of this or that
person, and what would have happened in such and such circumstances.
He reminded me of a conversation I had with the Duc de Bauffremont in
the year 1867, in the course of which I said that in 1866 the Emperor
had not understood how to take advantage of the situation, that he
could have done a good stroke of business although not on German soil,
&c. Roughly that is quite correct. I remember it very well. It was in
the gardens of the Tuileries, and a military band was playing. In the
summer of 1866 Napoleon lacked courage to do what he ought to have
done from his point of view. When we attacked Austria he should have
occupied ----, the object of the Benedetti proposal, and held it as a
pledge. We could not have prevented him at that time, and most probably
England would not have stirred--in any case he could have waited. If
the _coup_ succeeded he might have placed himself back to back with
us, encouraging us to further aggression. But (turning to Delbrück,
first leaning a little forward and then sitting straight upright, a
habit of his on such occasions), he is and remains a muddle-headed
fellow.”
Thiers, after having had a conversation with Favre and Ducrot on the
bridge of Sèvres, returned and had another conference with the Chief
which lasted from 8.30 to 9.30. Favre and Ducrot had declared that our
conditions for an armistice could not be accepted, but that they would
ascertain the opinions of their colleagues, and bring Thiers a definite
answer to-morrow.
_Sunday, November 6th._--The Chief read to us at dinner a portion of
his wife’s letter which was to the following effect:--“I fear you will
not be able to find a Bible in France, and so I shall shortly send
you the Psalms in order that you may read the prophecies against the
French--‘I tell thee, the godless shall be destroyed!’” The Minister
had also received a “despairing letter” from Count Herbert, whose
wound was now healed, because he had been transferred to a depôt. “He
says that all he has had out of the whole war has been a fortnight’s
ride with his regiment and then three months on his back. I wished to
see whether anything could be done, and to-day I met the Minister of
War. He dissuaded me, however, with tears in his eyes--he had once
interfered in a similar way and lost his son in consequence.”
_Monday, November 7th._--Early in the morning the Chief instructs me
to telegraph to London: “In the negotiations with M. Thiers, which
lasted for five days, he was offered an armistice of any duration up
to twenty-eight days on the basis of the military _status quo_, for
the purpose of holding elections, which should also be allowed to take
place in the portions of France occupied by the German troops; or, as
an alternative, our assistance and sanction for holding the elections
without a truce. After a renewed conference with the Paris Government
at the outposts, M. Thiers was not authorised to accept either of
these offers. He demanded first of all permission to provision Paris,
without offering any military equivalent. As this proposal could not
be accepted by the Germans on military grounds, M. Thiers yesterday
received instructions from Paris to break off the negotiations.”
The following particulars have been ascertained from other sources: The
instruction referred to, was received by Thiers in the form of a curt
letter from Favre desiring him to return to Tours, whither he has gone,
to-day. The Chancellor tells me that Thiers was very depressed at the
foolish obstinacy of the Paris Government, of which both he himself and
several of the Ministers disapprove. Favre and Picard, particularly
the latter, are desirous of peace, but are too weak to withstand the
opposition of the others. Gambetta and Trochu will not hear of the
elections, which would in all probability put an end to their rule.
I write articles to the following effect: We were prepared to do
everything possible, but all our concessions were rejected owing to the
ambition of MM. Favre and Trochu, who do not want to be forced by the
true representatives of the French people to give up the power which
fell into their hands through an insurrection. It is that ambition
alone which prolongs the war. We, on the other hand, have shown that we
desire peace, by carrying our complaisance to the utmost point.
The postponement of the bombardment was again discussed at dinner. The
Chancellor said he could not understand the absurd rumour circulated
in the newspapers, to the effect that he was opposed to the bombardment
while the military authorities were pressing for it. “Exactly the
contrary is the case. No one is more urgent in favour of it than I am,
and it is the military authorities who hesitate. A great deal of my
correspondence is taken up in dispelling the scruples and excessive
circumspection of the military people. It appears that the artillery
are constantly requiring more time for preparation and particularly a
larger supply of ammunition. At Strassburg, they also asked for much
more than was necessary, as notwithstanding the foolish waste of powder
and shell, two-thirds of the supply collected was never used.” Alten
objected that even if the forts in question were captured they would
be then subjected to the fire from the enceinte, and we should have to
begin over again. “That may be,” said the Minister, “but they ought to
have known that sooner, as there was no fortress we knew so much about
from the commencement as Paris.”
Somebody remarked that in the two balloons that had been seized five
persons had been taken prisoners. The Chief considered that they ought
to be treated as spies without any lengthy deliberation. Alten said
they would be brought up before a court-martial, whereupon the Minister
exclaimed, “Well, nothing will happen to them there!” He then observed
how stout and strong Count Bill was. At his age he himself was slight
and thin. “At Göttingen I was as thin as a knitting-needle.” Mention
having been made of the circumstance that the sentry posted outside
the villa occupied by the Crown Prince had been shot at and wounded
the night before, and that the town would be obliged to pay him five
thousand francs as compensation, the Chief said that in going out in
the evening he would not take his sword but rather a revolver--“as
although in certain circumstances I should be quite willing to let
myself be murdered, I should not like to die unavenged.”
After dinner I was instructed by the Chancellor to again telegraph an
account of the negotiations with Thiers, only in a somewhat different
form. On my venturing to observe that the contents of the despatch had
been telegraphed in the morning he replied, “Not quite accurately;
you see here ‘Count Bismarck proposed, &c.’ You must notice such fine
shades if you want to work in the first Foreign Office of the world.”
_Tuesday, November 8th._--In the morning I sent off a telegram stating
that the prisoners taken in the balloons have been transported to
a Prussian fortress in order to be tried there by court-martial.
Furthermore that the confiscated letters compromised diplomats and
other personages who have been permitted to remain in communication
with the outer world out of consideration for their position and sense
of honour. Such communication would no longer be tolerated.
At about 12.30 P.M., while we were at lunch, the Chief received a
visit from Archbishop Ledochowski of Posen, and it was understood that
his business was to submit an offer of the Pope to intervene with the
French Government. They probably hope in this way to purchase the
intervention of the German Government on behalf of the Holy Father.
The Archbishop remained till nearly 3 o’clock, and on his leaving
the Chief went to see the King. He subsequently took dinner at the
Crown Prince’s, where the Grand Duke of Baden, who had arrived in the
meantime, also dined.
Delbrück, General Chauvin, and Colonel Meidam, the officer in command
of the Field Telegraph, were the Chief’s guests at dinner. Mention
was made of the improper use of the telegraph wire by distinguished
personages for their private purposes.
After a while the Chancellor remarked: “I hear that the Augustenburger
also telegraphs. That really should not be. Nor has the Coburger any
right to do so. The telegraph is for military and diplomatic purposes,
and not for minor potentates to use for inquiries respecting their
kitchens, stables and theatres. None of them has any rights here. Their
rights ceased on passing the German frontier.”
On some one referring to the destruction of the telegraph wires and
other similar misconduct on the part of franctireurs and peasants near
Epernay, the Minister said: “They should have immediately sent three or
four battalions there, and transported six thousand peasants to Germany
until the conclusion of the war.”
Amongst other subjects discussed at tea was the rumour that the
postponement of the bombardment was in part due to the influence of
ladies, the Queen and the Crown Princess being mentioned in this
connection. The Chief was in the drawing-room engaged in conference
with the Bavarian General von Bothmer on the military question in
connection with the closer unification of Germany now in progress. The
Minister joined us afterwards, remaining for about an hour. On sitting
down he breathed a deep sigh and said: “I was thinking just now, what I
have indeed often thought before--If I could only for five minutes have
the power to say: ‘That must be done thus and in no other way!’--If one
were only not compelled to bother about the ‘why’ and the ‘wherefore,’
and to argue and plead for the simplest things!--Things made much more
rapid progress under men like Frederick the Great, who were generals
themselves and also knew something about administration, acting as
their own Ministers. It was the same with Napoleon. But here, this
eternal talking and begging!”
After a while the Chief said, with a laugh: “I have been busy to-day
educating princes.”
“How so, Excellency?” asked Hatzfeldt.
“Well, I have explained to various gentlemen at the Hôtel des
Reservoirs what is and what is not proper. I have given the Meininger
to understand through Stein that he is not to be allowed to use the
Field Telegraph for giving instructions about his kitchen garden and
theatre. And the Coburger is still worse. Never mind, the Reichstag
will set that right and put a stop to all that kind of thing. But only
I shall not be there.”
Hatzfeldt asked: “Has your Excellency seen that the Italians have
broken into the Quirinal?”
“Yes, and I am curious to know what the Pope will now do. Leave the
country? But where can he go? He has already requested us to ask the
Italians whether he would be allowed to leave and with fitting dignity.
We did so, and they replied that the utmost respect would be paid
to his position, and that their attitude would be governed by that
determination in case he desired to depart.”
“They would not like to see him go,” added Hatzfeldt; “it is in their
interests that he should remain in Rome.”
The Chief: “Yes, certainly. But perhaps he may be obliged to leave. But
where could he go? Not to France, because Garibaldi is there. He would
not like to go to Austria. To Spain? I suggested to him Bavaria.” The
Minister then reflected for a moment, after which he continued: “There
remains nothing for him but Belgium or North Germany. As a matter of
fact he has already asked whether we could grant him asylum. I have no
objection to it--Cologne or Fulda. It would be passing strange, but
after all not so very inexplicable, and it would be very useful to us
to be recognised by Catholics as what we really are, that is to say,
the sole power now existing that is capable of protecting the head
of their Church. Stofflet and Charette, together with their Zouaves,
could then go about their business. We should have the Poles on our
side. The opposition of the Ultramontanes would cease in Belgium and
Bavaria. Malinkrott would come over to the Government side. But the
King will not consent. He is terribly afraid. He thinks all Prussia
would be perverted, and he himself would be obliged to become a
Catholic. I told him, however, that if the Pope begged for asylum
he could not refuse it. He would have to grant it as ruler over ten
million Catholic subjects who would desire to see the head of their
Church protected. Besides, imaginative people, particularly women,
may possibly feel drawn towards Catholicism by the pomp and ritual of
St. Peter’s, with the Pope seated upon his throne and bestowing his
benediction. The danger would not be so great, however, in Germany,
where the people would see the Pope amongst them as a poor old man
seeking assistance--a good old gentleman, one of the Bishops, who ate
and drank like the rest, took his pinch of snuff, and even perhaps
smoked a cigar. And after all even if a few people in Germany became
Catholic again (I should certainly not do so) it would not matter much
so long as they remained believing Christians. The particular sect is
of no consequence, only the faith. People ought to be more tolerant in
their way of thinking.” The Chief then dilated on the comic aspect of
this migration of the Pope and his Cardinals to Fulda, and concluded:
“Of course the King could not see the humorous side of the affair. But
(smiling) if only the Pope remains true to me I shall know how to bring
his Majesty round.”
Some other subjects then came up. Hatzfeldt mentioned that his Highness
of Coburg had fallen from his horse. “Happily, however, without being
hurt,” hastily added Abeken, with a pleased expression. This led the
Chief to speak of similar accidents that had happened to himself.
“I believe I shall be more than within the mark in saying that I must
have fallen from horseback fifty times. It is nothing to be thrown from
your horse, but when the horse lies on top of you, then it’s a bad
case. The last time was at Varzin, when I broke three ribs. I thought
it was all up with me. It was not, however, so dangerous as it seemed,
but it was terribly painful.... But as a young man I had a remarkable
accident, which shows how our thinking powers are dependent upon the
brain. I was riding home one evening with my brother, and we were both
galloping as hard as our horses could go. Suddenly my brother, who
was in front, heard a fearful bang. It was my head that had struck
against the road. My horse had shied at a lantern in a cart coming in
the opposite direction, and reared so that he fell backwards, and I
tumbled on my head. At first I lost consciousness, and on returning to
my senses my power of thinking remained on some points quite clear,
but had quite deserted me on others. I examined my horse and found
that the saddle was broken, so I called the groom and rode home on his
horse. When the dogs there barked at me by way of greeting, I thought
they did not belong to us, got cross with them and drove them away.
Then I said the groom had fallen from his horse and they should send
a stretcher to bring in; and I got very angry when, taking their cue
from my brother, they showed no disposition to move. Were they going
to leave the unfortunate man lying in the road? I did not know that I
was myself and was at home, or rather I was both myself and the groom.
I asked for something to eat and afterwards went to bed. After having
slept through the night I woke up next morning all right again. It was
a strange case. I had examined the saddle, taken another horse, and so
forth. I had done everything that was practically required. In that
respect the fall had produced no confusion in my ideas. A singular
example which shows that the brain harbours various intellectual
powers--only one of these had remained stupefied by my fall for a
somewhat longer time.
“I well remember another incident of the kind. I was riding rapidly
through some young timber in a large wood a considerable distance from
home. As I was crossing over a hollow road the horse stumbled and
fell, and I lost consciousness. I must have lain there senseless for
about three hours, as it was already twilight by the time I stirred.
The horse was standing near me. As I said, the place was at a great
distance from our estate, and I was entirely unacquainted with the
district. I had not yet quite recovered my senses, but on this occasion
also I did what was necessary. I took off the martingale, which was
broken, and followed the road across a rather long bridge which, as I
then ascertained, was the nearest way to a farm in the neighbourhood.
The farmer’s wife ran away on seeing a big man standing before her
with his face all covered with blood. Her husband, however, came to me
and wiped away the blood. I told him who I was, and as I was hardly
fit for such a long ride home I asked him to drive me there, which he
accordingly did. I must have been shot fifteen feet out of the saddle
and fallen against the root of a tree. On the doctor examining my
injuries, he said it was against all the rules of his art that I had
not broken my neck.
“I have also been a couple of other times in danger of my life,”
continued the Chief. “For instance, before the Semmering railway was
finished (I believe it was in 1852) I went with a party through one of
the tunnels. It was quite dark inside. I went ahead with a lantern.
Now right across the floor of the tunnel was a rift or gully, which
must have been about fifteen feet deep and half as wide again as this
table. A plank was laid across it, with a raised skirting board on both
sides to prevent the wheelbarrows from slipping off. This plank must
have been rotten, as when I reached the middle it broke in two and I
fell down; but having probably involuntarily stretched out my arms, I
remained hanging on the skirting. The lantern having gone out, those
behind thought I had fallen into the gully, and were not a little
surprised when the reply to their question, ‘Are you still alive?’
instead of coming from the depths below came from just under their
feet. I answered, ‘Yes, here I am.’ I had in the meantime recovered
hold also with my feet, and I asked whether I should go on or come
back. The guide thought I had better go on to the other side, and so
I worked my way over. The workman who acted as our guide then struck
a light, got another plank, and brought the party across. That plank
was a good example of the slovenly way in which such things were
managed in Austria at that time; because I cannot believe that it
was intentional. I was not hated in Vienna then as I am now--on the
contrary.”
_Thursday, November 10th._--In the morning I am instructed by the Chief
to telegraph that great distress has been occasioned in France, and
that still more is to be anticipated, in consequence of the application
by the Provisional Government of Savings Bank funds for the relief of
the poor, and of the property of corporations, to military purposes.
I had permission to study the documents connected with the abortive
negotiations for an armistice.
Thiers had stated in a memorandum the principles which he, and the
French Government which he represented, regarded as a basis for the
proposed armistice. It was to the following effect: The object of the
understanding was to put an end as soon as possible to the bloodshed,
and to permit the convocation of a National Assembly which would
represent the will of France in dealing with the European Powers,
and be in a position sooner or later to conclude peace with Prussia
and her allies. The armistice must last for twenty-eight days, of
which twelve would be required for canvassing the constituencies, one
for the polling, five for the elected deputies to meet in some given
place, and ten for examining the returns and appointing the bureau
of the Assembly. Tours might for the present remain the seat of such
an Assembly. The elections must be allowed to take place free and
unhindered in all parts of France, including those occupied by the
Prussians. Military operations on both sides to cease, although both
parties would be at liberty to enlist recruits and proceed with works
of defence. The armies to be at liberty to obtain for themselves
supplies of provisions, but requisitions on the other hand to be
suspended as “constituting a military operation which should cease
together with other hostilities.” Moreover fortified places were to be
provisioned for the duration of the truce in proportion to the strength
of the population and garrison. For this purpose Paris to be allowed to
receive the following live stock and other provisions over four railway
lines to be determined: 34,000 bullocks, 80,000 sheep, 8,000 pigs,
5,000 calves, 100,000 metric centals of corned meat, 8,000,000 metric
centals of hay or straw as fodder for the cattle in question, 200,000
metric centals of flour, 30,000 metric centals of dried vegetables,
100,000 tons of coal, and 500,000 cubic metres of fire-wood. In these
calculations the population of Paris and its suburbs, including the
garrison of 400,000 men, was estimated at 2,700,000 to 2,800,000
inhabitants.
These demands on the part of the French could not be accepted. Had
we agreed to them we should have surrendered the greater and more
important portion of the advantages we had gained in the last seven
weeks, at the cost of great sacrifices and severe exertions. In
other words, we should in the main have returned to the position in
which we were on the 19th of September, the day on which our troops
completed the investment of Paris. We are asked to allow Paris to
provision itself, when even now it suffers from scarcity and will
shortly be obliged to starve or surrender. We are to suspend our
military operations just at the moment when the fall of Metz and the
release of the army of Prince Frederick Charles enable us to extend and
render them more effective. We are quietly to permit recruiting and
organisation, by means of which the French Republic is to create a new
field force, while we require no recruits. At the same time that we
are to allow Paris and the other French fortresses to supply themselves
with provisions, we are to provide for our own troops without the
requisitions which are necessary in an enemy’s country. We are to
make all these concessions without any military equivalent--such, for
instance, as the evacuation of one or two of the Paris forts in return
for the liberty to provision the city--and without being offered any
clear prospect of peace. The first object of the armistice according
to the Thiers memorandum, namely, the restoration of an orderly
state of affairs by the lawful election of a Constituent Assembly,
is unquestionably more in the interest of the French themselves than
in ours; and, considering the constant excitement maintained by the
inflammatory proclamations of the Provisional Government, it may
possibly not be secured even under a new administration. More orderly
conditions could be brought about even now without a truce if the
present Government were seriously disposed to work in that direction.
It was absolutely impossible on the German side to have anything
to do with such proposals. A different arrangement altogether was
needful, and therefore the Chancellor of the Confederation offered M.
Thiers a truce of twenty-five to twenty-eight days on the basis of
the maintenance of the military _status quo_, which would enable the
French to carry on the elections in peace, and to convoke the Assembly
thus constituted. This also was a concession on our part in which the
advantages were all on the French side. If, as Thiers asserted, Paris
was supplied with provisions and other necessaries for several months,
it is not easy to see why the Provisional Government broke off the
negotiations which, at the outside, would have prevented the Parisians
from making useless sorties. France, on the other hand, would have
had the great advantage of having a line of demarcation drawn which
would have arrested the advance of the German forces, restricting the
unopposed occupation of further districts by our army that had been
set free by the fall of Metz. In the meantime Thiers refused this
very acceptable offer, and maintained that the provisioning of Paris
was an indispensable condition for an understanding, while he was not
empowered to give any prospect of a military equivalent for the same,
such as the evacuation of one of the Paris forts.
On coming in to dinner, the Chief mentioned that the Minister of War is
seriously ill. He feels very weak, and will scarcely be able to rise
from his bed for a fortnight. The Count afterwards made some jokes
about the water supplied to us for washing. “The inhabitants of the
local reservoir,” he said, “seem to have their seasons. First came
the scolopendria, which are particularly distasteful to me, ‘moving
their thousand limbs together’ (Schiller’s Diver). Then followed the
wood lice, which I cannot bear to touch, although they are perfectly
harmless. I’d sooner grasp a snake. Now the leeches have arrived. I
found quite a small specimen to-day, doubled up into a button. I tried
to induce him to deploy, but he declined--remained a button. I then
poured some well water over him, and he stretched out straight, long
and thin like a needle, and made off with himself.” The conversation
then turned on a variety of simple but nevertheless estimable
delicacies, such as fresh and salt herrings, new potatoes, spring
butter, &c. The Minister observed to Delbrück, who also approved of
those good things: “The sturgeon is a fish which is also to be found
here, but it is not appreciated as it ought to be. In Russia they
recognise its good qualities. It is often caught in the Elbe in the
Magdeburg district, but is only eaten by fishermen and poor people.” He
then explained its good points, and thus came to speak of caviare, and
treated of the several varieties with the knowledge of a connoisseur.
“The fresh caviare which we now get in Berlin is very good,” he said,
“since it can be brought by rail from St. Petersburg in forty hours. I
have had it several times, and one of my principal complaints against
that fat Borck is that he intercepted forty pounds of this caviare
which I once sent to the King. I suspected something of the kind, as
the King made no mention of it, and did not send me any present in
return. Later on Perponcher or some one told me that on dropping in to
Borck’s room he saw there a barrel of caviare with a spoon standing in
it. That made me wild with him (_Das hat mir sehr verdrossen_).”
The Chief remarked at dinner: “To-day, again, I noticed when it snowed
how many points of resemblance there are between the Gauls and the
Slavs. The same broad streets, with the houses standing close together,
the same low roofs, as in Russia. The only thing wanting here is the
green onion-shaped steeple. But, on the other hand, the versts and
kilometres, the arsheens and metres are the same. And then the tendency
to centralisation, the uniformity of views of the whole population and
the communistic trait in the popular character.”
He then spoke of the wonderful “topsy turvy” world we live in nowadays.
“When one thinks that perhaps the Pope will shortly be residing in
a small town of Protestant Germany, that the Reichstag may meet in
Versailles, and the Corps Législatif in Cassel, that Garibaldi has
become a French general in spite of Mentana, and that Papal Zouaves are
fighting side by side with him!” He followed up this train of ideas for
some little time.
The Minister then remarked suddenly: “Metternich has also written to me
to-day. He wants me to allow Hoyos to enter Paris, in order that he may
bring away the Austrians. I replied that since the 25th of October they
have had permission to come out, but that we could allow no more people
to enter, not even diplomats. We also receive none in Versailles, but I
would make an exception in his favour. He will then perhaps again raise
the Austrians’ claims respecting the property of the old Bund in the
German fortresses.”
On the subject of doctors, and the way in which nature sometimes
comes to its own assistance, the Chief related that he was once with
a shooting party for two days at the Duke of ----. “I was thoroughly
out of sorts. Even the two days’ shooting and fresh air did me no
good. On the third day I visited the Cuirassiers at Brandenburg, who
had received a new cup. I was to be the first one to drink out of it,
thus dedicating it, and then it was to go the round of the table. It
held nearly a bottle. I made my speech, however, drank and set it
down empty, to the great surprise of the officers, who had but a poor
opinion of mere quill-drivers. That was the result of my Göttingen
training. And strangely, or perhaps naturally enough, it set me all
right again. On another occasion, when I was shooting at Letzlingen
in the time of Frederick William IV. the guests were asked to drink
from an old puzzle goblet. It was a stag’s horn, which contained about
three-quarters of a bottle of wine, and was so made that one could
not bring it close to the lips, yet one was not allowed to spill a
drop. I took it and drank it off at a draught, although it was very
cold champagne, and not a single drop fell on my white waistcoat.
Everybody was immensely surprised; but I said, ‘Give me another.’ The
King, however, who evidently did not appreciate my success, called out
‘No, no more.’ Such tricks were formerly an indispensable part of the
diplomat’s trade. They drank the weaker vessels under the table, wormed
all they wanted to know out of them, made them agree to things which
were contrary to their instructions, or for which, at least, they had
no authority. Then they were compelled to put their signatures at once,
and afterwards when they got sober they could not imagine how they had
done it.”
Bismarck-Bohlen, who seemed to be particularly communicative to-day,
told the following anecdote about the Chief. At Commercy a woman
came to him to complain that her husband, who had tried to strike a
hussar with a spade, had been arrested. “The Minister listened to
her very amiably, and when she had done he replied in the kindliest
manner possible, ‘Well, my good woman, you can be quite sure that your
husband’ (drawing a line round his neck with his finger) ‘will be
presently hanged.’”
_Saturday, November 12th._--While we were at lunch the Chief was out.
He shortly afterwards passed through the dining-room into the saloon,
accompanied by a bearded officer in a Prussian uniform, the Grand Duke
of Baden.
In about ten minutes the Chief returned to table. He was very angry and
indignant, and said: “This is really too bad! No peace from these Grand
Dukes even at one’s meals. They will eventually force their way into
one’s bedroom. That must be put a stop to. It is not so in Berlin.
There the people who want something from me announce their visits in
writing, and I fix a suitable time for them to call. Why should it not
be the same here?”
After a while the Chief said to one of the attendants who was waiting
upon us, “Remember in future in such cases to say that I am not at
home. Whoever brings any visitor to me unannounced will be put under
arrest and sent off to Berlin;” and after eating a few mouthfuls more,
he went on: “As if it were anything of importance! But merely curiosity
and a desire to kill time. He shall see, however, I will shortly pay
him a surprise visit on some official matter, so that he cannot send me
away....”
The conversation then turned on Roon’s asthma, which according to
Lauer is now improving. His rage at the appearance of the Grand Duke
during the dinner hour still visibly affected the Chief, who asked
Lauer, “What should one drink with marena when in a bad temper?” and on
Lauer recommending something the name of which I could not catch, the
Minister continued: “It upsets my digestion when anything exasperates
me at meals; and here I have had good reason to be angry. They think
that one is only made for their use.” Then addressing the servant again
the Chief said: “Mind you send away the red lackeys, and say that I am
not at home. Remember that! And you, Karl (to Bohlen), must take care
that this is done.”
The name of Arnim Boitzenburg, the former Minister, then came up. The
Chancellor said he had been his chief at Aix-la-Chapelle, and he went
on to describe him as “amiable, clever, but unstable and incapable of
persistent or energetic action. He was like an india-rubber ball that
bounces again and again, but each time with diminishing force until at
length it ceases to move. He first had an opinion, then weakened it by
arguing against it himself, and went on criticising his own criticism,
until at last there was nothing left and nothing done.”
Delbrück praised the son-in-law (Harry Arnim) as being well-informed
and intelligent, though unsympathetic and unambitious. This was
confirmed by the Chief, who said: “Yes, he is a rocket in which they
forgot to put in the powder. He has, however, a good head, but his
reports are not the same on any two successive days--often on the same
day two thoroughly contradictory views. No reliance can be placed upon
him.”
Arnim’s lack of ambition led some one to speak of orders and titles,
and the Chief said his first decoration was a medal for saving life,
which he received for having rescued a servant from drowning. “I was
made an ‘Excellency’ at the palace in Königsberg in 1861. I however,
already had the title in Frankfurt, only there I was not a Prussian
but a Federal Excellency. The German Princes had decided that each
Minister to the Diet should have that title. For the matter of that I
did not trouble myself much about it--nor afterwards either--I was a
distinguished man without it.”
_Sunday, November 13th._--The Chancellor, in a general’s uniform and
helmet, and wearing several orders, went to-day to dine with the King.
As he was leaving, Bohlen said to him: “But you ought to have the
ribbon of the Iron Cross in your button-hole.”
“It is there already,” replied the Minister. “In other circumstances I
should not wear it. I am ashamed before my own sons and many others who
have earned it but not got it, while all the loafers at headquarters
swagger about with it.”
In the evening the Chancellor desired me to send a _démenti_ of a false
report published by the Augsburg _Allgemeine Zeitung_, to the effect
that Count Arnim paid a visit to headquarters before his departure for
Rome. The Chief at the same time remarked: “I have told you more than
once that you must not write so violently. Here you are again, speaking
of ‘hallucination’ (in correction of an article by Archibald Forbes in
the _Daily News_). Why not be civil? I, too, have to be civil. Always
this carping, malignant style! You must learn to write differently if
you want to work in such a distinguished Foreign Office, or we must
make other arrangements. And such a bullying style! Just like Brass,
who might have had a brilliant position if he were not so brutal.”
“Hallucination” was the word used by the Minister himself; but in
future I shall be careful to sift my phrases so as to eliminate all
rough words and only let soft ones find their way into the press.
Hatzfeldt told me at tea that the Chief had also “carried on awfully”
with him, adding that if he remained in such a temper for long he
(Hatzfeldt) would think of leaving. The Count will, however, in all
probability, take plenty of time to reconsider this matter.
_Tuesday, November 15th._--The Chief is still unwell. Theiss reports
that the Court have their things ready packed to-day, and this is
confirmed at lunch. The position of affairs between here and Orleans
is not as good as it might be. The Minister also on sitting down to
table mentions the possibility of our having to retire, and evacuate
Versailles for a time. There might be an attack from Dreux combined
with a sortie on a large scale from Paris. He had repeatedly spoken of
that possibility to members of the general staff. Even a layman could
see that a successful attempt of that kind in which not only the Court
and general staff but also the heavy siege guns would be in danger
of falling into the hands of the enemy, must be the sole chance of
relieving Paris, and that the French, therefore, may well hazard the
attempt.
CHAPTER XII
GROWING DESIRE FOR A DECISION IN VARIOUS DIRECTIONS
_Wednesday, November 16th._--The Chief is still unwell. One of the
causes is supposed to be his mortification at the course of the
negotiations with the South German States (which once more seem as if
they would come to a standstill) and at the conduct of the military
authorities, who have on various occasions neglected to consult him,
although the matters dealt with were not merely military questions.
Count Waldersee dines with us. The Chief complains once more that
the military authorities are proceeding too slowly for him, and do
not inform him of all matters of importance. He had only succeeded,
“after repeated requests,” in getting them to send him at least
those particulars which they telegraph to the German newspapers. It
was different in 1866. He was then present at all councils, and his
view was frequently accepted. For instance, it was due to him that a
direct attack upon Vienna was given up, and that the army marched on
to the Hungarian frontier. “And that is only as it should be. It is
necessary for my business. I must be informed of the course of military
operations, in order that I may know the proper time at which to
conclude peace.”
_Thursday, November 17th._--Alten and Prince Radziwill are the Chief’s
guests at dinner. A rumour is mentioned to the effect that Garibaldi
and 13,000 of his volunteers have been made prisoners. The Minister
observed: “That is really disheartening--to make prisoners of 13,000
franctireurs who are not even Frenchmen! Why have they not been shot?”
He then complained that the military authorities so seldom consulted
him. “This capitulation of Verdun, for instance--I should certainly
not have advised that. To undertake to return their arms after peace
had been concluded, and still more to let French officials continue
the administration as they please. The first condition might pass, as
the conditions of peace might provide that the weapons should not be
returned. But that _librement_! It ties our hands in the interval,
even should they place all kinds of obstacles in our way and act as
if there were absolutely no war. They can openly stir up a rising in
favour of the Republic, and under this agreement we can do nothing
to prevent them.” After dwelling upon this topic for some time, the
Minister concluded by saying: “At all events, such a capitulation is
unprecedented in history.”
Some one referred to the article written by a diplomat in the
_Indépendance Belge_ prophesying the restoration of Napoleon. “No
doubt,” observed the Chancellor, “Napoleon fancies something of the
kind will happen. Moreover, it is not entirely impossible. If he made
peace with us he might return with the troops he has now in Germany.
Something in the style of Klapka’s Hungarian Legion on a grand scale,
to work in co-operation with us. And then his Government is still the
legal one. Order being once restored, he would at the outside require
an army of 200,000 men for its maintenance. With the exception of
Paris, it would not be necessary to garrison the large towns with
troops. Perhaps Lyons and Marseilles. The National Guards would be
sufficient for the protection of the others. If the republicans were to
rise in rebellion they could be bombarded and shelled out.”
A telegram reporting Granville’s statement with regard to the Russian
declaration concerning the Peace of Paris was sent by the King to
the Chief, who read it over to us. It was to the effect that Russia,
in taking upon herself to denounce a portion of the Treaty of 1856,
assumed the right to set aside the whole on her own initiative, a right
which was only possessed by the signatory Powers collectively. England
could not tolerate such an arbitrary course, which threatened the
validity of all treaties. Future complications were to be apprehended.
The Minister smiled, and said: “Future complications! Parliamentary
speech-makers! They are not going to venture. The whole tone is also
in the future. That is the way in which one speaks when he does not
mean to do anything. No, there is nothing to be feared from them now,
as there was nothing to be hoped from them four months ago. If at the
beginning of the war the English had said to Napoleon, ‘There must be
no war,’ there would have been none.”
After a while the Minister continued: “Gortschakoff is not carrying
on in this matter a real Russian policy (that is, one in the true
interests of Russia), but rather a policy of violent aggression. People
still believe that Russian diplomats are particularly crafty and
clever, full of artifices and stratagems, but that is not the case.
If the people at St. Petersburg were clever they would not make any
declaration of the kind, but would quietly build men-of-war in the
Black Sea and wait until they were questioned on the subject. Then they
might reply that they knew nothing about it, but would make inquiries,
and so let the matter drag on. That might continue for a long time, and
finally people would get accustomed to it.”
Another telegram announced the election of the Duke of Aosta as King of
Spain. The Chief said: “I pity him--and them. He is, moreover, elected
by a small majority--not by the two-thirds originally intended. There
were 190 votes for him and 115 against.” Alten was pleased that the
monarchical sentiments of the Spaniards had ultimately prevailed. “Ah,
those Spaniards!” exclaimed the Chief. “They have no sense of what
is honourable or becoming! They showed that on the outbreak of this
war. If only one of those Castilians who pretend to have a monopoly of
the sense of honour had but expressed his indignation at the cause of
the present war, which was after all Napoleon’s intervention in their
previous election of a king, interfering with their free choice and
treating them as vassals!... As a matter of fact, these Spaniards are
all mere Angelo de Mirandas,--he was formerly a card sharper, and then
confidant of Prim’s and probably also of the King’s.” After the Chief
had made some further remarks, some one said that it was now all over
with the candidature of the Prince of Hohenzollern. “Yes,” replied the
Chief, “but only because he wishes it to be so. A couple of weeks ago
I told him that it was still time. But he no longer wanted to go on.”
_Saturday, November 19th._--We were joined at dinner by General von
Werder, the Prussian Military Plenipotentiary at St. Petersburg.
The Chief, who looked very pleased, said, shortly after entering
the dining-room: “Well, we shall probably be able to come to an
understanding with Bavaria.” “Yes,” exclaimed Bohlen, “something of
that kind has already been telegraphed to one of the Berlin papers.”
“I am sorry for that,” replied the Minister; “it is premature. But of
course, wherever there is a mob of princes who have nothing to do and
who feel bored, nothing can be kept secret!”
The conversation then turned on Vienna and Count Beust. The Chief said
Beust had apologised for the recent discourteous note. It was written
by Biegeleben, and not by himself. The reference to Biegeleben led
to the discussion of the Gagern family and to the once celebrated
Heinrich von Gagern (President of the Reichstag in the Paulskirche at
Frankfurt). “I remember,” the Chief said, “in 1850 or 1851, Manteuffel
was instructed to bring about an understanding between the Gagern and
the Conservative sections of the Prussian party--at least, as far as
the King was disposed to go in the cause of German unity. Manteuffel
selected Gagern and myself for this purpose, and so we were both
invited one day to a _souper à trois_ at his place. At first there was
little or no mention of politics, but Manteuffel afterwards made some
excuse for leaving us alone. When he left I immediately began to talk
politics, explaining my standpoint to Gagern in a plain, business-like
way. You should have heard Gagern! He assumed his Jove-like aspect,
lifted his eyebrows, ran his fingers through his hair, rolled his eyes
and cast them up to heaven so perpendicularly that you could hear the
joints in his neck crack, and poured out his grand phrases to me as if
I were a public meeting. Of course, that did not help him much with
me. I replied coolly, and we remained divided as before. When Jupiter
had retired, Manteuffel asked, ‘Well, what arrangement have you come to
together?’ ‘Oh,’ I replied, ‘no arrangement at all. The man is a fool.
He takes me for a public meeting! A mere watering-can of fine phrases!
Nothing can be done with him.’”
The subject of the bombardment having been introduced, the Chief said:
“I told the King again yesterday that it was time to begin, and he had
no objection to make. He replied that he had given orders to begin, but
that the generals said they could not. I know exactly how it is. It is
Stosch, Treskow, and Podbielski.”
Some one asked: “And Hindersin?”
“He is also against it,” said the Chief. “Podbielski” (so I understood
him to say) “could be brought round. But the other two are influenced
by considerations affecting their own future.”
It appeared from some further remarks of the Minister that, in his
opinion, first Queen Victoria, and then, at her instance the Crown
Princess, and, finally, the Crown Prince, persuaded by his consort,
will not have Paris bombarded; while the generals “cannot” bombard
the city out of consideration for the views of the Crown Prince, who
will, of course, be the future King, and will have the appointment of
Ministers of War, commandants of army corps, and field marshals.
The late General von Möllendorff having been mentioned, the Minister
related the following anecdote: “I remember after the March rising,
when the King and the troops were at Potsdam, I went there too. A
council was being held as to what was to be done. Möllendorff was
present, and sat not far from me. He seemed to be in pain, and could
scarcely sit down for the beating he had received. All kinds of
suggestions were made, but no one knew exactly what was to be done. I
sat near the piano and said nothing, but played a few bars” (he hummed
the opening of the infantry march for the charge). “Old Möllendorff
suddenly stood up, his face beaming with pleasure, and, hobbling over,
threw his arms round my neck, and said: ‘That’s right. I know what you
mean. March on Berlin!’ There was nothing to be done with the King,
however, and the others had not the pluck.”
After a while the Chancellor asked Werder: “How much does each visit
to the Tsar cost you?” I do not know what Werder’s answer was, but
the Chief went on: “It was always a rather costly business for
me--particularly in Zarskoje. There I had always to pay from 15 to 20
and sometimes 25 roubles, according as I drove out to see the Emperor
with or without an invitation. It was always more expensive in the
former case. I had to fee the coachman and footman who brought me, the
majordomo who received me--he wore a sword when I came on invitation,
and then the running footman who conducted me through the whole length
of the castle--it must be about a thousand yards--to the Emperor’s
apartments. Well, he really earned his five roubles. And one never
got the same coachman twice. I could never recover these expenses. We
Prussians were altogether badly paid. Twenty-five thousand thalers
salary and 8,000 thalers for rent. For that sum I certainly had a house
as large and fine as any palace in Berlin. But all the furniture was
old, shabby, and faded, and when I had paid for repairs and other odds
and ends it cost me 9,000 a year. I found, however, that I was not
obliged to spend more than my salary, and so I helped myself out of
the difficulty by not entertaining. The French Minister had 300,000
francs, and was in addition allowed to charge his Government with the
expense of any receptions which he chose to look upon as official.”
“But you had at least free firing,” said Werder, “and at St. Petersburg
that amounts to something considerable in the course of the year.”
“Excuse me, but I had not,” replied the Chief, “I was obliged to pay
for that too. Food would not have been so dear if the officials had not
made it so. I remember once seeing some very good timber in a Finnish
boat. I asked the peasants what the price was and they mentioned a
very moderate figure. But when I wanted to buy it they asked if it was
for the Treasury (he used the Russian term). I was imprudent enough
to reply that it was not for the Imperial Treasury (he again used
the Russian words) but for the Royal Prussian Legation. When I came
back to have the wood removed they had disappeared. Had I given them
the address of a tradesman, with whom I could afterwards have made
an arrangement, I might have got the wood at a third of the price I
usually paid. They evidently regarded the Prussian Minister as one of
the Tsar’s officials and thought to themselves: ‘No, when it comes to
payment he will say that we have stolen the wood, and have us locked
up until we give it to him for nothing.’” The Chief then gave some
instances of the way in which the Tschinowniks harassed and exploited
the peasantry, and afterwards returned to the subject of the poor pay
of Prussian Ministers as compared with those of other countries. “It is
just the same in Berlin,” he said. “The Prussian Minister has 10,000
thalers, but the English Ambassador has 63,000, and the Russian 44,000,
while the latter’s Government bears the cost of all entertainments,
and if the Tsar stays with him he usually receives a full year’s salary
as compensation. Of course, in such circumstances, we cannot keep pace
with them.”
_Tuesday, November 22nd._--Prince Pless, Major von Alten, and a
Count Stolberg dine with us. Mention is made of a great discovery of
first-rate wine in a cellar near Bougival, which has been confiscated
in accordance with the laws of war. Bohlen complains that none of it
has reached us. Altogether the Foreign Office is as badly provided as
possible. Care is always taken to set apart the most uncomfortable
lodgings for the Chief, and they have been invariably lucky in finding
such. “Yes,” said the Chancellor, laughing, “it is pure churlishness
on their part to treat me like that. And so ungrateful, as I have
always looked after their interests in the Diet. But they shall see me
thoroughly transformed. I started for the war devoted to the military,
but I shall go home a convinced Parliamentarian. No more military
budgets.”
Prince Pless praises the Würtemberg troops. They make an excellent
impression and come next to our own in the matter of military
bearing. The Chancellor agrees but thinks the Bavarians also deserve
commendation. He appears to be particularly pleased at the summary
way in which they shoot down the “franc-voleurs.” “Our North German
soldiers follow orders too literally. When one of those footpads fires
at a Holstein dragoon he gets off his horse, runs after the fellow with
his heavy sword and catches him. He then brings him to his lieutenant,
who either lets him go or hands him over to his superior officer--which
comes to the same thing, as he is then set free. The Bavarian acts
differently. He knows that war is war, and keeps up the good old
customs. He does not wait until he is shot at from behind, but shoots
first himself.”
In the evening I prepared Bernstorff’s despatch respecting the capture
of a German ship in English waters by the French frigate _Desaix_ for
our press; also the letter to Lundy on the export of arms from England
to France; and finally arranged that our papers should no longer defend
Bazaine against the charge of treason, “as it does him harm.”
_Wednesday, November 23rd._--This morning I asked Bucher how the
Bavarian Treaties were getting on and whether they would not be finally
settled this evening. “Yes,” was the reply, “if nothing happens in
the meantime--and it need not be anything very important. Could you
imagine what it was that recently nearly wrecked the negotiations?
The question of collars or epaulettes! The King of Bavaria wanted
to retain the Bavarian collar, while his Majesty wished to have it
replaced by ours. The Chief, however, finally brought him round by
saying: ‘But, your Majesty, if the Treaty is not concluded now, and in
ten years’ time perhaps the Bavarians are arrayed against us in battle,
what will history say when it becomes known that the negotiations
miscarried owing to these collars?’ Moreover, the King is not the
worst--but rather the Minister of War.” As I was then called away I
could not for the moment unriddle this mystery. I afterwards learned
that the question was whether the Bavarian officers should in future
wear the badge of their rank on their collars as hitherto, or on their
shoulder straps like the North German troops. Bucher having alluded to
the strong Republican sympathies which Alten had yesterday displayed,
Pless also observed: “Really if we had known what sort of people these
Princes were at the time we were discussing the Criminal Code in
the Diet we should not have helped to make the provisions respecting
_lèse-majesté_ so severe.” The Chief remarked, with a laugh: “Every
one of us has already deserved ten years’ penal servitude if all our
jibbing at princes during the campaign were proved against us.”
We were joined at dinner by Count Frankenberg and Prince Putbus. Both
wore the Iron Cross. The guests mentioned that people were very anxious
in Berlin for the bombardment to begin and grumbled a great deal at its
postponement. The rumour as to the influence of certain great ladies
being one of the causes of the delay appears to be very widespread. “I
have often told the King so,” said the Chief, “but it cannot be done;
they will not have it.” “The Queen?” suggested some one. “Several
queens,” corrected the Chancellor, “and princesses. I believe also that
Masonic influences and scruples have helped.” He then again declared
that he regarded the investment of Paris as a blunder. “I have never
been in favour of it. If they had left it alone we should have made
more progress, or at least we should have had a better position before
Europe. We have certainly not added to our prestige by spending eight
weeks outside Paris. We ought to have left Paris alone and sought the
French in the open country. But otherwise the bombardment ought to have
begun at once. If a thing has to be done, do it!”
The conversation then turned upon the treatment of the French rural
population, and Putbus related that a Bavarian officer had ordered a
whole village to be burned to the ground and the wine in the cellars
to be poured out into the gutter because the inhabitants of the place
had acted treacherously. Some one else observed that the soldiers at
some other place had given a fearful dressing to a curé who had been
caught in an act of treachery. The Minister again praised the energy
of the Bavarians, but said with regard to the second case: “One ought
either to treat people as considerately as possible or to put it out
of their power to do mischief--one or the other.” After reflecting for
a moment, he added: “Be civil to the very last step of the gallows,
but hang all the same. One should only be rude to a friend when one
feels sure that he will not take it amiss. How rude one is to his wife,
for instance! That reminds me, by the way, Herr von Keudell, will you
please telegraph to Reinfeld, ‘If a letter comes from Count Bismarck
hold it back, and forward it to the Poste Restante or to Berlin’? I
have written various things to my wife which are not overflowing with
loyal reverence. My father-in-law is an old gentleman of eighty-one,
and as the Countess has now left Reinfeld, where she was on a visit to
him, he would open and read the letter and show it to the pastor, who
would tell his gossips about it, and presently it would get into the
newspapers.”
Bleibtreu’s sketch representing General Reille as he came up the hill
at Sedan to deliver Napoleon’s letter to the King was then mentioned,
and some one remarked that from the way in which the general was taking
off his cap, he looked as if he were going to shout Hurrah! The Chief
said: “His demeanour was thoroughly dignified and correct. I spoke to
him alone while the King was writing his reply. He urged that hard
conditions should not be imposed upon a great army which had fought so
bravely. I shrugged my shoulders. He then said rather than submit they
would blow up the fortress. I said, ‘Well, do so--_faites sauter_!’ I
asked him then if the Emperor could still depend upon the army and
the officers. He said yes. And whether his instructions and orders
still held good in Metz? Reille answered this question also in the
affirmative, and, as we saw, he was right at the time.... If Napoleon
had only made peace then I believe he would still be a respected ruler.
But he is a silly fool! I said so sixteen years ago when no one would
believe me. Stupid and sentimental. The King also thought for the
moment that it would be peace, and wanted me to say what conditions we
should propose. But I said to him ‘Your Majesty, we can hardly have
got as far as that yet.’ Their Highnesses and Serene Highnesses then
pressed so close to us that I had twice to beg the King to move further
off. I should have preferred to tell them plainly, ‘Gentlemen, leave us
alone; you have nothing to do here.’ The one thing which prevented me
from being rude to them was that the brother of our Most Gracious was
the ringleader and chief offender of the whole prying mob.”
About 10 o’clock I went down to tea, and found Bismarck-Bohlen and
Hatzfeldt still there. The Chief was in the _salon_ with the three
Bavarian Plenipotentiaries. In about a quarter of an hour he opened one
side of the door, bent his head forward with his friendliest look, and
came in with a glass in his hand and took a seat at the table.
“Well,” he said, his voice and looks betraying his emotion, “the
Bavarian Treaty is made and signed. German unity is secure, and the
German Emperor too.” We were all silent for a moment. I then begged
to be allowed to bring away the pen with which he had signed it. “In
God’s name, bring all three,” he said; “but the gold one is not amongst
them.” I went and took the three pens that lay near the document.
Two of them were still wet. Two empty champagne bottles stood close
by. “Bring us another bottle,” said the Chief to the servant. “It
is an event.” Then, after reflecting for a while, he observed: “The
newspapers will not be satisfied, and he who writes history in the
usual way may criticise our agreement. He may possibly say, ‘The
stupid fellow should have asked for more; he would have got it, as
they would have been compelled to yield.’ And he may be right so far
as the ‘compelled’ is concerned. But what I attached more importance
to was that they should be thoroughly pleased with the thing. What
are treaties when people are compelled to enter into them! And I know
that they went away pleased.... I did not want to squeeze them or to
make capital out of the situation. The Treaty has its deficiencies,
but it is for that reason all the more durable. The future can supply
those deficiencies.... The King also was not satisfied. He was of
opinion that such a Treaty was not worth much. My opinion is quite
different. I consider it one of the most important results which we
have attained during recent years. I finally succeeded in carrying it
through by exciting apprehensions of English intervention unless the
matter were speedily settled.... As to the question of the Emperor, I
made that proposal palatable to them in the course of the negotiations
by representing that it must be easier and more satisfactory for their
sovereign to concede certain rights to the German Emperor than to the
neighbouring King of Prussia.”
On the Minister then speaking somewhat slightingly of the King of
Bavaria, he was like a boy, did not know his own mind, lived in
“dreams,” and so on--Abeken (who had entered in the meantime, and was
naturally aggrieved at these remarks) said: “But surely the young King
is a very nice man!” “So are all of us here,” said the Chief, as he
looked round at the whole company one after another. Loud laughter from
the Centre and the Left. Over a second bottle of champagne which he
drank with us, the Chief came (I forget how the subject was introduced)
to speak of his own death. He asserted that he should die in his 71st
year, a conclusion which he arrived at from some combination of figures
which I could not understand. I said: “Excellency must not do that. It
would be too early. One must drive away the Angel of Death!”
“No,” he replied. “In 1886--still fifteen years. I know it. It is a
mystic number.”
_Thursday, November 24th._--Busily engaged all the morning with
various articles on the Treaty with Bavaria, written in the sense of
the Chief’s utterances of last night. Wollmann told me that a Colonel
Krohn had arrested a lawyer at a place in the Ardennes for having
treacherously entered into communication with a band of franctireurs,
and the court-martial having sentenced the man to death, he had
presented a petition for pardon. The Chief had, however, written to the
Minister of War to-day that he would advise the King to let justice
take its course.
Colonel Tilly, of the General Staff, and Major Hill are the Chief’s
guests at dinner to-day. The Minister again complained that the
military authorities do not communicate sufficient information to him
and too seldom consult him. “It was just the same with the appointment
of Vogel von Falkenstein, who has now locked up Jacoby. If I have to
speak on that subject in the Reichstag, I shall wash my hands of the
matter. They could not possibly have done more to spoil the broth for
me.” “I came to the war,” he repeated, “disposed to do everything
for the military authorities, but in future I shall go over to the
advocates of Parliamentary government, and if they worry me much more,
I shall have a chair placed for myself on the extreme Left.”
The Treaty with Bavaria was then mentioned, and it was said that the
difficulties which had been encountered arose partly on the National
side, on which the Minister observed, “It is really remarkable how
many clever people there are who, nevertheless, understand nothing
about politics. For instance, the man who always sat on my right here
(Delbrück). A very clever man, but no politician.”
Suddenly changing the subject, he said: “The English are beside
themselves, and their newspapers demand war on account of a note which
is nothing more than a statement of opinion on a point of law--for that
is all that Gortschakoff’s Note amounts to.”
Later on the Minister returned once more to the postponement of
the bombardment, which he regarded as dangerous from a political
standpoint. “Here we have now collected this enormous mass of siege
artillery. The whole world is waiting for us to begin, and yet the guns
remain idle up to the present. That has certainly damaged us with the
neutral Powers. The effect of our success at Sedan is very seriously
diminished thereby, and when one thinks on what grounds.” One of the
causes of the delay brought him to speak of the Crown Princess, of whom
he said: “She is in general a very clever person, and really agreeable
in her way, but she should not interfere in politics.” He then again
related the anecdote about the glass of water which he told me near
Crehanges, only this time it was in French that the Princess spoke.
_Friday, November 25th._--In the morning I cut out for the King an
article from the _Neue Freie Presse_, in which Granville’s note is
described as timid and colourless; and arrange for the republication
by all our papers in France of the telegram of July last, in which
Napoleon stated that the whole French people approved of the
declaration of war which he had just despatched.
Whilst I was walking with Wollmann in the afternoon, he told me an
anecdote of the Chief which is very neat--although I must add that my
informant is not quite trustworthy. Wollmann said: “On the night of
the 14th to the 15th of June, 1866, Manteuffel telegraphed that he
had crossed the Elbe, and asked how he was to treat the Hanoverians.
Thereupon the Minister wrote the answer: ‘Treat them as countrymen,
if necessary to death.’ He asked me: ‘Do you understand that?’ ‘Yes,
Excellency,’ I replied. ‘All right then,’ he added, ‘but, you see, it
is for a general.’”
_Saturday, November 26th._--Wrote several articles, including one on
Trochu’s extraordinary production in the _Figaro_ of the 22nd instant,
praising those whom he considered specially deserving of commendation
in the defence of the city. The Chief read over to me some of the
passages he had marked, saying: “These heroic deeds of the defenders of
Paris are mostly of such an ordinary kind that Prussian generals would
not think them worth mentioning; while others are mere swagger and
obvious impossibilities. Trochu’s braves have made more prisoners when
they are all reckoned up than the whole French army during the entire
investment of Paris. Then here is this Captain Montbrisson, who is
commended for having marched at the head of his column to the attack,
and had himself lifted over a wall in order to reconnoitre,--that was
merely his duty. Then here this theatrical vanity, where Private Gletty
made prisoners of three Prussians, _par la fermeté de son attitude_.
The firmness of his attitude! And our Pomeranians ate humble pie
before him! That may do for a Boulevard theatre, or a circus,--but
in reality! Then this Hoff, who on several occasions slaughtered in
single combat no less than twenty-seven Prussians! He must be a Jew,
this triple nine-pounder! Probably a cousin of Malz-Hoff of the Old or
New Wilhelmstrasse--at any rate a Miles Gloriosus. And finally this
Terreaux, who captured a _fanion_, together with the _porte-fanion_.
That is a company flag for marking the line--which we do not use at
all. And the Commander-in-Chief of an army officially reports such
stuff! Really this list of commendations is just like the battle
pictures in the gallery of _toutes les gloires de la France_, where
each drummer at Sebastopol and Magenta is preserved for posterity,
simply because he beat his drum.”
At dinner the Chief complained: “I was yesterday visited by a whole
series of misfortunes, one on top of the other. First of all some one
wanted to see me on important business (Odo Russell). I send word
requesting him to wait for a few moments, as I am engaged on a pressing
matter. On my asking for him a quarter of an hour later, I find he has
gone, and possibly the peace of Europe is at stake.
“Then I go to see the King as early as 12 o’clock, and the consequence
is that I fall into the hands of the Grand Duke of Weimar, who obliges
me, as his Chancellor, to listen to a letter which he has written to
an august personage (the Emperor of Russia), and thus wastes a good
deal of my time.... I am to tell him what I think of the letter, but
I decline to do so. Have I then anything to object to it? he asked
in a piqued tone. I cannot say that either, although I would observe
that I should have written the letter differently. What do I wish
altered? I stick to my point, and say I cannot express an opinion,
because if the letter went with my corrections I should be held
responsible for its contents. ‘Well, then, I must speak to the King.’
‘Do so,’ I reply coolly, ‘and take over the office of Chancellor of the
Confederation, if you like. But if the letter goes off, I for my part
shall immediately telegraph to the place of destination that I have
had nothing to do with it.’ I thus lost an hour, so that telegrams of
great importance had to wait, and in the meantime, decisions may have
been arrived at and resolutions taken which would have very serious
consequences for all Europe, and might change the political situation.
That all came of its being a Friday. Friday negotiations, Friday
measures!”
Bucher told me the Crown Prince recently said to the Chancellor that
too little had been secured by the Bavarian Treaty. After such great
successes we ought to have asked for more. “Yes; but how were we to
get it?” asked the Chief. “Why, we ought to force them,” was the Crown
Prince’s reply. “Then,” said the Chancellor, “I can only recommend your
Royal Highness to begin by disarming the Bavarian Army Corps here,” a
remark which, of course, was intended ironically.
_Sunday, November 27th._--We were joined at dinner by Count Lehndorff
and Count Holnstein. The latter is Master of the Horse to King Lewis,
and one of his confidential advisers.
The Chief spoke at first of the Russian question. He said: “Vienna,
Florence, and Constantinople have not yet expressed their views;
but St. Petersburg and London have done so, and those are the most
important factors. There, however, the matter is satisfactory.”
Subsequently affairs at Munich were discussed. Holnstein observing,
amongst other things, that the French Legation had greatly deceived
themselves before the outbreak of the war as to the attitude
of Bavaria. They judged by two or three ardently Catholic and
anti-Prussian _salons_, and even thought that Prince Luitpold would
become King. The Chief replied: “I never doubted that Bavaria would
join us, but I had not hoped that she would decide so speedily to do
so.”
Holnstein told us that a shoemaker in Munich had made a good deal of
money by letting his windows, from which a good view could be had of
the captured Turcos as they marched by, and presented seventy-nine
florins to the fund for the wounded soldiers. People had come even
from Vienna to see that procession. This led the conversation to the
shooting of these treacherous Africans, on which the Chief said: “There
should have been no question of making prisoners of these blacks.”
Holnstein: “I believe they do not do so any longer.” The Chief: “If I
had my way every soldier who made a black man prisoner should be placed
under arrest. They are beasts of prey, and ought to be shot down. The
fox has the excuse that Nature has made him so, but these fellows--they
are abominably unnatural. They have tortured our soldiers to death in
the most shameful way.”
CHAPTER XIII
REMOVAL OF THE ANXIETY RESPECTING THE BAVARIAN TREATY IN THE
REICHSTAG--THE BOMBARDMENT FURTHER POSTPONED.
_Monday, November 28th._--Prince Pless and Count Maltzahn dined with
us. At first the Minister spoke about Hume, the American spiritualist,
a doubtful character, who had been at Versailles, and who was to be
arrested if he showed himself here again. The Chief then said: “The
fellow managed to sneak into the Crown Prince’s. But that is explained
by the fact that whoever can speak even broken English is welcome
there. The next thing will be for them to appoint Colonel Walker my
successor as Chancellor of the Confederation.”[14] Bohlen exclaimed, “I
suppose you know that Garibaldi has been thrashed.” Some one observed
that if he were taken prisoner he ought to be shot for having meddled
in the war without authority. “They ought to be first put into a cage
like beasts in a menagerie,” said Bohlen. “No,” said the Minister; “I
have another idea. They should be taken to Berlin, and marched through
the town with these words on a placard suspended round their necks,
‘Italians, House of Correction, Ingratitude,’ and be then marched
through the town.” “And afterwards to Spandau,” suggested Bohlen.
The Chief added, “Or one might inscribe merely the words, ‘Italians,
Venice, Spandau.’”
The Bavarian question and the situation at Munich was then discussed.
The Chief said: “The King is undecided. It is obvious that he would
rather not. He accordingly pretends to be ill, has toothache, keeps
to his bed, where the Ministers cannot reach him. Or he retires to a
distant hunting-box in the mountains to which there is no telegraph
line, nor even a proper road.”
Some one having remarked that in the present circumstances he is, after
all, the best Bavarian ruler for our purposes, the Chief said: “Yes;
if he were to die he would be succeeded by little Otto, whom we have
had here. A poor creature, with very little intelligence. He would be
entirely in the hands of the Austrians and Ultramontanes. He has ruined
himself; that is, if he was ever worth anything.”
General Reille’s name again brought up the question of Napoleon’s
surrender. “The King thought,” said the Chancellor, “on reading
Napoleon’s letter, that it meant more for us than it did. ‘He must
at least surrender Metz to us,’ said the King to me. I replied, ‘I
do not know, your Majesty; we are not aware what power he still has
over the troops.’ The Emperor should not have needlessly surrendered
himself as a prisoner, but have made peace with us. His generals would
have followed him.” The Minister then again related the incident of
the letter Weimar wished to write to the Emperor Alexander; and it
appeared that the day before yesterday the Chief had, in a moment of
irritation, represented the expressions which he had used in speaking
to the Grand Duke as stronger than they actually were. According to the
present account, Weimar said, in conclusion, that his only object was
a patriotic one. He (the Minister) replied he quite believed that, but
it would not make the letter any more useful. The letter has probably
not been sent off.
The question of the bombardment then came up, and, in connection
therewith, the intrigues which are now being carried on by Bishop
Dupanloup, and the part he played in the opposition at the Vatican
Council. “Women and freemasons,” said the Chief, “are chiefly
responsible if our operations against Paris are not conducted as
energetically as they should be. Dupanloup has influenced Augusta....
He also wrote me a pile of letters, and took me in to such an extent
that I sent them to Twickenham.” (The Chancellor must have meant
Chislehurst). “He must be packed off when our people get to Orleans, so
that Von der Tann may not be swindled by him.”... “That reminds me,”
continued the Chief, “that the Pope has written a very nice letter to
the French Bishops, or to several of them, saying that they should not
enter into any understanding with the Garibaldians.”
Somebody having expressed anxiety about some matter which I was
unable to catch, the Chief observed: “A more important question
for me--indeed, the most important--is what will be done at Villa
Coublay; that is the main point. The Crown Prince said recently, when
I mentioned the matter to him, ‘I am ready to give up the command for
that purpose.’ I felt like replying, ‘And I am prepared to assume it.’
Give me the post of Commander-in-Chief for twenty-four hours, and I
will take it upon myself. I would then give one command only: ‘Commence
the bombardment.’”
Villa Coublay is a place not far from Versailles, where the siege
park has been collected and still remains, instead of being placed in
position. Bucher tells me that the Chancellor has appealed directly to
the King to hasten the bombardment. The Chief continued: “The assertion
of the generals that they have not enough ammunition is untrue. They do
not want to begin because the Heir Apparent does not wish it. He does
not wish it because his wife and his mother-in-law are against it.
“They have brought together three hundred cannon and fifty or sixty
mortars, and five hundred rounds of ammunition for each gun. That is
certainly enough. I have been speaking to artillerymen, who said that
they had not used half as much ammunition at Strassburg as they have
collected here; and Strassburg was a Gibraltar compared to Paris. It
would be easy to fire the barracks on Mont Valérien, and if the forts
of Issy and Vanvres were properly shelled so that the garrisons should
be compelled to bolt, the enceinte (of course we know it) would be of
little importance. The ditch is not broader than the length of this
room. I am convinced that if we poured shells into the city itself for
five or six days, and they found out that our guns reached farther than
theirs--that is to say, 9,000 yards--Paris would give in. True enough
the wealthier quarters are on this side of the city, and it is a matter
of indifference to the people at Belleville whether we blow them to
pieces or not; indeed, they are pleased when we destroy the houses of
the richer classes. As a matter of fact, we ought to have attacked
Paris from another direction; or still better, left it altogether
alone, and continued our forward march. Now, however, that we have
begun, we must set about the affair in earnest. Starving them out may
last a long time, perhaps till the spring. At any rate, they have flour
enough up to January.... If we had begun the bombardment at the right
time, there would have been no question of the Loire army. After the
engagement at Orleans, where Von der Tann was obliged to retire, the
military authorities (not I) regarded our position in Versailles as
critical. Had we begun the bombardment four weeks ago, we should now
in all probability be in Paris, and that is the main point. As it is,
however, the Parisians imagine that we are forbidden to fire by London,
St. Petersburg, and Vienna; while, on the other hand, the neutral
Powers believe that we are not able to do so. The true reason, however,
will be known at a future time. One of its consequences will be to lead
to a restriction of personal rule.”
In the evening I telegraphed to London that the Reichstag had voted
another hundred million thalers for the continuation of the war with
France, eight social democrats alone opposing the grant. Also that
Manteuffel has occupied Amiens. Several paragraphs were afterwards
written for the _Norddeutsche_, including one (on the directions of
the Chief) in which the moderate demands of the Chancellor in the
negotiations with Bavaria were defended as being not only right and
fair, but also wise and prudent. I said that the object was not so
much to secure this or that desirable concession from the authorities
at Munich as to make the South German States feel satisfied in forming
part of the new organisation of united Germany. Any pressure or
coercion for the purpose of obtaining further concessions would, in
view of the circumstance that they had fulfilled their patriotic duty,
be an act of ingratitude; while, in addition, it would have been,
above all things, impolitic to show ourselves more exacting in our
demands upon our allies. The discontent which would have resulted from
such an exercise of force would have far outweighed half a dozen more
favourable clauses in the Treaty. That discontent would soon have shown
the neutral Powers, such as Austria, where to insert the thin edge of
the wedge in order to loosen and ultimately destroy the unity which had
been achieved.
At dinner I suggested to Bucher that it might be well to ask
the Chief’s leave to hint in the press at the real cause of the
postponement of the bombardment. He agreed with me that it would,
and added: “I myself have already vehemently attacked Augusta in
the newspapers.” On the Chancellor sending for me in the evening, I
said: “May I venture to ask your Excellency a question? Would you
have any objection if I made a communication, in an indirect way, to
non-official organs respecting the causes of the postponement of the
bombardment, in the sense in which they have repeatedly been discussed
at table?” He reflected for a moment, and then said, “Do as you like.”
I accordingly wrote two paragraphs--one for the _Vossische Zeitung_,
and one for the _Weser Zeitung_, which I had copied out by another hand
in Berlin, and forwarded to their destination.
One of these paragraphs ran as follows:--
“Versailles, November 29th. It has been asserted here for some
considerable time past that the real cause of the postponement of the
bombardment is not so much a scarcity of ammunition for the siege guns
that were brought here weeks ago, nor the strength of the forts and
ramparts of Paris; in short, that the delay is not due to military
considerations, but rather to the influence of very highly placed
ladies, and--can it be credited?--of freemasons. I can assure you,
on very good authority, that these rumours are not unfounded. I have
no reason to apprehend a denial when I add that the interference of
one of these ladies has been prompted by a well-known French prelate,
who took a prominent part in the opposition at the Vatican Council.
For the moment we would only ask a few questions: Is it true humanity
to let masses of gallant soldiers fall a prey to the hardships of the
investment by postponing an artillery attack merely in order to save
a hostile city from damage? Is it good policy to let the impression
produced by Sedan upon the neutral Powers be frittered away by such
a postponement? Is that true freemasonry which troubles itself with
political questions? It was thought hitherto that politics were not
permitted to enter into the German lodges.”
_Tuesday, November 29th._--In the afternoon I sent off another article
on the Treaty with Bavaria, which is to be reproduced and circulated in
Berlin. It is becoming more and more difficult to satisfy the people
there.
Lieutenant-General von Hartrott joined us at dinner. The distribution
of the Iron Cross having been mentioned, the Chief observed: “The army
doctors should receive the black and white ribbon. They are under
fire, and it requires much more courage and determination to quietly
allow one’s self to be shot at than to rush forward to the attack....
Blumenthal said to me that properly speaking he could do nothing to
deserve the Cross, as he was bound in duty to keep out of danger of
being shot. For that reason when in battle he always sought a position
from which he could see well but could not be easily hit. And he was
perfectly right. A general who exposes himself unnecessarily ought to
be put under arrest.”
The Chancellor then remarked suddenly: “The King told me an untruth
to-day. I asked him if the bombardment was not to commence, and he
replied that he had ordered it. But I knew immediately that that was
not true. I know him. He cannot lie, or at least not in such a way
that it cannot be detected. He at once changes colour, and it was
particularly noticeable when he replied to my question to-day. When
I looked at him straight into his eyes he could not stand it.” The
conversation then turned upon the conduct of the war. The Minister
said: “Humility alone leads to victory; pride and self-conceit to an
opposite result.”
The Chancellor, speaking of his friend Dietze, talked of his natural
inborn heartiness--_politesse du cœur_. Abeken asked if that term was
originally French, as Goethe uses it--_Höflichkeit des Herzens?_ “It
must come from the German, I fancy.” “It certainly does,” replied the
Chief. “It is only to be found amongst the Germans. I should call it
the politeness of good will--good nature in the best sense of the word,
the politeness of helpful benevolent feeling. You find that amongst our
common soldiers, although, of course, it is sometimes expressed rather
crudely. The French have not got it. They only know the politeness
of hatred and envy. It would be easier to find something of the kind
amongst the English,” he added; and then went on to praise Odo Russell,
whose pleasant, natural manner he greatly appreciated. “At first one
thing aroused a little suspicion against him in my mind. I have always
heard and found that Englishmen who know French well are not worth
much, and he speaks quite excellent French. But he can also express
himself very well in German.”
At dessert the Minister said: “I recognise that I eat too much, or,
more correctly, too much at a time. It is a pity that I cannot get rid
of the absurd practice of only eating once a day. Formerly it was still
worse. In the morning I drank my tea and ate nothing until 5 o’clock
in the evening, while I smoked incessantly. That did me a great deal
of harm. Now, on the advice of my doctor, I take at least two eggs
in the morning and smoke little. But I should eat oftener; yet if I
take anything late I cannot sleep, as I only digest while awake. This
morning, however, I got up early. I was waked by the firing just at
the time when I sleep best, that is between 7 and 9 o’clock, and as it
seemed to be near I sent to inquire if the King was going to the scene
of the engagement. Otherwise he might start suddenly and go nobody
knows where, or where nothing is to be seen.”
While at tea the conversation turned once more on the now constant
theme of the postponement of the bombardment, and afterwards on the
Geneva Convention, which the Minister said must be denounced, as it was
impossible to conduct war in that manner.
“The principal reason why the bombardment is delayed,” said the
Chancellor, “is the sentimentality of the Queen of England, and the
interference of Queen Augusta.... That seems to be a characteristic of
the Hohenzollerns--their women folk have always a great influence upon
them. It was not so with Frederick the Great, but with his successor
and the late King, as well as the present Most Gracious and his future
Majesty. The most curious example is that of Prince Charles, who is
anything but a good husband, and yet depends upon his wife, indeed he
is thoroughly afraid of her and is guided by her wishes.... But it is
somewhat different with these two (the King and the Crown Prince).
They want to be praised. They like to have it said in the English and
French press that they are considerate and generous. They find that the
Germans praise them enough as it is.”
It appears that Delbrück has not expressed himself very clearly in
his telegram respecting the prospect of the agreement with Bavaria
being sanctioned by the Diet. It seems as if there were not sufficient
members present to form the necessary quorum, and that it would be
opposed both by the Progressists and National Liberals. The Chief
observed: “So far as the Progressists are concerned, their conduct is
consistent. They wish to return to the state of affairs which prevailed
in 1849. But the National Liberals? If they will not have now what they
were striving for with all their might at the beginning of the year,
in February, and what it now depends upon them to secure, then we must
dissolve. The new elections will weaken the Progressist party still
more, and some of the National Liberals will also lose their seats.
But in that case the Treaties would not be completed. Bavaria would
reconsider the matter; Beust would put his finger in the pie, and we do
not know what the result would be. I cannot well go to Berlin. It is a
very uncomfortable journey and takes up a lot of time, and besides I am
really wanted here.”
Proceeding from this point the Minister spoke of the position of
affairs in 1848. “At that period the situation was for a long time very
favourable for the unification of Germany under Prussia. The smaller
Sovereigns were for the most part powerless and despondent. If they
could only save their money, their domains and their appropriations
they were prepared to consent to everything. The Austrians were
engaged with Hungary and Italy. The Tsar Nicholas would not have
intervened at that time. If they had only acted in a resolute way
previous to May, 1849, and come to terms with the smaller States they
would doubtless have carried the South with them, particularly if the
Würtemberg and Bavarian armies joined the Baden revolution, which
was not impossible at that stage. Time was lost, however, through
hesitation and half measures, and so the opportunity was thrown away.”
About 11 o’clock another telegram arrived from Verdy respecting this
morning’s sortie which was directed against La Haye. Five hundred red
breeches were made prisoners. The Chief bitterly regretted that further
prisoners should be taken, and that it was not possible to shoot
them down on the spot. “We have more than enough of them, while the
Parisians have the advantage of getting rid of so many mouths to feed,
which must now be supplied by us, and for whom we can hardly find room.”
_Wednesday, November 30th._--Wrote fully to Treitschke, giving him
the reasons why the demands which he and those of his way of thinking
consider absolutely necessary had not been made upon the Bavarians.
Arranged to have a similar communication made to Schmidt.
The Chief seems to be seriously considering the idea of asking the King
to relieve him of his office. According to Bucher he is already on the
point of resigning.
“The Chief,” he said, “informed me of something to-day which nobody
else knows. He is seriously considering whether he will not break with
the King.” I said that in that case I should also take my leave. I did
not wish to serve under any one else. Bucher: “Nor I either. I, too,
would then resign.”
At dinner, at which Prince Putbus and Odo Russell were present, the
Chief related that he had once tried to use his knowledge of State
secrets for the purpose of speculating in stocks, but that his attempt
was not successful. “I was commissioned in Berlin,” he said, “to
speak to Napoleon on the question of Neuchâtel. It must have been in
the spring of 1857. I was to inquire as to his attitude towards that
question. Now, I knew that his answer would be favourable, and that
this would mean a war with Switzerland. Accordingly, on my way through
Frankfurt, where I lived at that time, I called upon Rothschild, whom
I knew well, and told him I intended to sell certain stock which I
held, and which showed no disposition to rise. ‘I would not do that,’
said Rothschild. ‘That stock has good prospects. You will see.’
‘Yes,’ I said; ‘but if you knew the object of my journey you would
think otherwise.’ He replied that, however that might be, he could
not advise me to sell. But I knew better, sold out and departed. In
Paris, Napoleon was very pleasant and amiable. It was true he could
not agree, as the King wanted to let us march through Alsace-Lorraine,
which would create great excitement in France, but in every other
respect he entirely approved of our plans. It could only be a matter
of satisfaction to him if that nest of democrats were cleared out.
I was, therefore, so far successful. But I had not reckoned with
my King, who had in the meantime, behind my back, made different
arrangements--probably out of consideration for Austria; and so the
affair was dropped. There was no war, and my stock rose steadily from
that time forward, and I had reason to regret parting with them.”
Villa Coublay and the bombardment were then referred to, and the
alleged impossibility of bringing up at once the necessary supply
of ammunition. The Chief said: “I have already informed the august
gentlemen a couple of times that we have here a whole herd of horses
that must be ridden out daily merely for exercise. Why should they not
be employed for once to better purpose?”
It was mentioned that the Palazzo Caffarelli in Rome had been purchased
for the German Embassy, and both Russell and Abeken said it was a very
fine building. The Chancellor observed: “Well, we have also handsome
houses elsewhere, in Paris and in London. According to Continental
ideas, however, the London house is too small. Bernstorff has so
little room that he has to give up his own apartments when he has a
reception or any other function of the kind. His Secretary of Embassy
is better off in that respect. The Embassy in Paris is handsome and
well situated. Indeed, it is probably the best Embassy in Paris, and
represents a considerable money value, so that it has already occurred
to me whether it might not be well to sell it and give the interest on
the capital to the Ambassador as an allowance for rent. The interest
on two and a half million francs would be a considerable addition to
his salary, which only amounts to one hundred thousand francs. But
on thinking the matter over more I found that it would not do. It is
not becoming, not worthy of a great State, that its Ambassador should
live in a hired house, where he would be subject to notice to quit,
and on leaving would have to remove the archives in a cart. We ought,
and must have, our own houses everywhere.”... “Our London house is an
exceptional case. It belongs to the King, and everything depends on the
way in which the Ambassador knows how to look after his own interest.
It may happen that the King receives no rent--that actually does occur
sometimes.”
The Chief spoke very highly of Napier, the former English Ambassador
in Berlin. “He was very easy to get on with. Buchanan was also a good
man, rather dry, perhaps, but absolutely trustworthy. Now we have
Loftus. The position of an English Ambassador in Berlin has its own
special duties and difficulties, if only on account of the personal
relations of the two Royal families. It demands a great deal of tact
and care.” (Presumably a quiet hint that Loftus does not fulfil those
requirements.)
The Minister then led the conversation on to Grammont. He said:
“Grammont and Ollivier strike me also as a pretty pair! If that had
happened to me--if I had been the cause of such disasters, I would at
least have joined a regiment, or, for the matter of that, have become a
franctireur, even if I had had to swing for it. A tall, strong, coarse
fellow like Grammont would be exactly suited for a soldier’s life.”
Russell mentioned having once seen Grammont out shooting in Rome
dressed in blue velvet. “Yes,” added the Chief, “he is a good
sportsman. He has the strength of muscle required for it. He would have
made an excellent gamekeeper. But as a Minister for Foreign Affairs,
one can hardly conceive how Napoleon came to select him.”
The Minister joined us at the tea-table about 10 o’clock, and referred
again to the bombardment. He said: “I did not from the very beginning
wish to have Paris invested. If what the general staff said at
Ferrières were correct, namely, that they could dispose of a couple of
the forts in three days, and then attack the weak enceinte, it would
have been all right. But it was a mistake to let 60,000 regulars
keep an army of 200,000 men engaged in watching them.” “One month up
to Sedan, and here we have already spent three months, for to-morrow
is the 1st of December. If we had telegraphed immediately after Sedan
for siege guns we should be now in the city, and there would be no
intervention on the part of the neutral Powers. If I had known that
three months ago I should have been extremely anxious. The danger of
intervention on the part of the neutral Powers increases daily. It
begins in a friendly way, but it may end very badly.” Keudell remarked:
“The idea of not bombarding first arose here.” “Yes,” replied the
Chief, “through the English letters to the Crown Prince.”
_Thursday, December 1st._--We were joined at dinner by a first
lieutenant, Von Saldern, who took part in the last engagement between
the 10th Army Corps and the Loire army. According to him that corps
was for a considerable time surrounded by the superior French force
at Beaune la Rolande, the enemy endeavouring to force their way
through one of our wings towards Fontainebleau. Our soldiers defended
themselves with the greatest gallantry and determination for seven
hours, Wedel’s troops and the men of the 16th regiment specially
distinguishing themselves. “We made over 1600 prisoners,” said Saldern,
“and the total loss of the French is estimated at four to five
thousand.” “I should have been better pleased,” said the Chief, “if
they had all been corpses. It is simply a disadvantage to us now to
make prisoners.”
The Chief afterwards gave Abeken instructions respecting communications
to be made to the King. The Chancellor looked through a number of
despatches and reports with him. Pointing to one document he said:
“Do not give him that without an explanation. Tell him how the matter
arose, otherwise he will misunderstand it. That long despatch from
Bernstorff--well, you can show him that also. But the newspaper article
enclosed--the gentlemen of the Embassy take things very easy--I have
already said frequently that such articles must be translated, or,
better still, that they should be accompanied by a _précis_. And tell
his Majesty also,” said the Minister in conclusion, “that, properly
speaking, we ought not to allow the Frenchman to join the Conference in
London” (the approaching Conference on the revision of the Paris Treaty
of 1856), “as he would represent a Government which is not recognised
by the Powers, and which will have no legal existence for a long time
to come. We can do it to please Russia in this question. At any rate,
if he begins to speak of other matters he must at once be sent about
his business.”
The Chief then related the following incident: “To-day, after calling
upon Roon, I made a round which may prove to have been useful. I
inspected Marie Antoinette’s apartment in the palace, and then I
thought I would see how the wounded were getting on. The servant who
acted as my guide had a pass-key, so I decided not to go in by the main
entrance, but by the back way. I asked one of the hospital attendants
what food the people had. Not very much. A little soup, which was
supposed to be bouillon, with broken bread and some grains of rice,
which were not even boiled soft. There was hardly any meat fat in it.
‘And how about wine? and do they get any beer?’ I asked. They got about
half a glass of wine during the day, he said. I inquired of another,
who had had none, and then of a third who had had some three days ago
and none since then. I then went on to question several of the men,
in all about a dozen, down to the Poles, who could not understand
me, but showed their pleasure at somebody taking an interest in them
by smiling. So that our poor wounded soldiers do not get what they
ought to, and suffer from cold besides, because the rooms must not be
warmed for fear of injuring the pictures. As if the life of one of our
soldiers was not worth more than all the trashy pictures in the palace!
The servant told me also that the oil lamps only remained alight until
11 o’clock, and that after that the men have to lie in the dark until
morning. I had previously spoken to a non-commissioned officer, who
was wounded in the foot. He said he did not want to complain, although
things could be much better. Some consideration was paid to him, but as
to the others! A member of the Bavarian Ambulance Corps now plucked up
courage, and said that wine and beer had been provided, but that half
of it had probably been intercepted somewhere; it was the same with
hot food and other presents. I then made my way to the chief surgeon.
‘How about provisions for the wounded?’ I asked. ‘Do they get enough to
eat?’ ‘Here is the bill of fare,’ he replied. ‘That is no good to me,’
I said; ‘the people cannot eat paper. Do they get wine?’ ‘Half a litre
daily.’ ‘Excuse me, but that is not true. I have questioned the men,
and I cannot believe they were lying when they told me that they had
not received any.’ ‘I call God to witness that everything here is done
properly and according to instructions. Please come with me and I will
question the men in your presence.’ ‘I will do nothing of the kind,’ I
answered; ‘but measures shall be taken to have them questioned by the
auditor as to whether they have received what has been ordered for them
by the inspector.’ He turned deadly pale--I see him now--an old wound
showed up on his face. ‘That would be a great reflection upon me,’ he
said. ‘Certainly,’ I replied, ‘and it ought to be. I shall take care
that the affair is inquired into--and speedily.’”[15]... “What I should
like best would be to induce the King to visit the wounded with me.”
He afterwards added: “We have two classes in particular amongst whom
frauds occur: the weevils that have to do with the commissariat and
the officials in the public works department, especially in the water
works. Then the doctors. I remember not long ago--it must be about a
year and a half ago--there was a great inquiry into frauds connected
with the passing of recruits for the army, in which, to my amazement,
some thirty doctors were involved.”
About 10.30 P.M. the Chief joined us at tea. After a while he remarked:
“The newspapers are dissatisfied with the Bavarian Treaty. I expected
as much from the beginning. They are displeased that certain officials
are called Bavarian, although they will have to conform entirely to
our laws. And the same with regard to the army. The beer tax is also
not to their liking, as if we had not had it for years past in the
Zollverein. And so on with a crowd of other objections, although after
all the important point has been attained and properly secured.”...
“They talk as if we had been waging war against Bavaria as we did in
1866 against Saxony, although this time we have Bavaria as an ally on
our side.”... “Before approving the treaty they want to wait and see
whether the unity of Germany will be secured in the form they prefer.
They can wait a long time for that. The course they are taking leads
only to fresh delays, while speedy action is necessary. If we hesitate
the devil will find time to sow dissensions. The treaty gives us a
great deal. Whoever wants to have everything runs the risk of getting
nothing. They are not content with what has been achieved. They require
more uniformity. If they would only remember the position of affairs
five years ago, and what they would then have been satisfied with!”...
“A Constituent Assembly! But what if the King of Bavaria should not
permit representatives to be elected to it? The Bavarian people would
not compel him, nor would I. It is easy to find fault, when one has no
proper idea of the conditions which govern the situation.”
The Minister then came to speak on another subject: “I have just read a
report on the surprise of the Unna battalion. Some of the inhabitants
of Chatillon took part in it--others, it is true, hid our people. It is
a wonder that they did not burn down the town in their first outburst
of anger. Afterwards, of course, in cold blood that would not do.”
After a short pause, the Chief took some coins out of his pocket and
played with them for a moment, remarking at the same time: “It is
surprising how many respectably dressed beggars one meets with here.
There were some at Reims, but it is much worse here.”... “How seldom
one now sees a gold piece with the head of Louis Philippe or Charles
X.! When I was young, between twenty and thirty, coins of Louis XVI.
and of the fat Louis XVIII. were still to be seen. Even the expression
‘louis d’or’ is no longer usual with us. In polite circles one speaks
of a friedrich d’or.” The Chancellor then balanced a napoleon on the
tip of his middle finger, as if he were weighing it, and continued:
“A hundred million double napoleons d’or would represent about the
amount of the war indemnity up to the present--later on it will be
more, four thousand million francs. Forty thousand thalers in gold
would make a hundredweight, thirty hundredweight would make a load for
a heavy two-horse waggon--(I know that because I once had to convey
fourteen thousand thalers in gold from Berlin to my own house. What a
weight it was!)--that would be about 800 waggon loads.” “It would not
take so long to collect the carts for that purpose as it does for the
ammunition for the bombardment,” observed some one, who, like most
of us, was losing patience at the slow progress of the preparations.
“Yes,” said the Chief; “Roon, however, told me the other day, he
had several hundred carts at Nanteuil, which could be used for the
transport of ammunition. Moreover some of the waggons that are now
drawn by six horses could do with four for a time, and the two spare
horses thus could be used for bringing up ammunition. We have already
318 guns here, but they want forty more, and Roon says he could have
them also brought up. The others however won’t hear of it.”
Hatzfeldt afterwards said: “It is only six or seven weeks since they
altered their minds. At Ferrières, while we were still on good terms
with them, Bronsart and Verdy said we could level the forts of Issy
and Vanvres to the ground in thirty-six hours, and then attack Paris
itself. Later on it was suddenly found to be impossible.” “Because of
the letters received from London,” exclaimed Bismarck-Bohlen. I asked
what Moltke thought of the matter. “He does not trouble himself about
it!” answered Hatzfeldt. But Bucher declared that Moltke wanted the
bombardment to take place.
_Friday, December 2nd._--I see Neininger in the morning and learn
that he succeeded in obtaining an audience from the Chief by playing
the informer. He hinted to a Dr. Schuster of Geneva that “there might
possibly be collusion between the foreign settlement collected round
headquarters, and the _personnel_ of the Government of National
Defence,” and also that there were “fresh symptoms of intimate
relations being maintained across the German investing lines with
the Oriental colony at Versailles.” Schuster managed to convey these
hints to the Minister. The “Oriental colony,” however, (a title which
is intended to apply chiefly to Löwinsohn, and after him to Bamberg)
appears to be innocent, and the intrigue to have been contrived merely
for the purpose of providing a better position for Neininger on the
_Moniteur_ by securing the dismissal of the other two journalists.
Subsequently wrote some letters and articles again setting forth the
Chief’s views in the matter of the Bavarian Treaty, and translated for
the King the leading article in _The Times_ on Gortschakoff’s reply to
Granville’s despatch.
Alten, Lehndorff and a dragoon officer Herr von Thadden, were the
Chief’s guests at dinner.
The Chief said that he had taken measures for providing our sentries
with more comfortable quarters. “Up to the present they occupied Madame
Jesse’s coach-house, which has no fireplace. That would not do any
longer, so I ordered the gardener to clear out half of the greenhouse
for them. ‘But Madame’s plants will be frozen,’ said the gardener’s
wife. ‘A great pity,’ said I. ‘I suppose it would be better if the
soldiers froze.’”
The Chief then referred to the danger of the Reichstag rejecting, or
even merely amending, the treaty with Bavaria. “I am very anxious
about it. People have no idea what the position is. We are balancing
ourselves on the point of a lightning conductor. If we lose the
equilibrium, which at much pains I have succeeded in establishing,
we fall to the ground. They want more than can be obtained without
coercion, and more than they would have been very pleased to accept
before 1866. If at that time they had got but half what they are
getting to-day! No; they must needs improve upon it and introduce more
unity, more uniformity; but if they change so much as a comma, fresh
negotiations must be undertaken. Where are they to take place? Here
in Versailles? And if we cannot bring them to a close before the 1st
of January--which many of the people in Munich would be glad of--then
German unity is lost, probably for years, and the Austrians can set to
work again in Munich.”
Mushrooms dressed in two ways were the first dish after the soup.
“These must be eaten in a thoughtful spirit,” said the Chief, “as they
are a present from some soldiers who found them growing in a quarry or
a cellar. The cook has made an excellent sauce for them. A still more
welcome gift, and certainly a rare one, was made to me the other day by
the--what a shame! I have quite forgotten. What regiment was it sent
me the roses?” “The 46th,” replied Bohlen. “Yes; it was a bouquet of
roses plucked under fire, probably in a garden near the outposts.” “By
the way, that reminds me that I met a Polish soldier in the hospital
who cannot read German. He would very much like to have a Polish prayer
book. Does anybody happen to have something of that kind?” Alten said
no, but he could give him some Polish newspapers. The Chief: “That
won’t do. He would not understand them, and besides they stir up the
people against us. But perhaps Radziwill has something. A Polish novel
would do--_Pan Twardowski_ or something of that kind.” Alten promised
to see if he could get anything.
Mention was made of Ducrot, who in all likelihood commanded the French
forces engaged in to-day’s sortie, and it was suggested he had good
reason not to allow himself to be made prisoner. “Certainly,” said the
Minister. “He will either get himself killed in action; or if he has
not courage enough for that, which I am rather inclined to believe, he
will make off in a balloon.”
Some one said Prince Wittgenstein (if I am not mistaken, a Russian
aide-de-camp) would also be glad to leave Paris.
Alten added: “Yes, in order that he might go in again. I fancy it is a
kind of sport for him.”
The Chief: “That might be all very well for a person who inspired
confidence. But I never trusted him, and when he wished to return to
Paris recently, neither I nor the general staff wanted to let him
through. He succeeded in obtaining permission surreptitiously through
the good nature of the King. Never mind. Possibly things may yet be
discovered about him that will ruin him in St. Petersburg.”
The subject of Stock Exchange speculation was again introduced, and
the Chief once more denied the possibility of turning to much account
the always very limited knowledge which one may have of political
events beforehand. Such events only affect the Bourse afterwards, and
the day when that is going to happen cannot be foreseen. “Of course,
if one could contrive things so as to produce a fall--but that is
dishonourable! Grammont has done so, according to what Russell recently
stated. He doubled his fortune in that way. One might almost say that
he brought about the war with that object. Moustier also carried on
that sort of business--not for himself, but with the fortune of his
mistress--and when it was on the point of being discovered, he poisoned
himself. One might take advantage of one’s position in a rather less
dishonest way by arranging to have the Bourse quotations from all the
Stock Exchanges sent off with the political despatches by obliging
officials abroad. The political despatches take precedence of the
Bourse telegrams, so that one would gain from twenty minutes to half an
hour. One would then want a quick-footed Jew to secure this advantage.
I know people who have done it. In that way one might earn fifteen
hundred to fifteen thousand thalers daily, and in a few years that
makes a handsome fortune. But, all the same, it remains ugly; and my
son shall not say of me that that was how I made him a rich man. He
can become rich in some other way--through speculation with his own
property, through the sale of timber, by marriage, or something of the
kind. I was much better off before I was made Chancellor than I am now.
My grants have ruined me. My affairs have been embarrassed ever since.
Previously I regarded myself as a simple country gentleman; now that
I, to a certain extent, belong to the peerage, my requirements are
increasing and my estates bring me in nothing. As Minister at Frankfurt
I always had a balance to my credit, and also in St. Petersburg, where
I was not obliged to entertain, and did not.”
In the afternoon Friedlander called upon me with an invitation,
which I was obliged to decline. Our fat friend knew exactly why the
bombardment did not take place. “Blumenthal will not agree to it
because the Crown Prince does not want it,” he said; “and behind him
are the two Victorias.” So an Artillery officer told him a few days ago.
_Addendum._--According to a pencil note which I have now laid hands on,
Bohlen remarked yesterday at dinner that he understood many valuable
pictures and manuscripts removed by the French from Germany had not
been returned. Some one else observed that it would be difficult to
put this right now. “Well,” said the Chief, “we could take others of
equal value in their stead. We could, for instance, pack up the best
of the pictures out of the Gallery here.” “Yes, and sell them to the
Americans,” added Bohlen; “they would give us a good price for them.”
According to another note the Chancellor related (doubtless on
the occasion when Holnstein dined with us): “In Crehanges the
Augustenburger again tricked me into shaking hands with him. A Bavarian
Colonel or General came over to me and held out his hand, which I
took. I could not put a name to the face, and when I had, it was too
late. If I could only come across him again, I would say to him, ‘You
treacherously purloined a hand from me at Crehanges; will you please
restore it?’”
I afterwards wrote an article on the neutrality of Luxemburg, and the
perfidious way in which people there are taking advantage of it to
help the French in every sort of way. It ran as follows:--We declared
at the commencement of the war that we would respect the neutrality
of the Grand Duchy, the neutrality of its government and people being
thereby assumed. That condition, however, has not been fulfilled, the
Luxemburgers having been guilty of flagrant breaches of neutrality,
although we on our part have kept our promise in spite of the
inconvenience to which we have often been put, especially in connection
with the transport of our wounded. We have already had occasion to
complain of the fortress of Thionville having been provisioned by
trains despatched at night with the assistance of the railway officials
and police authorities of the Grand Duchy. After the capitulation of
Metz numbers of French soldiers passed through Luxemburg with the
object of returning to France and rejoining the French army. The French
Vice-Consul opened a regular office at the Luxemburg railway station,
where soldiers were provided with money and passports for their
journey. The Grand Ducal Government permitted all this to go on without
making any attempt to prevent it. They cannot, therefore, complain if
in future military operations we pay no regard to the neutrality of the
country, or if we demand compensation for the injury done by breaches
of neutrality due to such culpable negligence.
_Sunday, December 4th._--We were joined at dinner by Roggenbach, a
former Baden Minister, and von Niethammer, a member of the Bavarian
Ambulance Corps, whose acquaintance the Chief made recently in the
hospital.
The Chief spoke at first of having again visited the wounded, and
afterwards added:--“Leaving Frankfurt and St. Petersburg out of
account, I have now been longer here than in any other foreign town
during my whole life. We shall spend Christmas here, which we had not
expected to do, and we may remain at Versailles till Easter and see the
trees grow green again, whilst we wait for news of the Loire army. Had
we only known we might have planted asparagus in the garden here.”
The Minister afterwards said, addressing Roggenbach:--“I have just
looked through the newspaper extracts. How they do abuse the treaties!
They simply tear them into shreds. The _National Zeitung_, the
_Kölnische_,--the _Weser Zeitung_ is still the most reasonable, as it
always is. Of course one must put up with criticism; but then one is
responsible if the negotiations come to nothing, while the critics have
no responsibility. I am indifferent as to their censure so long as the
thing gets through the Reichstag. History may say that the wretched
Chancellor ought to have done better; but I was responsible. If the
Reichstag introduces amendments every German Diet can do the same, and
then the thing will drag on and we shall not be able to secure the
peace we desire and need. We cannot demand the cession of Alsace if no
political entity is created, if there is no Germany to cede it to.”
The question of the peace negotiations to follow in the approaching
capitulation of Paris was then discussed, and the difficulties which
might arise. The Chief said:--“Favre and Trochu may say, ‘We are
not the Government. We were part of it at one time, but now that
we have surrendered we are private persons. I am nothing more than
Citizen Trochu.’ But at that point I should try a little coercion on
the Parisians. I should say to them: ‘I hold you, two million people,
responsible in your own persons. I shall let you starve for twenty-four
hours unless you agree to our demands.’ Yes, and yet another
four-and-twenty hours, come what might of it.
“I would stick to my point--but the King, the Crown Prince, the women
who force their sentimental views upon them, and certain secret
European connections--I can deal with those in front of me--but those
who stand behind me, behind my back, or rather who weigh upon me so
that I cannot breathe!--people for whom the German cause and German
victories are not the main question; but, rather, their anxiety to be
praised in English newspapers. Ah, if one were but the Landgrave!--I
could trust myself to be hard enough. But, unfortunately, one is not
the Landgrave.[16] Quite recently, in their maudlin solicitude for
the Parisians, they have again brought forward a thoroughly foolish
scheme. Great stores of provisions from London and Belgium are to be
collected for the Parisians. The storehouses are to be within our
lines, and our soldiers are merely to look at them, but not to touch
them, however much they may themselves suffer from scarcity and hunger.
These supplies are to prevent the Parisians starving when they shall
have capitulated. We, in this house, it is true, have enough, but the
troops are on short commons; yet they must suffer in order that the
Parisians, when they learn that supplies have been collected for them,
may postpone their capitulation till they have eaten their last loaf
and slaughtered their last horse. I shall not be consulted, otherwise
I’d rather be hanged than consent to it. But I am, nevertheless,
responsible. I was imprudent enough to call attention to the famine
that must ensue. It is true I mentioned it merely to the diplomatists.
But they have thus become aware of the fact. Otherwise it would not
have occurred to them.”
Swiss cheese having been handed round, some one raised the question
whether cheese and wine went well together. “Some descriptions with
certain wines,” was the Minister’s decision. “Not strong ones like
Gorgonzola and Dutch cheese, but others are all right. I remember that
at the time when people drank hard in Pomerania--two hundred years
ago or more--the good folks of Rammin were the greatest topers in the
country. One of them happened to get a supply of wine from Stettin,
which was not quite to his liking. He complained accordingly to the
merchant, who replied: ‘_Eet kees to Wien, Herr von Rammin, deen smeckt
de Wien wie in Stettin ook to Rammin._’” (Low German: “Eat cheese to
your wine, good sir, from Rammin, then the wine will taste as good in
Rammin as it does here in Stettin.”)
Abeken, who had been with the King, came in afterwards, and reported
that his Majesty considered it would be well to write again to the
Emperor of Russia, and give him the views held here respecting the
Gortschakoff Note. The Chief said: “I think not. Enough has been
already written and telegraphed on the subject. They know in St.
Petersburg what we think. At least we must not write discourteously,
but rather in a friendly and amiable spirit: It is better however to
say nothing. If it were England! But we shall still want Russia’s good
will in the immediate future. When that is no longer necessary, we can
afford to be rude.”
Bohlen said: “They are quite beside themselves in Berlin. They will
have tremendous rejoicings there to-morrow, about the Emperor. They are
going to illuminate the town, and are making immense preparations--a
regular scene from fairyland!” “I fancy that will have a good effect
on the Reichstag,” observed the Chief. “It was really very nice
of Roggenbach to start off at once for Berlin” (in order to urge
moderation upon the grumblers in the Reichstag). “They” (the members
of Parliament, or the Berliners?) “attach much more importance to the
title of Emperor than the thing really deserves--although I do not mean
to say it is of no value.”
“That was really funny,” said Bohlen, “what Holnstein told us about his
interview with the King of Bavaria while he had a toothache!”
“And the way I wrote to him in order to bring him round,” added the
Chancellor. “I knew that he could not bear me, and did not trust me.
So I wrote to him at last, that one of our estates had been granted to
our family by Ludwig, the Bavarian, as Lord of Brandenburg, and that
consequently we had had relations with his house for more than five
centuries. That was true, in so far as the estates which we now hold
were given to us in exchange for those which the Hohenzollerns extorted
from us. Holnstein said the letter must have pleased the King very
much, as he asked to read it again. It was Holnstein who did most in
this matter. He played his part very cleverly. Tell me (to Bohlen),
what Order can we give him?”
Bohlen: “He got the first class of the red fowl (the Red Eagle), when
the Crown Prince was in Munich.”
“Well then,” said the Chief, “he has got the highest decoration that
can be given to him.”
Bohlen: “Well, the King might give him the Imperial German Order, about
which Stillfried is already meditating, or he can found a new Prussian
Order, and thus supply a long-felt want.”
The Chief: “The Green Lion.”
Bohlen: “The German Order, with a black, white, and red ribbon.”
The Chief: “Or with the colours of the German Knights, a white ribbon
with small black stripes. It looks very well. The King did not rightly
know what it was all about when Holnstein requested an audience. He
said to me, ‘I observed to Holnstein, that I supposed he wished to see
Versailles.’ Of course, he (King William) could not have arranged that
himself”--(_i.e._, he could not have arranged to acquire the Imperial
dignity through the good offices of Bavaria.)
Werther, our Minister at Munich, seems to have reported that it was
intended there to commission Prince Luitpold with the proclamation of
the Emperor. The Chancellor observed: “A singular idea! Another example
of the way in which Bray treats matters of business. How is he to do
it? Step on to a balcony, and proclaim it?--to whom? That might do if
all the Princes were here--but with the three or four now present!
I had hoped that we should have made peace before German unity was
secured.”
Bohlen: “How pleased the King will feel at being made Emperor! and
still more so, the Crown Prince!”
The Chief: “Yes, and no doubt he is already thinking about the cut of
the Imperial robes.”
_Monday, December 5th._--The Chief sent for me, and gave me his
instructions for a _démenti_ with regard to the Bavarian Treaty,
in which his ideas were to be somewhat differently expressed. It
was to the following effect. The rumour that the Chancellor of the
Confederation only concluded the treaties with the South German States,
in anticipation that they would be rejected, or at least amended in
the Reichstag, is entirely without foundation. The debate on the
treaties must be brought to a close during the month of December, and
they must be adopted in their entirety, in order that they may come
into force on the 1st of January. Otherwise, everything will remain
uncertain. If the representatives of North Germany alter the treaties,
the South German Diets will be entitled to make further amendments in
a contrary sense, and there is no knowing how far that right might
not be exercised. In such circumstances, the nation might have still
to wait a long time for its political unity. (“Perhaps ten years,”
said the Chief, “and _interim aliquid fit_.”) In that case, also the
Treaty of Peace might not be what we desire. The treaties may be
deficient, but they can always be gradually improved by the Reichstag,
in co-operation with the Bundesrath, and through the pressure of public
opinion and national sentiment. There is no hurry about that. If public
opinion brings no pressure to bear in that direction, it is obvious
that the present arrangement meets the views of the majority of the
nation. Men of national sentiment at Versailles are very anxious and
uneasy at the prevailing dispositions in Berlin. They are, however,
to some extent reassured by the fact that the _Volkszeitung_ opposes
the Bavarian Treaty, as people have gradually grown accustomed to find
that all persons of political insight as a rule reject whatever that
journal praises and recommends, and are disposed to adopt whatever it
deprecates and censures.
At dinner Bamberger, the member of the Reichstag, was on the
Chief’s left. He is also going to Berlin in order to plead for the
adoption, without alteration, of the treaties with South Germany. The
conversation first turned on doctors and their knowledge, whereupon
the Chief (I cannot now remember on what grounds) delivered the
following weighty judgment: “Ah, yes, if doctors were only sensible
men; but as it is, they are dolts.” The question of the treaties was
then discussed, and the attitude of the Princes in this matter was
admitted to be correct. “Yes, but the Reichstag,” said the Chancellor;
“it reminds me of Kaiser Heinrich and his ‘Gentlemen, you have spoiled
my sport.’[17] In that instance it ultimately turned out all right, but
in this! All the members of the Reichstag might sacrifice themselves
one after another upon the altar of the Fatherland--it would be all to
no purpose.” After reflecting for a moment, the Minister continued,
with a smile: “Members of the Diet and the Reichstag should be made
responsible, like Ministers, no more and no less, and placed on a
footing of absolute equality. A Bill should provide for the impeachment
for treason of members of Parliament when they reject important State
treaties, or, as in Paris, approve of a war undertaken on frivolous
pretexts. They were all in favour of the war, with the exception of
Jules Favre. Perhaps I shall bring in some such measure one day.”
The conversation then turned upon the approaching capitulation of
Paris, which must take place, at latest, within a month. “Ah!” sighed
the Chancellor, “it is then that my troubles will begin in earnest.”...
Bamberger was of opinion that they should not be allowed merely to
capitulate, but should immediately be called upon to conclude peace.
“Quite so,” said the Chief. “That is exactly my view, and they should
be forced to do so by starvation. But there are people who want, above
all else, to be extolled for their humane feelings, and they will spoil
everything--altogether forgetting the fact that we must think of our
own soldiers, and take care that they shall not suffer want and be shot
down to no purpose. It is just the same with the bombardment. And then
we are told to spare people who are searching for potatoes; they should
be shot too, if we want to reduce the city by starvation.”
After 8 o’clock, I was called to the Chief several times, and wrote
two paragraphs for the _Spenersche Zeitung_ in accordance with his
instructions. The first ran as follows:--“The Vienna newspapers
recently stated that ‘the German Austrians did not wish for war, and
the majority of the Austrian Slavs just as little.’ But there is in
Austria, and in Hungary, a not very numerous but influential party
which does desire war. When inquiry is made as to their real motive
for doing so, it is found to arise from pride and arrogance, from a
kind of frivolous chivalry, from a real hunger for political luxuries,
from the determination to play the Grand Seigneur before the world.
The Austrians of this party, in which very distinguished personages
are the moving spirits, seem to us to resemble the princely family of
Esterhazy. It is an ancient house, of high rank, with great estates and
a large fortune. Its members might well have been content to occupy
so eminent a position. But the evil genius of the family continually
drove them into extravagance, into making too great demands upon their
resources, into squandering enormous sums on horses, diamonds, &c.,
with the object of displaying their wealth and importance; so that
they fell into debt, and, finally, came to the verge of bankruptcy.
The Esterhazy Lottery was then resorted to, and actually did tide them
over their difficulties. The family was saved. But scarcely have they
begun to breathe freely, and to regain their footing, when their evil
genius once more inspires them, and the old game goes on again, until,
at length, a time will come when even a lottery will no longer save
them. The Austrian party to which we have already referred seems to us
to present a close resemblance to the Esterhazys. The State is a fine
property, with excellent natural advantages, a rich soil, and a great
variety of valuable resources. But the policy of the proprietors is
exactly the same as that of the Esterhazys. They must always overreach
themselves, and try to be more than they really are. The evil genius
of the State regards as a necessity what is in reality mere luxury,
self-conceit, and the desire to cut a great figure in the world. In
that way, the ancient and wealthy house has become a comparatively
poor one, with a touch of the Quixotic, and a still stronger flavour
of unfair dealing, which is very badly suited to our matter-of-fact
age, when so much importance is attached to the ability to pay one’s
way. Every now and then, the State, like its prototype the Esterhazys,
escapes out of its troubles by means of a lottery, or of some not
particularly respectable financial manœuvre; but then it suddenly
puts forward fresh claims to a position beyond its means, presumes to
play the part of a great Power, squanders millions on mobilisation,
as its prototype does on stables and diamonds, and thus sinks deeper
and deeper into financial difficulties. Instead of being able to
satisfy its creditors by good management and a modest bearing, it moves
steadily forward, without pause or rest, towards that bankruptcy which
for a considerable space has only been a question of time.”
The foregoing is an almost literal reproduction of the Chief’s own
words. I did not venture, however, to incorporate his concluding
remarks, which were as follows: “The Hapsburgs have really
become great through plundering old families--the Hungarians,
for instance. At bottom they are only a family of police spies
(_polizeilich-Spitzelfamilie_) who lived upon and made their fortune by
confiscations.”
The second paragraph, which referred to a statement in the
_Indépendance Belge_, pointed out that the relationship between the
Orleans and the House of Hapsburg-Lorraine through the Duc d’Alençon,
could not induce us Germans to regard them with any special favour.
The paragraph was to the following effect. It is known that Trochu
declined the offer of the Princes of the House of Orleans to take part
in the struggle against us. The _Indépendance Belge_ now states that
the Duc d’Alençon, second son of the Duc de Nemours, who was at that
time incapacitated by illness from joining his uncles and cousins in
their offer of service, has now sought salvation by adopting a similar
course. The Brussels organ adds the significant remark: “It will be
remembered that the Duc d’Alençon is married to a sister of the Empress
of Austria.” We understand that hint, and believe we shall be speaking
in the spirit of German policy in replying to it as follows:--The
Orleans are quite as hostile to us as the other dynasties that are
fishing for the French throne. Their journals are filled with lies and
abuse directed against us. We have not forgotten the hymn of praise
which the Duc de Joinville raised after the battle of Wörth to the
franctireurs who had acted like assassins. The only French Government
we care for is that which can do us the least harm, because it is most
occupied with its own affairs, and with maintaining its own position
against its rivals. Otherwise Orleanists, Legitimists, Imperialists,
and Republicans are all of the same value or no value to us. And as
for those who throw out hints about the Austrian relationship, they
would do well to be on their guard, as we are on ours. There is in
Austria-Hungary one party in favour of Germany and another hostile
to her,--a party that wants to continue the policy of Kaunitz in the
Seven Years’ War, a policy of constant conspiracy with France against
German interests, and particularly against Prussia. That is the policy
which has recently been connected with Metternich’s name, and which was
pursued from 1815 to 1866. Since then more or less vigorous attempts
have been made to continue it. It is the party of which the younger
Metternich is regarded as the leader. He has for years past been
looked upon as the most ardent advocate of a Franco-Austrian alliance
against Germany, and one of the principal instigators of the present
war. If the Orleans believe that their prospects are improved by their
connection with Austria, they ought also to know that for that very
reason they have nothing to hope from us.
After Bucher, Keudell and myself had been for some time at tea, we were
joined by the Chief, and afterwards by Hatzfeldt, who had been with the
King. He said it was intolerably dull there.
“Grimm, the Russian Councillor of State, gave us a variety of wearisome
particulars about Louis Quatorze and Louis Quinze. The W. worried us,
and me in particular, with silly questions.” (He pouted his lips,
assumed a killing smile, and bent his head to one side, imitating
the Grand Duke’s affectations.) “He informed us that the students
at St. Cyr all received a portrait of Madame Maintenon, and that he
himself had one also. The King, who had occasionally rubbed his eyes,
observed somewhat pointedly, ‘I suppose they were photographs.’ ‘No,
oh no, engravings.’ ‘Well, then, what did you do with yours?’ the King
asked. ‘Why, nothing, I kept it.’ The Grand Duke then asked me--he had
obviously prepared the question in advance, and perhaps learnt it by
heart--‘Is the _Revue des Deux Mondes_ still published? An interesting
newspaper.’ I replied, ‘I do not know, your Royal Highness.’ ‘Who is
the editor?’ ‘I do not know that either.’ ‘So-o-o!’ The aides-de-camp
were cruelly bored, and one of them nudged Lehndorff, begging him in a
whisper to give the old fool a rap on the head with his crutch.”
“Yes, he is a fearful bore,” added the Chief. “What a miserable
position it must be for a man whose father was a Court official to
him or one like him, and who has to assume the same office himself--a
chamberlain or something of that kind, who has to listen day after day
to all that twaddle, and has no prospect of ever becoming anything
else! The Queen is just such another. She was educated in the same
school. I remember she once questioned me on a literary subject, I
believe it was about some French book or other. ‘I do not know, your
Majesty,’ I replied. ‘Ah, I suppose that does not interest you.’ ‘No,
your Majesty.’ Radowitz was very strong on those subjects. He boldly
gave every kind of information, and in that way secured a great deal
of his success at Court. He was able to tell exactly what Maintenon
or Pompadour wore on such and such a day; such and such a gewgaw on
her neck, her head-dress trimmed with colibris or grapes, her gown
pearl-grey or peacock-green with furbelows or lace of this or that
description--exactly as if he had been there at the time. The ladies
were all ear for these toilette lectures, which he poured forth with
the utmost fluency.”
The conversation then turned upon Alexander von Humboldt, who appears
to have been a courtier too, but not of the amusing variety. The Chief
said: “Under the late King I was the sole victim when Humboldt chose
to entertain the company in his own style. He usually read, often for
hours at a time, the biography of some French savant or architect in
whom nobody in the world except himself took the slightest interest.
He stood by the lamp holding the paper close to the light, and
occasionally paused for the purpose of making some learned observation.
Although nobody listened to him he had the ear of the house. The Queen
was all the time at work on a piece of tapestry, and certainly did
not understand a word of what he said. The King looked through his
portfolios of engravings, turning them over as noisily as possible,
evidently with the intention of not hearing him. The young people on
both sides and in the background enjoyed themselves without the least
restraint, so that their cackling and giggling actually drowned his
reading, which however rippled on without break or stop like a brook.
Gerlach, who was usually present, sat on his small round chair which
could barely accommodate his voluminous person, and slept so soundly
that he snored. The King was once obliged to wake him, and said,
‘Pray, Gerlach, don’t snore so loud!’ I was Humboldt’s only patient
listener, that is to say I sat silent and pretended to listen, at the
same time following my own thoughts, until at length cold cake and
white wine were served. It put the old gentleman in very bad humour
not to be allowed to have the talk all to himself. I remember once
there was somebody there who managed to monopolise the conversation,
quite naturally, it is true, as he was a clever raconteur and spoke
about things that interested everybody. Humboldt was beside himself.
In a peevish surly temper he piled his plate so high (pointing with
his hand) with _pâté de foie gras_, fat eels, lobsters’ tails, and
other indigestible stuff,--a real mountain,--it was astounding that
an old man could put it all away. At last his patience was exhausted,
and he could not stand it any longer. So he tried to interrupt the
speaker. ‘On the peak of Popocatapetl,’ he began,--but the other went
on with his story. ‘On the peak of Popocatapetl, seven thousand fathoms
above’--but he again failed to make any impression, and the narrative
maintained its easy flow. ‘On the peak of Popocatapetl, seven thousand
fathoms above the level of the sea,’ he exclaimed in a loud and excited
tone,--but with as little success as before. The talker talked on, and
the company had no ears for anybody else. That was something unheard
of, outrageous! Humboldt threw himself back in morose meditation over
the ingratitude of mankind, and shortly afterwards left. The Liberals
made a great deal of him, and counted him as one of themselves. He
was however a sycophant who aspired to the favour of Princes and who
was only happy when basking in the sunshine of royalty. That did
not prevent him however from criticising the Court afterwards to
Varnhagen, and repeating all sorts of discreditable stories about it.
Varnhagen worked these up into books, which I also bought. They are
fearfully dear when one thinks how few lines in large type go to the
page.” Keudell observed that they were nevertheless indispensable for
historical purposes. “Yes, in a certain sense,” replied the Chief.
“Taken individually the stories are not worth much, but as a whole
they are an expression of the sourness of Berlin at a period when
nothing of importance was happening. At that time everybody talked
in that maliciously impotent way. It was a society which it would be
hardly possible to realise to-day without the assistance of such books,
unless one had personal experience of it. A great deal of outward show
with nothing genuine behind it. I remember, although I was a very
little fellow at the time, it must have been in 1821 or ’22. Ministers
were still like strange animals, regarded with wonder as something
mysterious. There was once a large party, which was at that time called
an _assemblée_, given at Schuckmann’s--what a monstrous huge beast he
was as a Minister! My mother also went there. I remember it as if it
were to-day. She wore long gloves that went up to here.” (He pointed
to the upper part of his arm.) “A dress with a short waist, her hair
puffed out on both sides, and a big ostrich feather on her head.” (The
Chief left this anecdote unfinished, if indeed there was any conclusion
to it, and returned to his former subject.) “Humboldt, however,” he
continued, “had a great many interesting things to tell when one was
alone with him, about the times of Frederick William III., and in
particular about his own first sojourn in Paris. As he liked me, owing
to the attention with which I listened to him, he told me a number of
pretty anecdotes. It was the same with old Metternich, with whom I
spent a few days at Johannisberg. Thun afterwards said to me, ‘I do
not know how you have managed to get round the old Prince, but he has
indeed looked into you as if you were a golden goblet, and he told me
if you do not come to an understanding with him then I really don’t
know what to say.’ ‘I can explain that to you,’ I replied. ‘I listened
to all his stories, and often prompted him to continue them. That
pleases the garrulous old people.’”
Hatzfeldt said that Moltke had written to Trochu telling him how
affairs stood at Orleans, and expressing his readiness to allow one of
Trochu’s officers to satisfy himself of the truth of his statement. He
would be furnished with a safe conduct to Orleans. The Chief said: “I
know that. But he should not have done so. They ought to find that out
for themselves. Our lines are now thin at various points, and they have
also a pigeon post. They will only imagine we are in a hurry to get
them to capitulate.”
_Tuesday, December 6th._--In the morning I telegraphed to Berlin and
London more detailed particulars of the victory at Orleans. Then wrote
articles for the _Moniteur_ and the German papers on the way in which
French officers interned in Germany are breaking their parole. So long
as this unworthy conduct receives approval and encouragement from the
Government of National Defence, it is impossible for us to carry on any
negotiations with it.
Dr. Lauer and Odo Russell dined with us to-day. The conversation was
not of particular interest. We had, however, a delicious Palatine
wine--Deidesheimer Hofstück and Forster Kirchenstück, a noble juice,
rich in all virtues, fragrant, and fiery. _Aus Feuer ward der Geist
erschaffen_. Even Bucher, who usually drinks only red wine, did justice
to this heavenly dew from the Haardt Hills.
I afterwards wrote an article in which I politely expressed surprise
at the brazen impudence with which Grammont reminds the world of his
existence in the Brussels _Gaulois_. He who, through his unparalleled
ineptitude, has brought so much misery upon France, should, like his
colleague Ollivier, have hidden himself in silence and been glad to be
forgotten. Or, inspired by his ancient name, he should have joined the
army and fought for his country, so as in some degree to expiate the
wrong he has done it. Instead of doing anything of the kind, however,
he dares to remind the world that he still lives, and once conducted
the foreign policy of France. “A blockhead, a coward, an impudent
fellow!” said the Chief, when he instructed me to write this article.
“You can use the strongest expressions in dealing with him.”
CHAPTER XIV
THE PROSPECTS OUTSIDE PARIS IMPROVE
_Wednesday, December 7th._--At dinner the Chief related some of his
Frankfurt reminiscences. “It was possible to get on with Thun,” he
said. “He was a respectable man. Taken altogether, Rechberg[18] was
also not bad. He was at least honourable from a personal standpoint,
although violent and irascible--one of those passionate, fiery blondes!
It is true that as an Austrian diplomat of those days he was not able
to pay too strict a regard to truth. I remember his once receiving a
despatch in which he was instructed to maintain the best relations with
us, a second despatch being sent to him at the same time enjoining him
to follow an exactly opposite course. I happened to call upon him, and
he inadvertently gave me the second despatch to read. I saw immediately
how matters stood and read it through. Then handing it back to him I
said: ‘I beg your pardon, but you have given me the wrong one.’ He
was fearfully embarrassed, but I consoled him, saying I would take no
advantage of his mistake, using it merely for my personal information.”
“The third, however,--Prokesch--was not at all to my liking. In the
East he had learnt the basest forms of intrigue and had no sense of
honour or truth. A thoroughpaced liar. I remember being once in a large
company where some Austrian assertion which was not in accordance with
the truth was being discussed. Prokesch, raising his voice in order
that I might hear him, said: ‘If that be not true, then the Imperial
and Royal Cabinet has commissioned me to commit an act of perfidy,
indeed his Imperial and Apostolic Majesty has _lied_ to me!’ and he
emphasised the word _lied_. He looked at me whilst he was speaking,
and, when he had finished, I replied, quietly: ‘Quite so, Excellency!’
He was obviously aghast, and as he looked round and found all eyes
cast down and a deep silence which showed approval of what I had said,
he turned away without a word and went into the dining-room where the
table was laid. He had recovered himself, however, after dinner, and
came over to me with a full glass in his hand--but for that I should
have thought he was going to challenge me--and said, ‘Well, let us make
peace.’ ‘Certainly,’ I replied, ‘but what I said in the other room was
true, and the protocol must be altered.’ The protocol was altered, an
admission that it had contained an untruth. A rascally fellow!”
_Thursday, December 8th._--Some one asked at dinner how the question
of Emperor and Empire now stood. The Chief replied _inter alia_: “We
have had a great deal of trouble with it in the way of telegrams and
letters. But after all Holnstein has done the greater part of the work.
He is a clever fellow, and not in the least spoilt by or prepossessed
in favour of Court manners.” Putbus asked what position he held.
“Master of the Horse. He showed himself very willing and energetic,
making the journey to Munich and back in six days. In the present
condition of the railways that requires a great deal of good will. Of
course he has the necessary physique. Indeed, not merely to Munich, but
to Hohenschwangau,--and there saw the King who had just been operated
under chloroform for a tumour in the gum. But King Lewis also greatly
contributed to the speedy settlement of the matter. He received the
letter immediately, and at once gave a definite answer. He might easily
have said that he must first take some fresh air in the mountains,
and would answer in three or four days. The Count has certainly done
us a very good service in the affair; but I really do not know how we
can reward him.” I forget how the conversation came to deal with the
terms “Swell,” “Snob,” and “Cockney,” which were the subject of much
discussion. The Chief mentioned a certain diplomat as a “swell,” and
observed: “It is really a capital word, but we cannot translate it
into German. ‘_Stutzer_,’ perhaps, but that conveys at the same time
pompousness and self-importance. ‘Snob’ is something quite different,
while it is also very difficult for us to render properly. It denotes
a variety of attributes, but principally one-sidedness, narrowness,
slavery to local or class prejudices, philistinism. A ‘snob’ is
something like our ‘_Pfalbürger_,’ yet not quite. It includes also a
petty conception of family interests, political narrow-mindedness,
rigid adherence to ideas and habits that have become a second nature.
There are also female snobs and very distinguished ones. The feminine
half of our Court are snobs. Our two most exalted ladies are snobs. The
male element is not snobbish. One may also talk of party snobs--those
who in larger political issues cannot emancipate themselves from the
rules that govern private conduct--the ‘Progressist snob.’ The cockney
again is quite another person. That term applies more particularly to
Londoners. There are people there who have never been outside their
own walls and streets, never got away from the brick and mortar, who
have never seen life anywhere else nor travelled beyond the sound of
Bow Bells. We have also Berliners who have never left their city. But
Berlin is a small place compared to London, or even Paris, which has
also its cockneys, although they are known by another name there. There
are hundreds of thousands in London who have never seen anything but
London. In such great cities conceptions are formed which permeate
the whole community, and harden into the most inveterate prejudices.
Such narrow and silly ideas arise in every great centre of population
where the people have no experience, and often not the faintest notion
of how things look elsewhere. Silliness without conceit is endurable,
but to be silly and unpractical, and at the same time conceited, is
intolerable. Country life brings people into much closer contact
with realities. They may be less educated there, but what they know
they know thoroughly. There are, however, snobs in the country also.
(Turning to Putbus.) Just take a really clever shot. He is convinced
that he is the first man in the world, and that sport is everything,
and that those who do not understand it are worth nothing. And then
a man who lives on his estate in a remote district, where he is
everything, and all the people depend upon him; when he comes to the
wool-market and finds that he is not of the same importance with the
townspeople as he is at home, he gets into a bad temper, sits sulking
on his sack of wool, and takes no notice of anything else.”
At tea, Keudell said that I ought really to see, not merely those
political despatches, reports and drafts which I received from the
Minister, but everything that came in and went out. He would speak on
the subject to Abeken, who acts here as Secretary of State. I accepted
his proposal with many thanks.
Bucher informed me that the Minister had made some very interesting
remarks in the drawing-room while they were taking coffee. Prince
Putbus mentioned his desire to travel in far distant lands. “It might
be possible to manage that for you,” said the Chief. “You might be
commissioned to notify the foundation of the German Empire to the
Emperor of China and the Tycoon of Japan.” The Minister then discussed
at length the duties of the German aristocracy, of course with special
reference to his guest.
The King was faithful to his duty, but he was born in the last century,
and thus he regarded many things from a point of view which was no
longer suitable to the times. He would allow himself to be cut to
pieces in the interests of the State, as he understood them, if he
knew that his family would be provided for. The future king was quite
different. He had not this strong sense of duty. When he found himself
in good case, had plenty of money at his disposal, and was praised by
the newspapers, he was quite satisfied. He would choose his Ministers
in the English fashion from the Liberal or from other parties just as
things happened in the Diet, in order to avoid trouble. In that way,
however, he would ruin everything, or at least produce a condition
of constant instability. The great nobles ought then to intervene.
They must have a sense of the necessities of the State and recognise
their mission, which is to preserve the State from vacillation and
uncertainty in the struggles of parties, to give it a firm support,
&c. There was no objection to their associating with a Strousberg, but
they would do better to become bankers straight away.
_Monday, December 12th._--The Chief’s indisposition seems to have again
grown worse, and it is said that he is in a particularly bad humour.
Dr. Lauer has been to see him. _The Times_ contains the following
communication which it would be impossible for us to improve upon.[19]
An excellent letter which we must submit to the Versailles people in
the _Moniteur_.
Busily engaged all the evening. Translated for the King articles
published by _The Times_ and _Daily Telegraph_ warmly approving of the
restoration of the German Empire and the imperial dignity.
_The Times_ article, after stating that not merely the fact of the
restoration of the German Empire but also the manner in which it
had been brought about could only be regarded with the liveliest
satisfaction, proceeds as follows:--
“The political significance of this change cannot be placed too high.
A mighty revolution has been accomplished in Europe, and all our
traditions have suddenly become antiquated. No one can pretend to
predict the relations of the Great Powers; but it is not very difficult
to forecast in a general way the political tendencies of the time on
which we are about to enter. There will be a powerful united Germany,
presided over by a family which represents not only its interests, but
its military fame. On the one side will be Russia, strong and watchful
as ever; but on the other side will be France, which, whether patient
under her reverses or burning for revenge, will be for a time incapable
of playing that great part in Europe which belonged to her even under
the feebleness of the Restoration. Thus, whereas we had formerly two
strong centralised military empires, with a distracted, unready nation
between them, which might be ground to powder whenever the two closed
to crush it, there is now a firm barrier erected in Central Europe, and
the fabric is correspondingly strengthened. In this the policy of past
generations of English statesmen is fulfilled. They all desired the
creation of a strong Central Power, and laboured for it in peace and
war by negotiations and alliances, now with the Empire, now with the
new State which had arisen in the North.”
On the instructions of the Chief, I also wrote a paragraph for the
press to the effect that we are no longer opposed by France, but
rather by the cosmopolitan Red Republicans, Garibaldi and Mazzini (who
are with Gambetta, and act as his counsellors), and Polish, Spanish,
and Danish adherents of that party. The aims of these good people
are indicated in a letter from the son of the Prefect Ordinaire,
who describes himself as an officer in Garibaldi’s General Staff.
This letter, which is dated from Autun on the 16th of November, and
addressed to the editor of the newspaper _Droits de l’Homme_, contains
the following passage:--
“You will see from the post-mark where we are now stationed--in one of
the most priest-ridden towns of France. It is the centre of monarchical
reaction. It looks less like a town than an enormous monastery, huge
black walls and barred windows, behind which monks of all colours
intrigue and pray in darkness and silence for the success of the good
cause. In the streets our red shirts are constantly brushing against
the black cassock of the priest. The whole population, from the
tradespeople downwards, present a mystic aspect, and appear as if they
had been all drenched in holy water. We are regarded here as if we
had been inscribed upon the Index, and the calumnies that are rained
upon us rival the deluge. A breach of discipline (which is unavoidable
in the case of a volunteer army) is immediately exaggerated into a
great crime. Trifles are transformed into outrages that deserve to be
punished by death. The mountain frequently gives birth to a mere mouse,
but the bad impression produced upon the public mind remains.
“Would you believe it? The officials themselves put difficulties
in our way! They echo, I hope unwittingly, the calumnies that are
circulated against us, and regard us with evident ill will. Indeed,
our fellow citizens are almost inclined to look upon our army as a
band of brigands. Can you imagine that the monarchists have not in the
least renounced their mischievous endeavours, and hate us because we
have sworn never to permit the re-erection of those mountebank stages
from which kings and emperors have ordered nations as the humour
took them? Yes, we proclaim the fact aloud that we are soldiers of
the Revolution, and I would add not of the French Revolution alone,
but of the cosmopolitan revolution. Italians, Spaniards, Poles, and
Hungarians, in gathering under the French flag, clearly understand
that they are defending the Universal Republic. The real nature of
the struggle is now evident. It is a war between the principle of the
divine right of kings and of force, and that of popular sovereignty,
civilisation, and freedom. The fatherland disappears before the
Republic.
“We are citizens of the world, and whatever may happen we will fight to
the death for the realisation of that noble ideal of the United States
of Europe, that is to say, the fraternisation of all free peoples. The
monarchical reactionaries know that, and so they reinforce the Prussian
forces with their own legions. We have the enemies’ bayonets in front,
and treason behind us. Why is not every old official sent about his
business? Why are not all the old generals of the Empire ruthlessly
cashiered? Cannot the Government of National Defence see that they
are being betrayed, and that these people, with their hypocritical
manœuvres, shameful capitulations, and inexplicable retreats are
preparing for a Bonapartist restoration, or, at least, for the
accession of an Orleans or a Bourbon?
“But the Government, which has undertaken the task of delivering the
contaminated soil of France from foreign hordes, should take care. In
times like the present, and under the fearful conditions in which we
find ourselves, it is not enough to be honest. It is also necessary
to show energy, to keep a cool head, and not to allow one’s self to
be drowned in a glass of water. Let the Cremieuxs, the Glais-Bizoins,
and the Fourichons remember the manner in which the men of 1792 and
’93 acted! To-day we need a Danton, a Robespierre, the men of the
Convention! Away with you, gentlemen! Make room for the Revolution!
That alone can save us. Great crises demand great measures!”
The fatherland disappears before the Republic! Resort to the great
measures adopted by Danton and Robespierre! Behead every one who
differs from us in religious and political affairs, and establish the
guillotine as a permanent institution. Dismiss Generals Chanzy and
Bourbaki, Faidherbe and Vinoy, Ducrot and Trochu, and appoint private
soldiers in their place. That is the gospel preached by the son of a
Prefect in the department of Doubs, an officer of Garibaldi’s General
Staff. I wonder whether these proposals will commend themselves to many
of the Versailles people when they see this letter in the _Moniteur_
one of these days?
_Tuesday, December 13th._--In the morning wrote another article on the
confession of faith of the cosmopolitan Republicans. The Chief’s health
is somewhat better, only he feels very exhausted....
At lunch Bucher, Hatzfeldt, and Keudell declared in all seriousness
that they thought the Chancellor would resign. It was jestingly
suggested that he would be followed by a Ministry under Lasker,
who would be “a kind of Ollivier,” and then half in joke, half in
earnest, the possibility was discussed of our having for a Chancellor
Delbrück,--“a very clever man, but no politician.”
I regarded it as absolutely inconceivable that the Chief could ever be
allowed to resign, even if he requested to be relieved from office.
They thought, nevertheless, that it was possible. I said that in such
circumstances they would be obliged to recall him in less than a month.
Bucher questioned whether he would come back, and said positively
that so far as he knew him, if the Count once retired he would never
take office again. He enjoyed himself far too well at Varzin, free
from business and worry of every kind. He liked best of all to be in
the woods and fields. The Countess had once said to him: “Believe me,
a turnip interests him (Bismarck) more than all your politics.” That
statement, however, must not be too hastily accepted, and must be
limited to a temporary state of feeling.
About 1.30 P.M. I was summoned to the Chancellor. He wished me to
call attention to the difficulties of the King of Holland with regard
to a new Ministry, and to point to this as the result of a purely
Parliamentary system under which the advisers of the Crown must
retire, whatever the condition of affairs may be, when a majority of
the representatives is opposed to them on any question. He observed:
“I remember when I became Minister that there had been twenty or
twenty-one Ministries since the introduction of the constitutional
system. If the principle of Ministers retiring before a hostile
majority be too strictly enforced, far too many politicians will be
used up. Then mediocrities will have to be taken for the post, and
finally there will be no one left who will care to devote himself to
such a trade. The moral is that either the advantages of a Minister’s
position must be increased, or the Parliamentary system must be applied
less stringently.”
The Chief went out for a drive at 3 o’clock, after Russell had again
called upon him.
He talked after dinner about his negotiations with Russell and the
demands of Gortschakoff. He said amongst other things: “They do not
want in London to give an unqualified approval to the proposal that
the Black Sea shall be again given up to Russia and the Turks with
full sovereignty over its coast. They are afraid of public opinion in
England, and Russell returns again and again to the idea that some
equivalent might possibly be found. He asked, for instance, whether it
would not be possible for us to join in the agreement of the 16th of
April, 1856. I replied that Germany had no real interest in the matter.
Or whether we would bind ourselves to observe neutrality in case of a
conflict some day breaking out there. I told him I was not in favour
of a conjectural policy, such as his suggestion involved. It would
depend altogether on circumstances. For the present we saw no reason
why we should take any part in the matter. That ought to suffice for
him. Besides I did not believe that gratitude had no place in politics.
The present Tsar had always acted in a friendly and benevolent manner
towards us. Austria, on the other hand, was up to the present little
to be trusted and took up at times a very dubious attitude. Of course
he knew himself how far we were indebted to England. The friendship
of the Tsar was the legacy of old relations, based partly on family
connections, but partly also on the recognition that our interests are
not opposed to his. We did not know what those relations would be in
future, and therefore it was impossible to speak about them.... Our
position would now be different to what it was formerly. We should
be the only Power that had reason to be satisfied; we had no call to
oblige any one of whose willingness to reciprocate our services we
could not altogether feel sure.... He returned again and again to the
suggestion as to an equivalent, and at length asked me if I could not
propose something. I spoke of making the Dardanelles and the Black Sea
free to all. That would please Russia, as she could then pass from the
Black Sea into the Mediterranean, and Turkey also as she could have her
friends, including the Americans, near her. It would remove one of the
reasons why the Americans held with the Russians, namely, their desire
for free navigation in all seas. He seemed to recognise the truth of
that.” The Chancellor added: “As a matter of fact, the Russians should
not have been so modest in their demands. They ought to have asked for
more, and then the matter of the Black Sea would have been granted to
them without any difficulty.” Turning to Abeken the Minister said:
“Write that to Bernstorff and also to Reuss for his information. In
writing to the latter, suggest that in St. Petersburg they should try
to find something harmless that would look like an equivalent.”
The conversation then turned upon the four new points of international
law respecting navigation--that no privateers should be fitted out,
that goods should not be seized so far as they were not contraband of
war, and that a blockade was only valid when effective, &c. The Chief
remarked that one of these was flagrantly violated by the French in
burning a German ship. He concluded the conversation on this head by
saying, “We must see how we are to get rid of this rubbish.”
_Wednesday, December 14th._--The German party of centralisation are
still dissatisfied with the Bavarian Treaty. Treitschke writes me
from Heidelberg on the subject in an almost despairing tone: “I quite
understand that Count Bismarck could not have acted otherwise, but it
remains a very regrettable affair all the same. Bavaria has once more
clogged our feet as she did in 1813 in the Treaty of Ried. So long
as we have our leading statesman we can manage to move in spite of
that. But how will it be later on? I cannot feel that unquestioning
confidence in the vitality of the new Empire which I had in that of
the North German Confederation. I only hope that the nation will
prosper, owing to its own healthy vigour, in spite of constitutional
deficiencies.”
The Chief and Count Holnstein dined with us. Politics were not
discussed. The Minister was very cheerful and communicative, and spoke
on a variety of subjects. He said, amongst other things, that as a
young man he was a swift runner and a good jumper. His sons, on the
other hand, are unusually strong in the arms. He should not care to try
a fall with either of them.
The Minister then sent for the gold pen that had been presented to him
by Bissinger, the jeweller, and mentioned that the Countess had written
to him asking about it, remarking that “doubtless it was a lie, like
the story of the baby at Meaux.” We now heard for the first time that a
new-born baby, the child of one of the French soldiers who had fallen
in one of the recent battles, was supposed to have been smuggled into
the Chief’s bed. This was, of course, a mere newspaper invention.
The conversation afterwards turned on the deputation from the
Reichstag, which was already at Strassburg, and would arrive here
to-morrow. The Chancellor said: “We must begin to think what we are to
reply to their address. The speech-making will be a real pleasure to
Simson. He has been already engaged in several affairs of the kind--in
the first deputation to the Hohenzollernburg respecting the imperial
dignity. He makes a good speech, loves to talk, and thoroughly enjoys
himself on such occasions.”
Abeken observed that Löwe, the member of the Reichstag, said that he
also had taken part in such a function, but had afterwards plenty of
opportunity to think over the matter in a foreign country.
“Ah! Was he also engaged in the 1849 affair?” asked the Chief.
“Yes,” said Bucher; “he was President of the Reichstag.”
“But,” said the Chief, “he need not have left his country on account of
the part he took in the proposal as to the Emperor. It must have been
because of his journey to Stuttgart, which was quite a different story.”
The Minister then spoke of the Hohenzollernburg, where each branch
of the family had a special suite of apartments; of an old castle in
Pomerania, where all members of the family of Dewitz had a right to
lodgings,--it was now reduced to a picturesque ruin, after having
long served as a stone quarry for the inhabitants of the neighbouring
country town; and afterwards of a landed proprietor who had a singular
way of raising money. “He was always hard up, and on one occasion, when
he was in desperate straits, his woods were attacked by caterpillars,
then a fire broke out, and finally a number of trees were blown down by
a gale. He was miserable, and thought he was bankrupt. So the timber
had to be sold, and he suddenly found himself in possession of a lot
of money, fifty or sixty thousand thalers, which set him on his legs
again. It had never occurred to him that he could have his trees cut
down.”
This story led the Chief to speak of another extraordinary gentleman,
a neighbour of his. (Query, in Varzin.) “He had ten or twelve estates,
but was always short of ready money, and frequently felt a desire to
spend some. When he wished to invite some people to a decent lunch
he usually sold an estate, so that at length he had only one or two
left. Some of his own tenants bought one of the former lot from him
for 35,000 thalers, paying him 5,000 thalers down. They then sold a
quantity of timber for shipbuilding purposes, for 22,000 thalers, an
idea which, of course, had never occurred to him.”
The Minister then referred to the Hartschiere (big tall men, chosen for
the Royal Body Guard on account of their size) in Munich, who made a
great impression upon him owing to their bulk and general character,
and who are understood to be excellent connoisseurs of beer.
Finally it was mentioned that Count Bill was the first German to ride
into Rouen. Somebody remarked that his appearance would have convinced
the inhabitants of that city that our troops had not up to the present
been put on short rations. This led the Chancellor to speak again of
the strength of his “youngsters.” “They are unusually strong for their
age,” he said, “although they have not learnt gymnastics--very much
against my desire, but it is not considered the proper thing for the
sons of a diplomatist.”
While enjoying his after dinner cigar the Chief asked if the members of
his staff were smokers. Yes, every one of them, Abeken replied. “Well,
then,” said the minister, “Engel must divide the Hamburg cigars amongst
them. I have received so many that if the war were to last for twelve
months I should still bring some home with me.”
_Thursday, December 15th._--Count Frankenberg and Count Lehndorff
joined us at dinner, Prince Pless coming in half an hour later. The
Chief was in high spirits and very talkative. The conversation at first
turned on the question of the day, that is to say, the commencement of
the bombardment. The Minister said it might be expected within the next
eight or ten days. It would possibly not be very successful during the
first weeks, as the Parisians had had time to take precautions against
it. Frankenberg said that in Berlin, and particularly in the Reichstag,
no subject was so much discussed as the reasons why the bombardment had
been postponed up to the present. Everything else gave way to that.
The Chief replied; “Yes, but now that Roon has taken the matter in
hand something will be done. A thousand ammunition waggons with the
necessary teams are on their way here, and it is said that some of the
new mortars have arrived. Now that Roon has taken it up something will
at last be done.”
The manner in which the restoration of the imperial dignity in
Germany had been brought before the Reichstag was then discussed, and
Frankenberg as well as Prince Pless were of opinion that it might
have been better managed. The Conservatives had not been informed
beforehand, and the statement was actually made when they were sitting
at lunch. To all appearance Windthorst was not wrong when, with his
usual dexterity in seizing his opportunities, he remarked that he had
expected more sympathy from the Assembly.
“Yes,” said the Chief, “there ought to have been a better stage
manager for the farce. It should have had a more effective
_mise-en-scène_,--but Delbrück does not understand that sort of thing.
Some one should have got up to express his dissatisfaction with the
Bavarian Treaties, which lacked this, that, and the other. Then he
should have said: ‘If, however, an equivalent were found to compensate
for these defects, something in which the unity of the nation would
find expression, that would be different,’--and then the Emperor
should have been brought forward.”... “Moreover, the Emperor is more
important than many people think. I could not tell them. (that is to
say, the Princes) what it all means--if I had, I certainly should
not have succeeded.... I admit that the Bavarian Treaty has defects
and deficiencies. That is, however, easily said when one is not
responsible. How would it have been, then, if I had refused to make
concessions and no treaty had been concluded? It is impossible to
conceive all the difficulties that would have resulted from such a
failure, and for that reason I was in mortal anxiety over the easy
unconcern of centralising gentlemen in the Diet.”... “Last night, after
a long interval, I had again a couple of hours of good deep sleep. At
first I could not get off to sleep, worrying and pondering over all
sorts of things. Then suddenly I saw Varzin before me, quite distinctly
to the smallest detail like a big picture, with all the colours
even--green trees, the sunshine on the stems and a blue sky above it
all. I saw each single tree. I tried to get rid of it, but it came back
and tormented me, and at length when it faded away it was replaced by
other pictures, documents, notes, despatches, until at last towards
morning I fell asleep.”
Whilst Bucher and myself were alone at tea, he told me that Delbrück,
who is the “Liberal Minister,” holds with the Liberals and is “thinking
of the future.” “At an early stage of his career the Chief offered
him the Ministry of Commerce. Delbrück declined it, saying: ‘Yes,
Excellency, but you may not remain long yourself, and I should prefer
not to accept it. What should I do if you retired? I should be obliged
to go too and renounce official life, and of course that would not
do.’”
CHAPTER XV
CHAUDORDY AND THE TRUTH--OFFICERS OF BAD FAITH--FRENCH GARBLING--THE
CROWN PRINCE DINES WITH THE CHIEF.
_Friday, December 16th._--In the morning I wrote several articles on M.
de Chaudordy’s circular as to the barbarity with which we are alleged
to conduct the war. They were to the following effect. In addition to
the calumnies that have been circulated for months past by the French
press with the object of exciting public opinion against us, a document
has now been issued by the Provisional Government itself for the
purpose of prejudicing foreign Courts and Cabinets by means of garbled
and exaggerated accounts of our conduct in the present war. An official
of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs at Tours, M. de Chaudordy, impeaches
us in a circular to the neutral Powers. Let us consider the main points
in his statement and see how the matter stands in reality, and who can
be justly charged with barbarous methods of warfare, ourselves or the
French.
He asserts that we make excessive requisitions, and abuse our power in
the occupied towns and districts to extort impossible contributions.
We are further stated to have seized private property, and to have
cruelly burnt down towns and villages, whose inhabitants have offered
resistance, or have in any way assisted in the defence of their
country. Our accuser says: “Commanding officers have ordered a town to
be plundered and burnt down as a punishment for the acts of individual
citizens whose sole crime consisted in resisting the invaders, thus
misusing the inexorable discipline imposed upon their troops. Every
house in which a franctireur had been concealed, or received a meal,
has been burnt down. How can this be reconciled with respect for
private property?” The circular states that in firing upon open towns
we have introduced a procedure hitherto unexampled in war. Finally,
in addition to all our other cruelties, we take hostages with us on
railway journeys to secure ourselves against the removal of the rails
and other injuries and dangers.
In reply to these charges we offer the following observations. If M. de
Chaudordy understood anything about war, he would not complain of the
sacrifices which our operations have imposed upon the French people,
but would, on the contrary, be surprised at our relative moderation.
Moreover, the German troops respect private property everywhere,
although they can certainly not be expected, after long marches and
severe fighting, and after enduring cold and hunger, to refrain from
securing as comfortable quarters as possible, or from demanding, or, if
the inhabitants have fled, helping themselves to absolute necessaries
such as food, drink, firing, &c. Moreover, instead of seizing private
property, as M. de Chaudordy asserts, our soldiers have frequently done
the reverse, and at the risk of their own lives, rescued for the owners
works of art and other valuables which were endangered by the fire of
the French guns. We have burnt down villages, but does our accuser
know nothing of our reasons for doing so? Is he not aware that in
those villages franctireurs have treacherously fired upon our people,
and that the inhabitants have given every possible assistance to the
murderers? Has he heard nothing of the franctireurs who recently left
Fontaines, and who boldly stated that the object of their march was to
inspect the houses in the neighbourhood which were worth pillaging? Can
he bring forward a single well-established case of outrage committed
by our soldiers such as those of which the Turcos and French guerillas
have been guilty? Have our troops cut off the noses or ears of their
wounded or dead opponents, as the French did at Coulours on the 30th
of November? On the 11th of December, when 800 German prisoners should
have been brought into Lille, only 200 of them actually arrived. Many
of these were severely wounded, yet instead of affording them succour,
the people of the town pelted them with snowballs, and shouted to the
soldiers to bayonet them. The frequency with which the French have
fired at the bearers of flags of truce is something unheard of. There
is good evidence for the truth of the following incident, however
incredible it may appear. On the 2nd of December, a German sergeant
named Steinmetz, at the express desire of an officer of the Garibaldian
troops, wrote a letter to his lieutenant in Mirecourt, stating that
if our side took reprisals against Vittel or other places in the
neighbourhood, the ears of fourteen Prussian prisoners, who had fallen
into the hands of the guerillas in a surprise attack, would be cut off.
In many instances we have not treated those volunteers as soldiers,
but that was only in cases where they did not act as soldiers, but
on the contrary, followed the principles recommended by the Prefect,
Luce Villiard, in the address issued by him through the Maires to the
peasants of the Côte d’Or department. M. Villiard said: “The country
does not demand that you should collect in large masses and openly
oppose the enemy. It expects that every morning three or four resolute
men amongst you shall leave your villages and select some good natural
position from which you can fire upon the Prussians without risk.
You must above all direct your fire against the enemy’s cavalry, and
bring their horses in to the chief district towns. I will distribute
premiums amongst you, and your heroic deeds shall be published in all
the newspapers of the Provinces as well as in the Official Journal.”
We have bombarded open cities, such as Orleans, but is M. de Chaudordy
not aware that they were occupied by the enemy? And has he forgotten
that the French bombarded the open towns of Saarbrücken and Kehl?
Finally, as to the hostages who were obliged to accompany the railway
trains, they were taken not to serve as a hindrance to French heroism,
but as a precaution against treacherous crime. The railway does not
convey merely soldiers, arms, ammunition and other war material,
against which it may be allowable to use violent measures: it also
conveys great numbers of wounded, doctors, hospital attendants and
other perfectly harmless persons. Is a peasant or a franctireur to
be allowed to endanger hundreds of those lives by removing a rail or
laying a stone upon the line? Let the French see that the security of
the railway trains is no longer threatened and the journeys made by
those hostages will be merely outings, or our people may even be able
to forgo such precautionary measures. We forbear to deal any further
with the charges of M. de Chaudordy. The European Cabinets are aware
of the humane sentiments which inspire German methods of warfare, and
they will easily be able to form a just estimate of the value of these
charges. War, moreover, is and remains war, and it cannot be waged with
velvet gloves. We should perhaps less frequently employ the iron gloves
if the Government of National Defence had not declared a people’s war,
which invariably leads to greater harshness than a conflict between
regular armies.
Bohlen, who is still unwell, Hatzfeldt, who is indisposed, and Keudell,
who received a command to dine with the King, were absent from dinner.
Count Holnstein and Prince Putbus were present as guests. The first
subject to be touched upon was the Bavarian Treaty, which Holnstein
expected would be approved of by the second Bavarian Chamber, in which
a two-thirds majority was necessary. It was already known that there
were only some forty members opposed to it. It was also practically
certain that it would not be rejected by the Upper House.
“Thuengen will doubtless be in favour of it,” observed the Chief.
“I believe so,” replied Holnstein, “as he also voted in favour of
joining in the war.”
“Yes,” said the Minister, “he is one of the honest Particularists; but
there are some who are not honest and who have other objects in view.”
“Certainly,” added Holnstein. “Some of the patriots showed that quite
clearly. They omitted the words, ‘For King and Country,’ retaining only
‘Mit Gott.’”
Putbus then referred to the approaching holidays, and said it would
be a good idea to give the people in the hospital a Christmas tree.
A collection had been started for that purpose, and 2,500 francs had
already been received. “Pless and I put down our names,” he said.
“The subscription list was then laid before the Grand Duke of Weimar,
and he gave 300 francs; and the Coburger, who was then attacked, gave
200. He would certainly have been glad to get out of it. He should at
least have contrived not to give more than Weimar or less than Pless.”
“It must certainly have been very disagreeable to him,” said the
Minister. Putbus: “But why? He is a rich man!” The Chief: “Very rich!”
Putbus: “Why, certainly, he has come in for an enormous forest which
is worth over a million.” The Chief: “The Crown Princess secured that
for him through all sorts of stratagems, which she also tried on with
me. But I have done with him. He shall never get my signature again.”
Putbus: “Besides, 200 francs! He ought not to feel it so much. It is
not much more than fifty thalers. But it is just like him!” Putbus
then said they intended to submit the list of subscriptions to his
Majesty, whereupon the Chief remarked: “Then you will also allow me
to join.” Putbus afterwards added that Weimar had “not shown himself
over-generous in other matters. He established an ambulance for his
regiment, where a couple of officers are now being cared for. He
demanded payment for their keep from the Commandant, which of course
only the doctors are entitled to do.” “But surely they have not given
it to him?” said the Chief. Putbus: “Oh, yes; they have though, but not
without making some remarks on the subject that led to a great deal of
bad language on his part.”
It was then mentioned that a French balloon had fallen down near
Wetzlar and that Ducrot was said to be in it. “I suppose he will be
shot then,” said Putbus. “No,” replied the Chief. “The common jail. Ten
years’ penal servitude. If he is brought before a court-martial nothing
will happen to him. But a Council of Honour would certainly condemn
him. So I have been told by officers.”
“Any other news on military matters?” asked Putbus.
“Perhaps at the General Staff,” replied the Minister, “but we know
nothing here. We only get such information as can be obtained by dint
of begging, and that is little enough.”
Later on it was stated that the Government of National Defence was
thinking of contracting a new loan. Turning to me, the Minister
said: “It may be useful to call attention in the press to the danger
investors run in lending money to this Government. It would be well to
say that the loans made to the present Government might possibly not
be recognised by that with which we concluded peace, and that we might
even make that one of the conditions of the peace. That should be sent
to the English and Belgian press in particular.”
Löwinsohn mentioned to me in the evening that a Conservative of high
position, from whom he sometimes obtained information, had said to
him that his friends were anxious to know what the King was going to
say to the deputation from the Reichstag. It was understood that he
was not pleased at their coming, as only the first Reichstag which
would represent all Germany, and not the North German Reichstag,
could tender him the imperial crown. (Doubtless the King is thinking
less of the Reichstag, which cannot proffer him the imperial dignity
independently, but only in concert with the Princes in the name of the
whole people, than of the Princes themselves, all of whom will not as
yet have replied to the proposal of the King of Bavaria.) Furthermore,
this Conservative of high position would prefer to see the King become
Emperor of Prussia. (A matter of taste.) Under the other arrangement
Prussia will be lost in Germany, and that arouses scruples in his mind.
Löwinsohn also reported that the Crown Prince is very indignant at
certain correspondents who compared Châteaudun to Pompeii, and drew
lively pictures of the devastation of the country owing to the war. I
suggested to Löwinsohn that he should deal with the subject of the new
French loan and that of “Chaudordy and Garibaldi’s ear-clippers” in the
_Indépendance Belge_, with which he is connected. He promised to do
this to-morrow.
An article for the _Kölnische Zeitung_ on the new French loan was
accordingly despatched in the following form:--
“Yet another loan! With wicked unconcern the gentlemen who now preside
over the fortunes of France and who are plunging her deeper and deeper
into moral and material ruin, are also trying to exploit foreign
countries. This was to be anticipated for some time past, and we are
therefore not surprised at it. We would, however, call the attention
of the financial world to the very obvious dangers accompanying the
advantages which will be offered to them. We will indicate there in
a few words, in order to make the matter clear. High interest and a
low rate of issue may be very tempting. But, on the other hand, the
Government which makes this loan is recognised neither by the whole
of France nor by a single European Power. Moreover, it should be
remembered that we have already stated our intention that measures
would be taken to prevent the repayment of certain loans which French
municipalities tried to raise for the purposes of the war. We imagine
that is a sufficient hint that the same principle might be applied
on a larger scale. The French Government which concludes peace with
Prussia and her allies (and that will presumably not be the present
Government) will in all probability be bound, among other conditions
of peace, not to recognise as binding the engagements for payment of
interest and redemption of loans made by MM. Gambetta and Favre. The
Government referred to will unquestionably have the right to do this,
as those gentlemen, although it is true they speak in the name of
France, have received no mission and no authority from the country.
People should therefore be on their guard.”
Wollmann came up to me after 10 o’clock, and said that the deputation
from the Reichstag had arrived. Their chairman, Simson, was now with
the Chief, who would doubtless inform him of the King’s disinclination
to receive them before all the Princes had sent letters declaring their
approval. These letters would go first to the King of Bavaria, who
would afterwards send them to our King. All the Princes had already
telegraphed their approval--only Lippe still appeared to entertain
scruples. Probably in consequence of this postponement it will be
necessary for a few members of the deputation to fall ill.
_Saturday, December 17th._--In the course of the forenoon I wrote a
second paragraph on the new French loan.
In the afternoon wrote another article on the ever-increasing instances
of French officers breaking their parole and absconding from the
places where they were interned, and returning to France to take
service against us again. Over fifty of these cases have occurred up
to the present. They include officers of all ranks, and even three
generals--namely, Ducrot, Cambriel, and Barral. After the battle of
Sedan we could have rendered the army that was shut up in that fortress
harmless by destroying it. Humanity, however, and faith in their
pledged word induced us to forgo that measure. The capitulation was
granted, and we were justified in considering that all the officers had
agreed to its terms and were prepared to fulfil the conditions which it
imposed. If that was not the case we ought to have been informed of the
fact. We should then have treated those exceptions in an exceptional
way, that is to say, not accorded to the officers in question the
same treatment that was granted to the others. In other words, they
would not have been allowed the liberty which they have now abused in
such a disgraceful manner. It is true that the great majority of the
captive officers have kept their word, and one might therefore have
dismissed the matter with a shrug of the shoulders. But the affair
assumes another aspect when the French Provisional Government approves
this breach of their pledged word by reappointing such officers to
the regiments that are opposing us in the field. Has there been a
single case in which one of these deserters was refused readmission to
the ranks of the French army? Or have any French officers protested
against the readmission of such comrades into their corps? It is,
therefore, not the Government alone, but also the officers of France,
who consider this disgraceful conduct to be correct. The consequence,
however, will be that the German Governments will feel bound in duty
to consider whether the alleviation of their imprisonment hitherto
accorded to French officers is consistent with the interests of
Germany. And further, we must ask ourselves the question whether we
shall be justified in placing confidence in any of the promises of the
present French Government when it wants to treat with Germany, without
material guarantees and pledges.
We were joined at dinner by Herr Arnim-Krochlendorff, a brother-in-law
of the Chief, a gentleman of energetic aspect, and apparently a little
over fifty. The Minister was in very good humour, but the conversation
this time was not particularly interesting. It chiefly turned upon
the bombardment, and the attitude assumed towards that question by a
certain party at headquarters. Arnim related that when Grävenitz spoke
to the Crown Prince on the matter, the latter exclaimed: “Impossible!
nothing to be done; it would be to no purpose,” and when Grävenitz
ventured to argue the point, the Prince declared: “Well, then, if
you know better, do it! Bombard it yourself!” To which Grävenitz
replied: “Your Royal Highness, I can only fire a _feu de joie_ (_ich
kann nur Victoria schiessen_).” The Chief remarked: “That sounds
very equivocal.” The Crown Prince told me the same thing, viz., if I
thought the bombardment would be successful, I had better take over the
command. I replied that I should like to very much--for twenty-four
hours, but not longer. He then added in French, doubtless on account
of the servants: “For I do not understand anything about it, although
I believe I know as much as he does, for he has no great knowledge of
these matters.”
_Sunday, December 18th._--At 2 o’clock the Chief drove off to the
Prefecture for the purpose of introducing the deputation of the
Reichstag to the King. The Princes residing in Versailles were in
attendance upon his Majesty. After 2 o’clock the King, accompanied
by the Heir Apparent and Princes Charles and Adalbert, entered
the reception room where the other Princes, the Chancellor of the
Confederation, and the Generals grouped themselves around him. Among
those present were the Grand Dukes of Baden, Oldenburg and Weimar, the
Dukes of Coburg and Meiningen, the three Hereditary Grand Dukes, Prince
William of Würtemberg and a number of other princely personages. Simson
delivered his address to the King, who answered very much in the sense
that had been anticipated. A dinner of eighty covers, which was given
at 5 o’clock, brought the ceremony to a close.
On our way back from the park Wollmann told me that the Chief had
recently written to the King requesting to be permitted to take part in
the councils of war. The answer, however, was that he had always been
called to join in councils of a political nature, as in 1866, that a
similar course would also be followed in future, and that he ought to
be satisfied with that. (This story is probably not quite correct, for
Wollmann is incapable of being absolutely accurate.)
_Monday, December 19th._--I again wrote calling attention to the
international revolution which arrays its guerilla bands and heroes of
the barricades against us. The article was to the following effect.
We understood at first that we were only fighting with France, and
that was actually the case up to Sedan. After the 4th of September
another power rose up against us, namely the universal Republic, an
international association of cosmopolitan enthusiasts who dream of the
United States of Europe, &c.
In the afternoon I took a walk in the park, in the course of which
I twice met the Chief driving with Simson, the President of the
Reichstag. The Minister was invited to dine with the Crown Prince at
7 o’clock, but first joined our table for half an hour. He spoke of
his drive with Simson: “The last time he was here was after the July
Revolution in 1830. I thought he would be interested in the park and
the beautiful views, but he showed no sign of it. It would appear that
he has no feeling for landscape beauty. There are many people of that
kind. So far as I am aware, there are no Jewish landscape painters,
indeed no Jewish painters at all.” Some one mentioned the names of
Meyerheim and Bendemann. “Yes,” the Chief replied, “Meyerheim; but
Bendemann had only Jewish grandparents. There are plenty of Jewish
composers--Mendelssohn, Halevy--but painters! It is true that the Jew
paints, but only when he is not obliged to earn his bread thereby.”
Abeken alluded to the sermon which Rogge preached yesterday in the
palace church, and said that he had made too much of the Reichstag
deputation. He then added some slighting remarks about the Reichstag
in general. The Chief replied: “I am not at all of that opinion--not
in the least. They have just voted us another hundred millions, and
in spite of their doctrinaire views they have adopted the Versailles
treaties, which must have cost many of them a hard struggle. We ought
to place that, at least, to their credit.”
Abeken then talked about the events at Ems which preceded the outbreak
of the war, and related that on one occasion, after a certain despatch
had been sent off, the King said, “Well, he” (Bismarck) “will be
satisfied with us now!” And Abeken added, “I believe you were.” “Well,”
replied the Chancellor, laughing, “you may easily be mistaken. That is
to say I was quite satisfied with you. But not quite as much with our
Most Gracious, or rather not at all. He ought to have acted in a more
dignified way--and more resolutely.” “I remember,” he continued, “how I
received the news at Varzin. I had gone out, and on my return the first
telegram had been delivered. As I started on my journey I had to pass
our pastor’s house at Wussow. He was standing at his gate and saluted
me. I said nothing, but made a thrust in the air--thus” (as if he were
making a thrust with a sword). “He understood me, and I drove on.” The
Minister then gave some particulars of the wavering and hesitation
that went on up to a certain incident, which altered the complexion of
things, and was followed by the declaration of war. “I expected to find
another telegram in Berlin answering mine, but it had not arrived. In
the meantime I invited Moltke and Roon to dine with me that evening,
and to talk over the situation, which seemed to me to be growing more
and more unsatisfactory. Whilst we were dining, another long telegram
was brought in. As I read it to them--it must have been about two
hundred words--they were both actually terrified, and Moltke’s whole
being suddenly changed. He seemed to be quite old and infirm. It
looked as if our Most Gracious might knuckle under after all. I asked
him (Moltke) if, as things stood, we might hope to be victorious. On
his replying in the affirmative, I said, ‘Wait a minute!’ and seating
myself at a small table I boiled down those two hundred words to about
twenty, but without otherwise altering or adding anything. It was
Abeken’s telegram, yet something different--shorter, more determined,
less dubious. I then handed it over to them, and asked, ‘Well, how does
that do now?’ ‘Yes,’ they said, ‘it will do in that form.’ And Moltke
immediately became quite young and fresh again. He had got his war,
his trade. And the thing really succeeded. The French were fearfully
angry at the condensed telegram as it appeared in the newspapers, and
a couple of days later they declared war against us.”
The conversation then wandered back to Pomerania, and if I am not
mistaken to Varzin, where the Chief had, he said, taken much interest
in a Piedmontese who had remained behind after the great French wars.
This man had raised himself to a position of consequence, and although
originally a Catholic, had actually become a vestryman. The Minister
mentioned other people who had settled and prospered in places where
they had been accidentally left behind. There were also Italians taken
as prisoners of war to a district in Further Pomerania, where they
remained and founded families whose marked features still distinguish
them from their neighbours.
The Minister did not return from the Crown Prince’s until past ten
o’clock, and we then heard that the Crown Prince was coming to dine
with us on the following evening.
_Tuesday, December 20th._--On the instructions of the Chief I wrote two
articles for circulation in Germany.
The first was as follows: “We have already found it necessary on
several occasions to correct a misunderstanding or an intentional
garbling of the words addressed by King William to the French people on
the 11th of August last. We are now once more confronted with the same
attempt to falsify history, and to our surprise in a publication by
an otherwise respectable French historian. In a pamphlet entitled _La
France et la Prusse devant l’Europe_, M. d’Haussonville puts forward an
assertion which does little credit to his love of truth, or let us say
his scientific accuracy. The whole pamphlet is shallow and superficial.
It is full of exaggerations and errors, and of assertions that have no
more value than mere baseless rumours. Of the gross blunders of the
writer, who is obviously blinded by patriotic passion, we will only
mention that, according to him, King William was on the throne during
the Crimean War. But apart from this and other mistakes, we have here
only to deal with his attempt to garble the proclamation issued to the
French in August last, which, it may be observed, was written in French
as well as in German, so that a misunderstanding would appear to be
out of the question. According to M. d’Haussonville the King said: ‘I
am only waging war against the Emperor and not at all against France.’
(_Je ne fais la guerre qu’à l’Empereur, et nullement à la France._) As
a matter of fact, however, the document in question says: ‘The German
nation, which desired and still desires to live in peace with France,
having been attacked at sea and on land by the Emperor Napoleon, I have
taken the command of the German armies for the purpose of repelling
this aggression. Owing to the course taken by the military operations,
I have been led to cross the French frontier. I wage war against the
soldiers and not against the citizens of France.’ (_L’Empereur Napoléon
ayant attaqué par terre et par mer la nation allemande, qui désirait
et désire encore vivre en paix avec le peuple français, j’ai pris le
commandement des armées allemandes pour repousser l’agression, et
j’ai été amené par les événements militaires à passer les frontières
de la France. Je fais la guerre aux soldats, et non aux citoyens
français._) The next sentence excludes all possibility of mistake as
to the meaning of the foregoing statement: ‘They (the French citizens)
will accordingly continue to enjoy complete security of person and
property so long as they themselves do not deprive me of the right
to accord them my protection by acts of hostility against the German
troops.’ (_Ceux-ci continueront, par conséquent, à jouir d’une
complète sécurité pour leur personnes et leur biens, aussi longtemps
qu’ils ne me priveront eux-mêmes par des entreprises hostiles contre
les troupes allemandes du droit de leur accorder ma protection._) There
is, in our opinion, a very obvious difference between d’Haussonville’s
quotation and the original proclamation, and no obscurity can possibly
be discovered in the latter to excuse a mistake.”
The second item ran thus: “The Delegation from the Government of
National Defence, which is at present in Bordeaux, has satisfied itself
that further resistance to the German forces is useless, and it would,
with the approval even of M. Gambetta, be prepared to conclude peace
on the basis of the demands put forward by Germany. It is understood,
however, that General Trochu has decided to continue the war. The
Delegation entered into an engagement from Tours with General Trochu
not to negotiate for peace without his consent. According to other
reports General Trochu has had provisions for several months stored
in the fortress of Mont Valérien, so that he may fall back upon that
position after Paris has had to capitulate with a sufficient force
to exercise influence upon the fate of France after the conclusion
of peace. His object, it is believed, is to promote the interests of
the Orleans family, of which General Trochu is understood to be an
adherent.”
On my taking these paragraphs into the office to have them sent off,
Keudell told me the Chief had agreed that henceforth all State papers
received and despatched should be shown to me if I asked for them.
The Crown Prince and his aide-de-camp arrived shortly after six
o’clock. The former had on his shoulder straps the badges of his
new military rank as field-marshal. He sat at the head of the table,
with the Chief on his right and Abeken on his left. After the soup
the conversation first turned on the subject which I had this morning
worked up for the press, namely, that according to a communication from
Israel, the secretary of Laurier, who acts as agent for the Provisional
Government in London, Gambetta no longer believed in the possibility
of successful resistance, and was disposed to conclude peace on the
basis of our demands. Trochu was the only member of the Government who
wished to continue the struggle, but on his undertaking the defence of
Paris, the others had bound themselves to act in concert with him in
this respect.
The Chancellor observed: “He is understood to have had Mont Valérien
provisioned for two months, so that he may fall back upon that position
with the regular troops when it becomes necessary to surrender the
city--probably in order to influence the conclusion of peace.” He then
continued: “Indeed, I believe that France will break up into several
pieces--the country is already split up into parties. There are great
differences of opinion between the different districts. Legitimists
in Brittany, Red Republicans in the south, and Moderate Republicans
elsewhere, while the regular army is still for the Emperor, or at least
the majority of the officers are. It is possible that each section will
follow its own convictions, one being Republican, another Bourbon, and
a third Orleanist, according to the party that happens to have the most
adherents, and then Napoleon’s people--tetrarchies of Judea, Galilee,
&c.”
The Crown Prince said it was believed that Paris must have a
subterranean communication with the outer world. The Chief thought so
too, and added: “But they cannot get provisions in that way, although,
of course, they can receive news. I have been thinking whether it
might not be possible to flood the catacombs from the Seine, and thus
inundate the lower parts of the city. Of course the catacombs go under
the Seine.”
The Chief then said that if Paris could be taken now it would produce
a good effect upon public opinion in Bavaria, whence the reports were
again unsatisfactory. Bray was not to be trusted, had not the interests
of Germany at heart, inclined to the Ultramontanes, had a Neapolitan
wife, felt happiest in his memories of Vienna, where he lived for a
long time, and seemed disposed to tack about again. “The King is, after
all, the best of them all in the upper circles,” said the Chancellor,
“but he seems to be in bad health and eccentric, and nobody knows what
may yet happen.” “Yes, indeed,” said the Crown Prince. “How bright
and handsome he was formerly--a little too slight, but otherwise the
very ideal of a young man. Now his complexion is yellow, and he looks
old. I was quite shocked when I saw him.” “The last time I saw him,”
said the Chancellor, “was at his mother’s at Nymphenburg, in 1863,
when the Congress of Princes was being held. Even at that time he had
a strange look in his eyes. I remember that, when dining, he on one
occasion drank no wine, and on another took eight or ten glasses--not
at intervals, but hastily, one glass after another, at one draught, so
that the servant scarcely liked to keep on filling his glass.”
The conversation then turned on the Bavarian Prince Charles, who was
said to be strongly anti-Prussian, but too old and feeble to be very
dangerous to the cause of German unity. Some one remarked: “Nature has
very little to do with him as it is.” “That reminds me of old Count
Adlerberg,” said the Minister, “who was also mostly artificial--hair,
teeth, calves, and one eye. When he wanted to get up in the morning
all his best parts lay on chairs and tables near the bed. You remember
the newly-married man in the _Fliegende Blätter_ who watched his bride
take herself to pieces, lay her hair on the toilet table, her teeth on
the chimney-piece, and other fragments elsewhere, and then exclaimed,
‘But what remains for me?’” Moreover, Adlerberg, he went on to say, was
a terrible bore, and it was owing to him that Countess Bismarck once
fainted at a diplomatic dinner where she was seated between him and
Stieglitz. “She always faints when she is exceptionally bored, and for
that reason I never take her with me to diplomatic dinners.” “That is
a pretty compliment for the diplomats,” observed the Crown Prince.
The Chief then related that one evening, not long ago, the sentry on
guard at the Crown Prince’s quarters did not want to let him go in,
and only agreed to do so on his addressing him in Polish. “A few days
ago I also tried to talk Polish with the soldiers in the hospital,
and they brightened up wonderfully on hearing a gentleman speak their
mother tongue. It is a pity that my vocabulary was exhausted. It would,
perhaps, be a good thing if their commander-in-chief could speak to
them.” “There you are, Bismarck, coming back to the old story,” said
the Crown Prince, smiling. “No, I don’t like Polish and I won’t learn
it. I do not like the people.” “But, your Royal Highness, they are,
after all, good soldiers and honest fellows when they have been taught
to wash themselves and not to pilfer.” The Crown Prince: “Yes, but when
they cast off the soldier’s tunic they are just what they were before,
and at bottom they are and still remain hostile to us.” The Chief:
“As to their hostility, that only applies to the nobles and their
labourers, and all that class. A noble, who has nothing himself, feeds
a crowd of people, servants of all sorts, who also belong to the minor
nobility, although they act as his domestics, overseers, and clerks.
These stand by him when he rises in rebellion, and also the Komorniks,
or day labourers.... The independent peasantry does not join them,
however, even when egged on by the priests, who are always against us.
We have seen that in Posen, when the Polish regiments had to be removed
merely because they were too cruel to their own fellow countrymen....
I remember at our place in Pomerania there was a market, attended, on
one occasion, by a number of Kassubes (Pomeranian Poles). A quarrel
broke out between one of them and a German, who refused to sell him
a cow because he was a Pole. The Kassube was mortally offended, and
shouted out: ‘You say I’m a Polack. No, I’m just as much a Prussack
as yourself;’ and then, as other Germans and Poles joined in, it soon
developed into a beautiful free fight.”
The Chief then added that the Great Elector spoke Polish as well
as German, and that his successors also understood that language.
Frederick the Great was the first who did not learn it, but then he
also spoke better French than German. “That may be,” said the Crown
Prince, “but I am not going to learn Polish. I do not like it. They
must learn German.” With this remark the subject was allowed to drop.
At dessert the Crown Prince, after asking if he might smoke a pipe,
pulled out a short one with a porcelain bowl, on which an eagle was
painted, while the rest of us lit our cigars.
After dinner the Crown Prince and the Minister retired with the
Councillors to the drawing-room, where they took coffee. Later on we
were all sent for, and formally presented to the future Emperor by
the Chief. We had to wait for about a quarter of an hour while the
Chancellor was deep in conversation with the Crown Prince. His august
guest stood in the corner near one of the windows. The Chief spoke to
him in a low tone, with his eyes mostly cast down, while the Crown
Prince listened with a serious and almost sullen look.
After the presentation I returned to the bureau, where I read the
diplomatic reports and drafts of the last few days, amongst others
the draft of the King’s reply to the Reichstag deputation. This had
been prepared by Abeken, and greatly altered by the Chief. Then an
instruction from the Minister to the Foreign Office to the effect that
if the _Provinzial-Correspondenz_ should again contain a commendation
of Gambetta’s energy or anything of that kind, every possible means
should be immediately employed to prevent the publication. Also a
report from Prince Reuss to the effect that Gortschakoff had replied in
a negative sense to a sentimental communication of Gabriac’s, adding
that all the Russian Cabinet could do for the French at present was
to act as letter-carrier in conveying their wishes to the Prussian
Government.
At tea Hatzfeldt told me he had been trying to decipher a Dutch report
from Van Zuylen, which had been brought out with Washburne’s mail, and
had succeeded, though there were still a few doubtful points. He then
showed it to me, and together we contrived to puzzle out some more of
it. The despatch seems to be based throughout on good information, and
to give a faithful account of the situation.
At 10.30 P.M. summoned to the Chief, who wants the _Moniteur_ to
mention Gambetta’s inclination to forgo further resistance and Trochu’s
plan respecting Mont Valérien.
_Wednesday, December 21st._--At dinner the Chief spoke of his
great-grandfather, who, if I rightly understood him, fell at Czaslau.
“The old people at our place often described him to my father. He was
a mighty hunter before the Lord, and a great toper. Once in a single
year he shot 154 red deer, a feat which Prince Frederick Charles
will scarcely emulate, although the Duke of Dessau might. I remember
being told that when he was stationed at Gollnow, the officers messed
together, the Colonel presiding over the kitchen. It was the custom
there for five or six dragoons to march in and fire a volley from their
carbines at each toast. Altogether they had very curious customs. For
instance, instead of a plank bed they had as a punishment a so-called
wooden donkey with sharp edges, upon which the men who had been guilty
of any breach of discipline were obliged to sit, often for a couple of
hours--a very painful punishment. On the birthday of the Colonel or of
other officers, the soldiers always carried this donkey to the bridge
and threw it into the river. But a new one was invariably provided.
The Burgomaster’s wife told my father that it must have been renewed a
hundred times. I have a portrait of this great-grandfather in Berlin. I
am the very image of him, that is to say, I was when I was young--when
I saw myself in the looking-glass.”
The Minister then related that it was owing to a relative of his,
Finanzrath Kerl, that he was sent to Göttingen University. He was
consigned to Professor Hausmann, and was to study mineralogy. “They
were thinking, no doubt, of Leopold von Buch, and fancied it would be
fine for me to go through the world like him, hammer in hand, chipping
pieces off the rocks. Things, however, turned out differently. It would
have been better if I had been sent to Bonn, where I should have met
countrymen of my own. At Göttingen I had no one from my own part of the
country, and so I met none of my University acquaintances again until
I saw a few of them in the Reichstag.”
Abeken said that after a brisk fire from the forts this morning there
had been a sortie of the Paris garrison, which was principally directed
against the positions occupied by the Guards. It was, however, scarcely
more than an artillery engagement, as the attack was known beforehand
and preparations had been made to meet it. Hatzfeldt said he should
like to know how they were able to discover that a sortie was going
to take place. It was suggested that in the open country movements
of transport and guns could not escape detection, as large masses of
troops could not be concentrated on the point of attack in one night.
“That was quite true,” observed the Chief, with a laugh; “but often
a hundred louis d’ors also form an important part of this military
prescience.”
After dinner I read drafts and despatches, from which I ascertained,
amongst other things, that as early as the 1st of September, Prussia
had intimated in St. Petersburg that she would put no difficulties in
the way of such action in the matter of the Black Sea as has now been
taken.
Later on I arranged that Löwinsohn should deal with the Gambetta-Trochu
question in the _Indépendance Belge_. Also informed him that Delbrück
would be here again on the 28th inst.
_Thursday, December 22nd._--This time there were no strangers at
dinner. The Chief was in excellent spirits, but the conversation was of
no special importance.
A reference was made to yesterday’s sortie, and the Chief remarked:
“The French came out yesterday with three divisions, and we had only
fifteen companies, not even four battalions, and yet we made nearly a
thousand prisoners. The Parisians with their attacks, now here and now
there, remind me of a French dancing master conducting a quadrille.
“Ma commère, quand je danse
Mon cotillon, va-t-il bien?
Il va de ci, il va de là,
Comme la queue de notre chat.”
Later on the Chief remarked: “Our august master is not at all pleased
at the idea of Antonelli at length deciding to come here. He is
uneasy about it. I am not.” Abeken said: “The newspapers express very
different opinions about Antonelli. At one time he is described as a
man of great intelligence and acumen; then again as a sly intriguer,
and shortly afterwards as a stupid fellow and a blockhead.” The
Chief replied: “It is not in the press alone that you meet with such
contradictions. It is the same with many diplomats. Goltz and our
Harry (von Arnim). We will leave Goltz out of the question--that was
different. But Harry--to-day this way and to-morrow that! When I used
to read a number of his reports together at Varzin, I found his opinion
of people change entirely a couple of times every week, according as he
had met with a friendly or unfriendly reception. As a matter of fact,
he sent different opinions by every post, and often by the same post.”
Afterwards read reports from Rome, London, and Constantinople, and the
replies sent to them. According to Arnim’s despatch, Monsignor Franchi
informed him that the Pope and Antonelli wished to send a mission to
Versailles to congratulate the King on his accession to the imperial
dignity, and at the same time to induce the French clergy to promote
the liberation of the country from Gambetta, and the negotiation of
peace with us on the basis of a cession of territory. In certain
circumstances Antonelli himself would undertake the task, in which
the Archbishop of Tours had failed, of securing an acceptable peace.
In reply to this communication Arnim was informed that it was still
uncertain whether Bavaria would agree to the scheme of Emperor and
Empire. We should, nevertheless, carry it through. But, in that case,
its chief support having been found in public opinion, the (mainly
Ultramontane) elements of resistance would be in still more marked
opposition to the new Germany. Bernstorff reports that the former
Imperial Minister, Duvernois, had called upon him at Eugénie’s instance
and suggested a cession of territory to us equal in extent to that
acquired by the Empire in Nice and Savoy. The Empress wished to issue
a proclamation. Persigny was of a different opinion, as he considered
the Empress to be impossible. Bonnechose, the Archbishop of Rouen,
expressed a similar opinion to Manteuffel. The reply sent to Bernstorff
was that we could not negotiate with the Empress (who, moreover, does
not appear to be reliable or politically capable), unless Persigny was
in agreement with her, and that Duvernois’ overture was unpractical.
Aali Pasha is prepared to agree to the abolition of the neutrality of
the Black Sea, but demands in compensation the full sovereignty of the
Porte over the Bosphorus and the Dardanelles. This was telegraphed by
us to St. Petersburg, and there agreed to; whereupon Brunnow (the
Russian Ambassador in London) received the necessary instructions in
the matter.
_Friday, December 23rd._--It was mentioned at dinner that General von
Voigts-Rhetz was outside Tours, the inhabitants having offered so much
resistance that it was found necessary to shell the town. The Chief
added, “He ought not to have stopped firing when they hoisted the white
flag. I would have continued to shell them until they sent out four
hundred hostages.” He again condemned the leniency of the officers
towards civilians who offer resistance. Even notorious treachery was
scarcely punished as it ought to be, and so the French imagined that
they could do what they liked against us. “Here is, for instance, this
Colonel Krohn,” he continued. “He first has a lawyer tried for aiding
and abetting franctireurs, and then, when he sees him condemned, he
sends in first one and then another petition for mercy, instead of
letting the man be shot, and finally despatches the wife to me with a
safe conduct. Yet he is generally supposed to be an energetic officer
and a strict disciplinarian, but he can hardly be quite right in his
head.”
From the discussion of this foolish leniency the conversation turned
on General von Unger, Chief of the Staff to the 7th Army Corps, who
had gone out of his mind, and had to be sent home. He is, it seems,
generally moody and silent, but occasionally breaks out into loud
weeping. “Yes,” sighed the Chief, “officers in that position are
terribly harassed. Constantly at work, always responsible, and yet
unable to get things done, and hampered by intrigue. Almost as bad as
a Minister. I know that sort of crying myself. It is over-excitement
of the nerves, hysterical weeping. I, too, had it at Nikolsburg, and
badly. A Minister is just as badly treated--all sorts of worries--an
incessant plague of midges. Other things can be borne, but one must
be properly treated. I cannot endure shabby treatment. If I were not
treated with courtesy, I should be inclined to throw my riband of the
Black Eagle into the dustbin.”
The Versailles _Moniteur_ having been mentioned, the Chief observed:
“Last week they published a novel by Heyse, the scene of which is laid
in Meran. Such sentimental twaddle is quite out of place in a paper
published at the cost of the King, which after all this one is. The
Versailles people do not want that either. They look for political
news and military intelligence from France, from England, or, if you
like, from Italy, but not such namby-pamby trash. I have also a touch
of poetry in my nature, but the first few sentences of that stuff were
enough for me.” Abeken, at whose instance the novel was published,
stood up for the editor, and said the story had been taken from the
_Revue des Deux Mondes_, an admittedly high-class periodical. The
Chief, however, stuck to his own opinion. Somebody remarked that the
_Moniteur_ was now written in better French. “It may be,” said the
Minister, “but that is a minor point. However, we are Germans, and as
such we always ask ourselves, even in the most exalted regions, if
we please our neighbours and if what we do is to their satisfaction.
If they do not understand, let them learn German. It is a matter
of indifference whether a proclamation is written in a good French
style or not, so long as it is otherwise adequate and intelligible.
Moreover, we cannot expect to be masters of a foreign language. A
person who has only used it occasionally for some two and a half
years cannot possibly express himself as well as one who has used it
for fifty-four years.” Steinmetz’s proclamation then received some
ironical praise, and a couple of extraordinary expressions were quoted
from it. Lehndorff said: “It was not first-class French, but it was,
at any rate, intelligible.” The Chief: “Yes, it is their business to
understand it. If they cannot, let them find some one to translate it
for them. Those people who fancy themselves merely because they speak
good French are of no use to us. But that is our misfortune. Whoever
cannot speak decent German is a made man, especially if he can murder
English. Old ---- (I understood: Meyendorff) once said to me: ‘Don’t
trust any Englishman who speaks French with a correct accent.’ I have
generally found that true. But I must make an exception in favour of
Odo Russell.”
The name of Napoleon III. then came up. The Chief regarded him as a
man of limited intelligence. “He is much more good-natured and much
less acute than is usually believed.” “Why,” interrupted Lehndorff,
“that is just what some one said of Napoleon I.: ‘a good honest fellow,
but a fool.’” “But seriously,” continued the Chief, “whatever one may
think of the _coup d’état_ he is really good-natured, sensitive, even
sentimental, while his intellect is not brilliant and his knowledge
limited. He is a specially poor hand at geography, although he was
educated in Germany, even going to school there,--and he entertains
all sorts of visionary ideas. In July last he spent three days
shilly-shallying without being able to come to a decision, and even
now he does not know what he wants. People would not believe me when
I told them so a long time ago. Already in 1854-55 I told the King,
Napoleon has no notion of what we are. When I became Minister I had a
conversation with him in Paris. He believed there would certainly be
a rising in Berlin before long and a revolution all over the country,
and in a plebiscite the King would have the whole people against
him. I told him then that our people do not throw up barricades, and
that revolutions in Prussia are only made by the Kings. If the King
could only bear the strain for three or four years he would carry his
point. Of course the alienation of public sympathy was unpleasant and
inconvenient. But if the King did not grow tired and leave me in the
lurch I should not fail. If an appeal were made to the population,
and a plebiscite were taken, nine-tenths of them would vote for the
King. At that time the Emperor said of me: ‘_Ce n’est pas un homme
sérieux._’ Of course I did not remind him of that in the weaver’s house
at Donchery.”
Somebody then mentioned that letters to Favre began “Monsieur
le Ministre,” whereupon the Chief said: “The next time I write
to him I shall begin _Hochwohlgeborner Herr!_” This led to a
Byzantine discussion of titles and forms of address, _Excellenz_,
_Hochwohlgeboren_, and _Wohlgeboren_. The Chancellor entertained
decidedly anti-Byzantine views. “All that should be dropped,” he
said. “I do not use those expressions any longer in private letters,
and officially I address councillors down to the third class as
_Hochwohlgeboren_.”
Abeken, a Byzantine of the purest water, declared that diplomats
had already resented the occasional omission of portions of their
titles, and that only councillors of the second class were entitled
to _Hochwohlgeboren_. “Well,” said the Chief, “I want to see all that
kind of thing done away with as far as we are concerned. In that way we
waste an ocean of ink in the course of the year, and the taxpayer has
good reason to complain of extravagance. I am quite satisfied to be
addressed simply as ‘Minister President Count von Bismarck.’”
_Saturday, December 24._--Bucher told us at lunch he had heard from
Berlin that the Queen and the Crown Princess had become very unpopular,
owing to their intervention on behalf of Paris; and that the Princess,
in the course of a conversation with Putbus, struck the table and
exclaimed: “For all that, Paris shall not be bombarded!”
We are joined at dinner by Lieutenant-Colonel von Beckedorff, an old
and intimate friend of the Chief, who said to him: “If I had been an
officer--I wish I were--I should now have an army and we should not be
here outside Paris.” He proceeded to give reasons for believing that
it was a mistake to have waited and invested Paris. With regard to the
operations of the last few weeks, he criticised the advance of the
army so far to the north and south-west and the intention of advancing
still further. “If it should become necessary to retire from Rouen and
Tours, the French will think they have beaten us. It is an unpractical
course to march on every place where a mob has been collected. We ought
to remain within a certain line. It may be urged that in that case
the French would be able to carry on their organisation beyond that
line. But they will always be able to do that even if we advance, and
we may be obliged ultimately to follow them to the Pyrenees and the
Mediterranean.” “When we were still at Mainz, I thought that the best
plan would be for us to take what we wanted to keep and occupy some
five other departments as a pledge for the payment of the cost of the
war, and then let the French try to drive us out of our positions.”
A further discussion of the conduct of the war followed, in the course
of which the Chief remarked: “With us it occasionally happens that it
is not so much the generals who begin and direct the course of battles
as the troops themselves. Just as it was with the Greeks and Trojans.
A couple of men jeer at each other and come to blows, lances are
flourished, others rush in with their spears, and so it finally comes
to a pitched battle. First the outposts fire without any necessity,
then if all goes well others press forward after them; at the start a
non-commissioned officer commands a batch of men, then a lieutenant
advances with more men, after him comes the regiment, and finally the
general must follow with all the troops that are left. It was in that
way that the battle of Spicheren began, and also that of Gravelotte,
which properly speaking should not have taken place until the 19th.
It was different at Vionville. There our people had to spring at the
French like bulldogs and hold them fast. At St. Privat the Guards made
a foolish attack merely out of professional jealousy of the Saxons, and
then when it failed threw the blame on the Saxon troops, who could not
have come a minute sooner with the long march they had had to make, and
who afterwards rescued them with wonderful gallantry.”
Later on I was summoned to see the Chief. Various articles are to be
written on the barbarous manner in which the French are conducting the
war--and not merely the franctireurs, but also the regulars, who are
almost daily guilty of breaches of the Geneva Convention. The French
appear only to know, and appeal to, those clauses that are advantageous
to themselves. In this connection should be mentioned the firing
at flags of truce, the ill-treatment and plundering of doctors and
hospital bearers and attendants, the murder of wounded soldiers, the
misuse of the Geneva Cross by franctireurs, the employment of explosive
bullets, and the treatment of German ships and crews by French cruisers
in breach of the law of nations. The conclusion to be as follows:--The
present French Government is greatly to blame for all this. It has
instigated a popular war and can no longer check the passions it has
let loose, which disregard international law and the rules of war. They
are responsible for all the severity which we are obliged to employ
against our own inclinations and contrary to our nature and habits, as
shown in the conduct of the Schleswig and Austrian campaigns.
At 10 P.M. the Chief received the first class of the Iron Cross.
At tea Hatzfeldt informs me that he is instructed to collect all the
particulars published by the newspapers respecting the cruelties of
the French, and asks whether I would not prefer to undertake that
task. After I promised to do so, he continued: “Moreover, I believe
the Chief only sent for me in order to tell me his opinion of the new
decoration.” He said to Hatzfeldt: “I have already enough of these
gewgaws, and here is the good King sending me the first class of the
Iron Cross. I shall be thoroughly ridiculous with it, and look as if
I had won a great battle. If I could at least send my son the second
class which I no longer want!”
_Sunday, December 25th._--Cardinal Bonnechose of Rouen is said to
be coming here. He and Persigny want to convoke the old Legislative
Assembly, and still more the Senate, which is composed of calmer and
riper elements, in order to discuss the question of peace. The Chief
is believed to have made representations to the King respecting the
expediency, on political grounds, of greater concentration in the
military operations.
We had no guests at dinner, and the conversation was, for the most
part, not worth repeating. The following may, however, be noted. Abeken
said he had observed that I was keeping a very complete diary, and
Bohlen added in his own lively style: “Yes, he writes down: ‘At 45
minutes past 3 o’clock Count or Baron So-and-so said this or that,’
as if he were going to swear to it at some future time.” Abeken said:
“That will one day be material for history. If one could only live
to read it!” I replied that it would certainly furnish material for
history, and very trustworthy material, but not for thirty years to
come. The Chief smiled and said: “Yes, and the reference will then be:
‘Conferas Buschii, cap. 3, p. 20.’”
After dinner I read State documents and ascertained from them that an
extension of the German frontier towards the west was first officially
submitted to the King, at Herny, on the 14th of August. It was only on
the 2nd September that the Baden Government sent in a memorial in the
same sense.
_Monday, December 26th._--Waldersee dined with us. The conversation
was almost entirely on military subjects. With respect to the further
conduct of the war, the Chief said that the wisest course would be to
concentrate our forces in Alsace-Lorraine, the department of the Meuse,
and another neighbouring department, which would amount to a strip of
territory with about 2,600,000 inhabitants. If one took in a few other
departments in addition, without Paris, it would amount to about seven
millions, or with Paris to about nine million inhabitants. In any case
the operations should be limited to a smaller area than that occupied
by our armies at present.
People’s ability to carry liquor was then discussed, and the Chief
observed: “Formerly drink did not affect me in the least. When I
think of my performances in that line! The strong wines, particularly
Burgundy!” The conversation afterwards turned for a while on
card-playing, and the Minister remarked that he had also done a good
deal in that way formerly. He had once played twenty-one rubbers of
whist, for instance, one after the other--“which amounts to seven hours
time.” He could only feel an interest in cards when playing for high
stakes, and then it was not a proper thing for the father of a family.
This subject had been introduced by a remark of the Chief’s that
somebody was a “Riemchenstecher.” He asked if we understood what the
word meant, and then proceeded to explain it. “Riemchenstechen” is an
old soldiers’ game, and a “Riemchenstecher” is not exactly a scamp, but
rather a sly, sharp fellow. The Minister then related how he had seen a
father do his own son at cards out of a sum of twelve thousand thalers.
“I saw him cheat, and made a sign to the son, who understood me. He
lost the game and paid, although it cost him two years’ income. But he
never played again.”
After dinner wrote another article on the barbarity with which
the French wage war, and cut out for the King an article from the
_Staatsbuergerzeitung_, recommending a less considerate treatment of
the enemy.
CHAPTER XVI
FIRST WEEK OF THE BOMBARDMENT
On Tuesday, the 27th of December, the long-wished-for bombardment of
Paris at length began, commencing on the east side. As the following
particulars show, we at first knew nothing of it, and afterwards also
it was only for a few days that the firing gave an impression of being
particularly violent. We very soon grew accustomed to it, and it never
entirely diverted our attention even from trifles, nor caused any
lengthy interruption of our work or of the flow of thought. The French
forts had been prepared for it. The diary may now resume its narrative.
From early morning on Tuesday until far into the day there was a heavy
fall of snow and rather severe cold. In the morning Theiss, who serves
Abeken as well as myself, and who seems to consider that our old
Geheimrath is a Catholic, told me:--“He always reads his prayers in the
morning. I believe it is Latin. He speaks very loud, so that he can
sometimes be heard in the antechamber. Probably it’s a mass.” He then
added that Abeken supposed the heavy firing that was heard from 7 A.M.
was the commencement of the bombardment.
Wrote several letters to Berlin with instructions as to articles.
Bray is to be sharply attacked by our newspapers. After 12 o’clock
I telegraph to London on the instructions of the Chief that the
bombardment of the outer fortifications began this morning. Our
artillery has commenced with an attack upon Mont Avron, a redoubt near
Bondy, and it appears that the Saxons had the honour to fire the first
shot.
The Minister remained in bed the whole day, not because he was
particularly unwell, but, as he told me, to maintain an equable
warmth. He was also absent from dinner, at which we were joined by
Count Solms. The only point of note in the conversation was Abeken’s
mention of a very pretty poem in the _Kladderadatsch_, on the Duke of
Coburg--probably a panegyric.
The Bonapartists seem to have become very active, and to entertain
great plans. According to Bernstorff’s despatches Persigny and
Palikao intend to get us to grant neutrality to Orleans, and to
convoke there the Corps Législatif to decide whether the country is
to have a republic or a monarchy, and if the latter which dynasty
is to reign. It is intended, however, to wait for a while, until
greater discouragement shall have made the people more accommodating.
Bonnechose proposes to attempt a negotiation for peace between Germany
and France. This prelate was formerly a lawyer, and only entered holy
orders subsequently. He is considered to be intelligent, is connected
with the Jesuits, and although in politics he is really a Legitimist he
has a high opinion of Eugénie because of her piety. He was an ardent
supporter of the doctrine of infallibility, and expects to be elected
Pope, which position he has indeed some prospect of attaining. The
Archbishop told Professor Wagener, who had been sent to see him by
Manteuffel respecting the hospital arrangements, that he could induce
Trochu, with whom he is acquainted, to surrender Paris in case we did
not insist upon a cession of territory. The Archbishop suggested that
instead of a cession of territory we might demand the return of Nice
and Savoy to Victor Emmanuel, and then oblige the latter to restore
their territories to the Pope and to the Sovereigns of Tuscany and
Naples. In that way we should win renown as the protectors of order,
and the restorers of justice in Europe. A strange idea indeed!
The Chief has given directions to adopt the severest measures against
Noquet le Roi, where a surprise by franctireurs was assisted by
the inhabitants. He has also rejected the appeal of the mayor and
municipality of Chatillon to be relieved from a contribution of a
million francs imposed upon the town as a penalty for similar conduct.
In both cases he was guided by the principle that the population must
be made to suffer by the war in order to render them more disposed to
peace.
At 11 P.M. called to the Chief, who gave me several newspaper articles
from Berlin “for the collection” (of examples of French barbarity in
the conduct of the war which I have begun under his instructions), as
well as two other articles that are to be sent to the King.
_Wednesday, December 28th._--Snowfall and moderately cold. The Chief
again kept to his room to-day. He handed me a letter in French, dated
the 25th instant, which he had received from “Une Américaine.” I am to
make what use I like of it. It runs as follows:--
“Graf von Bismarck. Jouissez autant que possible, Herr Graf, du climat
frais de Versailles, car, un jour, vous aurez à supporter des châleurs
infernales pour tous les malheurs que vous avez causés à la France et
à l’Allemagne.” That is all!
His Excellency Herr Delbrück again lunches with us. He is convinced
that the Second Bavarian Chamber will ultimately approve the Versailles
treaties just as the North German Diet did, respecting whose decision
he had been really uneasy for some days.
_Thursday, December 29th._--The Minister still remains in bed, but
works there, and does not seem to be particularly unwell.
In the afternoon I translated for the King Granville’s despatch
to Loftus respecting Bismarck’s circular on the Luxemburg affair.
Afterwards studied documents. In the middle of October the Chief
received a memorial from Coburg with proposals as to a reorganisation
of Germany. These also included the restoration of the imperial
dignity, and finally the substitution for the Bundesrath of a
Federal Ministry, and the creation of a Reichsrath to consist of
representatives of the Governments and delegates from the Diets. The
Chief replied to this memorial that some of the ideas brought forward
were already for some time past in process of realisation. He could not
agree to the proposals as to a Federal Ministry and the Reichsrath, as
he considered them calculated to hamper the new organisation, and, if
necessary, he would openly declare against them. It is reported from
Brussels that the King of the Belgians is well disposed towards us,
but has no means of controlling the anti-German press of the country.
The Grand Duke of Hesse has stated that Alsace and Lorraine must
become Prussian provinces. Dalwigk (his Minister), who is as opposed
to us as ever, wishes to see the territory to be ceded by France
incorporated with Baden. The Grand Duchy would then cede the district
near Heidelberg and Mannheim to Bavaria, whose connection with the
Palatinate on the left bank of the Rhine would be thus re-established.
In Rome the Pope wishes to undertake “mediation” between ourselves and
France. The expression quoted was objected to by Arnim as inappropriate.
The following particulars relating to the King of Bavaria are contained
in a report from Munich: “His kingdom is not of this world. It has been
further observed that Major Sauer has no longer any influence upon him,
while that of Privy Councillor Eisenhart has increased, as indeed also
that of Count Holnstein. He is not coming to Versailles, in the first
place because he would be obliged to ride, which he can no longer do
with comfort, and in the next place because he does not like to play
second fiddle. All that Bray thinks of is to keep his own position in
Vienna warm, if only for the sake of his livelihood.” Lutz is “the
_tête forte_ in the Ministry, and is very ambitious.” The Princes Karl
and Ludwig are strongly anti-Prussian. The Nuncio’s secretary exercises
a great influence with his chief.--Read a letter from King Lewis to
our Crown Prince. It was written at the commencement of the war. The
handwriting is coarse and ugly and the lines are not straight. It
expresses a hope that the independence of Bavaria will be respected.
Otherwise the tone of the epistle is soundly patriotic.
In the evening I handed Bucher, as material for an article, all the
newspaper reports I have collected on the barbarous conduct of the war
by the French, contrary to the law of nations.
At 10 o’clock I was called to the Chief, who was lying before the
fire on the sofa, wrapt in a blanket. He said: “Well, we’ve got him!”
“Whom, your Excellency?” “Mont Avron.” He then showed me a letter
from Count Waldersee, reporting that this redoubt was occupied by the
troops of the 12th Army Corps this afternoon. “It is to be hoped that
they have laid no mine and that the poor Saxons will not be blown up.”
I telegraphed the news of this first success in the bombardment to
London, but in cipher, “as otherwise the general staff might be angry.”
Subsequently the Chancellor sent for me once more to show me an
outburst of the Vienna _Tageblatt_ which has been reproduced by the
_Kölnische Zeitung_. It declares that Bismarck has been thoroughly
deceived as to the power of resistance of Paris, and in his overhaste,
which has already cost the lives of hundreds of thousands (why not at
once say millions?), has put forward excessive demands in connection
with the peace. We reply, through the _Spenersche Zeitung_, that up to
the present no one knows what the Chancellor’s conditions are, as he
has not yet had any opportunity of stating them officially, but they
do not in any case go so far as German public opinion, which almost
unanimously demands the cession of all Lorraine. No one can say either
what his views were respecting the power of resistance of Paris, as he
has never had to give official expression to them.
_Friday, December 30th._--The bitter cold of the last few days still
continues. In consequence of his indisposition the Chief still keeps
to his room, and is indeed mostly in bed. In the morning, on his
instructions, I telegraphed particulars of the occupation of Mont
Avron, and of the disgraceful conduct of the French authorities, who,
according to the official acknowledgment of the delegation at Tours,
have offered a premium to imprisoned officers to return to France, in
breach of their word of honour. On the suggestion of the Chief I write
paragraphs on this subject for the German press as well as for the
local _Moniteur_ to the following effect:--
“We have frequently had occasion to direct attention to the profound
demoralisation manifested by French statesmen and officers in the
matter of military honour. A communication, which reaches us from a
trustworthy source, proves that we had not up to the present realised
how deep and widespread that evil is. We have now before us an official
order issued by the French Ministry of War, the 5th Bureau of the 6th
Department, which bears the title ‘Solde et revues.’ It is dated from
Tours on the 13th of November, and is signed by Lieutenant-Colonel
Alfred Jerald, and by Colonel Tissier of the general staff of the
17th Army Corps. This order, which is based upon another dated the
10th of November, assures all French officers imprisoned in Germany,
without distinction, a money payment in case they escape from custody.
We repeat, all the French officers without distinction; that is to
say also those who have given their word of honour not to escape. The
premium offered for such dishonourable conduct amounts to 750 francs.
A measure of this description needs no comment. Honour (which is the
dearest treasure of every German officer and--duty and justice demand
that we should add--formerly also of all French officers) is regarded
by the men who came to power on the 4th of September as a commodity
to be bought and sold, and indeed very cheaply. In this way officers
of the French army will come to believe that France is no longer
administered by a Government, but is on the contrary exploited by a
trading firm, and one with lax principles of honesty and decency, under
the title of ‘Gambetta and Co.’ ‘Who’ll buy gods?’ ‘Who’ll sell his
word of honour?’”
Afterwards I write another short article on an error frequently
committed by the _Kölnische Zeitung_ and recently repeated in
connection with the Chancellor’s despatch to Vienna. The great Rhenish
newspaper writes: “Ever since 1866 we have been amongst those who
have persistently warned both Vienna and Berlin to dismiss their
idle jealousies and to come to the best understanding possible in
the circumstances. We have often regretted the _personal irritation_
between Bismarck and Beust which appears to stand in the way of such
a _rapprochement_, &c.” The reply is to the following effect: “It has
been observed that the _Kölnische Zeitung_ has already frequently
sought to explain political acts and omissions of the Chancellor of
the Confederation by personal motives, personal likes and dislikes,
personal disposition and ill humour; and we have here a further
instance of this unjustifiable course. We cannot imagine why such
suspicions are time after time brought forward. We only know that
absolutely no feeling of personal irritation exists between the
Chancellor of the North German Confederation and the Chancellor of the
Austria-Hungarian Monarchy, and indeed that, previous to 1866, when
they often came into personal contact, they were on excellent terms, as
Count Bismarck himself declared in the North German Reichstag. Since
then nothing has happened between them as private persons calculated
to create bitterness, if for no other reason than because they have
had no personal intercourse. If they have taken up a position more or
less antagonistic to each other the reasons are obvious. Up to the
present they were the representatives of different political systems,
and acted upon different political principles which it was difficult
although not quite impossible to reconcile. This, and this alone,
is the sole explanation of what the _Kölnische Zeitung_ ascribes to
personal motives, from which the thoughts and acts of no statesman of
the present day is farther removed than those of the Chancellor of
the Confederation. It may also be remarked incidentally that not only
has Count Bismarck not been ‘thoroughly’ deceived as to the power of
resistance of Paris, but he has not been deceived at all. His opinion
has never been asked on the subject; but we know on the best authority
that months ago he regarded the capture of the city as difficult, and
was decidedly opposed to the investment even before the fall of Metz.”
In reading documents in the evening I find that the Chief has had a
letter sent to General Bismarck-Bohlen stating that he does not agree
with the general in thinking that his main task should be to alleviate
the misery caused by the war, and to render the Alsacians well disposed
towards the future masters of the country. For the moment his first
business must be to promote the objects of the war and to secure the
safety of the troops. He should therefore expel such French officials
as will not take service under us, including the magistrates who will
not discharge the duties of their office; and he should also withhold
the payment of pensions directing the pensioners to apply to the
Government at Tours. Under such conditions the people would be more
disposed to call for peace.
_Saturday, December 31st._--All our people are ailing. I also begin
to feel exhausted. It will be well to shorten the night work which my
diary entails, or to interrupt it altogether for a few days.
_Tuesday, January 3rd._--I observe that the opinion already expressed
by the Chief on several occasions, that the dispersion of the German
forces towards the north and south-west is dangerous, and that more
in concentration is desirable, is also held elsewhere. A military
authority has written on this subject in the Vienna _Presse_; and
the _National Zeitung_ of the 31st of December publishes an article
which is even more in harmony with the Chief’s views. It says, _inter
alia_:--“The withdrawal of our troops from Dijon and the non-occupation
of Tours, to the gates of which a division of the 10th Army Corps
had advanced, give perhaps an indication of the views entertained
generally on the German side, and which will govern the continuation
of the campaign. It may possibly be expected that France will forgo
further resistance after the fall of Paris, and will agree to the
German conditions of peace. That, however, is not certain, and it is
necessary to be prepared for an opposite contingency. In any case the
fall of Paris will not be immediately followed by the establishment
of a Government generally recognised and supported by a National
Assembly, with which we could enter into negotiations for peace. Then
if hostilities are to be continued they cannot aim at conquering the
whole of such an extensive country as France. Our army, as hitherto,
might indeed be everywhere victorious and disperse the hostile forces.
That, however, would not be sufficient. It would be necessary to
organise a new civil administration in all the conquered districts
and to subject the population to its rule. Even in the country lying
between the Channel and the Loire our forces would not be sufficient
to completely secure the safety of communications and to maintain the
authority of a foreign administration in each town and village, to
prevent treacherous attacks and to collect the taxes as well as the
contributions and supplies that are indispensable for the purposes
of the war. To extend the area of occupation indefinitely would not
only be to overtax our military power, however highly we may rate it,
but to unduly drain our home services for the necessary supply of
civil administrators. Therefore, if peace is not attainable within a
very short time our military authorities must set clear and distinct
limits to the task which they propose to themselves. They must select a
fixed portion of French territory, which they can occupy so completely
that we shall have full command over it, and can retain it as long as
may be desired. This portion should include the capital and the best
provinces, with the finest and most warlike population, and it would
have, of course, to bear the whole burden and cost of the war until
a peace party had grown up throughout the country strong enough to
force its views upon the Government of the day. The occupied territory
should be so limited as to make its defence as easy as possible from
a military point of view. Of course further offensive operations for
temporary purposes might be undertaken beyond those lines, but there
should from the beginning be no intention of going permanently beyond
them. In the meantime the work of annexation should be proceeded with
in those districts which Germany requires for the security of her
frontier without awaiting the conclusion of peace.”
_Friday, January 6th._--Up to yesterday the cold was very severe. The
Chief has been unwell nearly the whole week. Yesterday for the first
time he went out for a short drive, and again this afternoon. The
Bureau has been reinforced by two officials, namely Oberregierungsrath
Wagener and Baron von Holstein, a secretary of embassy. Amongst
the articles which I have written within the last few days was one
concerning the withdrawal of a number of railway waggons from home
traffic, and consequently from the use of German industry, solely for
the purpose of collecting provisions here in anticipation of the time
when famine shall at length compel Paris to surrender. I described this
as humane, but unpractical and impolitic, as the Parisians, when they
hear that we have made preparations for that event, will continue their
resistance to the last crust of bread and the last joint of horseflesh.
We shall, therefore, ourselves be contributing through such acts of
humanity to a prolongation of the siege. It is not for us to provide
against the threatened danger of famine by establishing storehouses
or collecting the means of transport for reprovisioning the city, but
rather for the Parisians themselves by means of a timely capitulation.
I yesterday translated for the use of the King two English documents
respecting the sinking of English coal ships near Rouen by our troops,
who considered the measure necessary.
After dinner I read despatches and drafts. A demand has been addressed
to the German railways to supply a number of waggons (“2,800 axles”)
for the purpose of transporting provisions to Paris. The Chief
entered an energetic protest against this measure, which would be
prejudicial to us from a political standpoint, as the knowledge of
those provisions would enable the holders of power in Paris to exhaust
all their supplies before finally yielding, without any fear of famine
at the last moment. A telegram was sent to Itzenplitz on the 3rd of
January suggesting that he should not deliver a single waggon for this
purpose, and asking him to reply by wire whether he would decline such
requisitions. If not, the Chief “would request his Majesty to relieve
him from all responsibility.” Itzenplitz telegraphed back that he
agreed with the views of the Chancellor of the Confederation, and
would act accordingly. A letter from the King of Sweden, addressed to
a Commandant Verrier in Erfurt, is to be returned through the Dead
Letter Office. His Swedish Majesty, whom we know not to be particularly
well disposed towards us, says in this epistle, which, by the way, is
written in bad French with many orthographical errors, that he regrets
to have to watch the struggle with “folded arms,” and to be obliged
to “eat his bread in peace.” “_Nous nous armons tardivement, hélas!
mais avec vigueur, et j’espère que le jour de vengeance arrivera!_”
Vengeance? What have the Swedes to avenge upon us? It would seem as
if Prince Charles of Rumania were no longer able to manage the local
extremists, and were thinking of abdicating and leaving the country.
“We have no political interests in Rumania.” The Chief has made
representations to the King suggesting a limitation of the seat of war
for political reasons, namely on the ground that only thus shall we be
able to maintain our position in the occupied portions of France and
take full advantage of our occupation; and he has further proposed that
we should give notice to withdraw from the Geneva Convention, which is
unpractical. Bonnechose has, at the instance of the Pope, addressed
a letter to King William in favour of peace, but of an “honourable”
peace, that is to say, one that would not involve a cession of
territory. That we could have had twelve weeks ago from Monsieur Favre,
if the Chief had not preferred a _useful_ peace. For this reason
the Minister recommended that the letter should be left unanswered.
According to an intimation from Persigny, Prince Napoleon wishes to
come to Versailles in order to act as intermediary. He is a highly
intelligent and amiable gentleman, but enjoys little consideration in
France, and therefore the Chancellor declined to negotiate with him. In
the London Conference on the Black Sea question we are to give every
possible support to Russia’s demands. The Dowager Queen at Dresden
has suggested to Eichmann (the Prussian Minister) that it would be an
indication of confidence in Saxony if we were to allow them to garrison
Königstein with Saxon troops alone.
_Saturday, January 7th._--Haber suggested that possibly some political
documents of importance for us might be found in Odillon Barrot’s
house at Bougival. I asked the Minister’s permission to go over there
with Bucher. He replied: “That is all very well, but is it a private
library? I must preserve the things for M. Odillon Barrot. But you
can see if there is anything political amongst them.” It proved on
examination to be a well-chosen library, containing historical and
political works, as well as polite literature. It included also a
number of English books, but contained nothing of the character
suspected by Haber.
This evening the Minister dines with us again.
We hear at tea that the bombardment of the forts on the north side of
Paris has also begun, and shows good results. Fires have broken out in
Vaugirard and Grenelles--whence probably the smoke arose which we saw
yesterday from the hills between Ville d’Avray and Sèvres.
Keudell thinks I ought to tell the Chief. I go up to him at a quarter
to 11. He thanks me, and then asks, “What time is it?” I answer “Nearly
11, Excellency.” “Well, then, tell Keudell to prepare the communication
for the King.” I ascertain down stairs that this is a complaint that by
11 o’clock at night the military authorities have not communicated to
the Minister matters of which civilians were informed at 2 P.M.
_Sunday, January 8th._--At dinner the Chief gave some further
reminiscences of his youth. He spent the time from his sixth to his
twelfth year at the Plahmann Institute in Berlin, an educational
establishment worked on the principles of Pestalozzi and Jahn. It
was a period he could not think of with pleasure. The _régime_ was
artificially Spartan. While there he never fully satisfied his hunger,
except when he was invited out. “The meat was like india-rubber, not
exactly hard, but too much for one’s teeth. And carrots--I liked them
raw,--but cooked, and with hard potatoes, square junks!”
This led up to the pleasures of the table, the Chief giving his views
chiefly of certain varieties of fish. He had a pleasant recollection
of fresh-river lampreys, of which he could eat eight or ten; he then
praised schnäpel, a kind of whiting, and the Elbe salmon, the latter
being “a happy mean between the Baltic salmon and that of the Rhine,
which is too rich for me.” With regard to bankers’ dinners, “nothing is
considered good unless it is dear,--no carp because it is comparatively
cheap in Berlin, but _zander_ (a kind of perch-pike) because it is
difficult to carry. As a matter of fact I do not care for these, and
just as little for lampreys, of which the flesh is too soft for me.
But I could eat marena every day of the week. I almost prefer them to
trout, of which I only like those of a medium size, weighing about
half-a-pound. The large ones that are usually served at dinners in
Frankfurt, and which mostly come from the Wolfsbrünnen near Heidelberg,
are not worth much. They are expensive, and so one must have them.
That’s also the way at Court with oysters. They don’t eat any in
England when the Queen is present, as they are too cheap there.”
The conversation then turned on the Arc de Triomphe in Paris, which was
compared with the Brandenburg Gate. The Chief said of the latter: “It
is really beautiful in its way--particularly without the two pillared
porticos. I have advised the King to let it stand free, and have the
guard houses removed. It would be much more effective, as it would no
longer be squeezed in and partly concealed as it is now.”
Wagener having mentioned his former journalistic work, the Minister
said: “I know my first newspaper article was about shooting. At that
time I was still a wild junker. Some one had written a spiteful article
on sport, which set my blood boiling, so that I sat down and wrote a
reply, which I handed to Altvater, the editor, but without success. He
answered very politely, but said it would not do, he could not accept
it. I was beside myself with indignation that any one should be at
liberty to attack sportsmen without being obliged to listen to their
reply; but so it was at that time.”
The defence put forward by the Luxemburg Government in reply to our
complaints respecting breaches of neutrality is insufficient. It
perhaps shows the good will of that Government, but certainly the facts
prove that they are not able to maintain their own neutrality. They
have been again warned, further evidence being given in support of
our charges. If this does not prove effective, we shall be obliged to
occupy the Grand Duchy, and hand over his passports to the Grand Ducal
Minister in Berlin. A communication to the same effect has been made to
the Powers that signed the Treaty of 1867. According to a memorandum in
which the Chief proposed to the King that, the statesmen who concluded
the treaties providing for the accession of Baden and Würtemberg to the
North German Confederation should receive decorations, an exception was
to be made in the case of Dalwigk, because he had constantly intrigued
and worked against Prussia and the cause of German unity, and only
finally gave way on the compulsion of necessity; and his decoration
would, therefore, have a bad effect upon public opinion, which had
frequently urged the exercise of Prussian influence to secure his
dismissal.
_Monday, January 9th._--It is reported from London that Prince Napoleon
has a plan under consideration for concluding on his own authority a
peace satisfactory to us, and then after the capitulation of Paris
convoking the two Chambers to ratify the treaty, and to decide upon the
future form of government, and eventually upon the future dynasty. This
plan would be supported by Vinoy and Ducrot. The Orleanists are also
active, and hope to win over Thiers to their side. Bernstorff reports
that it has been ascertained from a servant of Dr. Reitlinger, Favre’s
secretary, that he has endeavoured to hatch a democratic conspiracy
in South Germany. Gladstone has received Reitlinger, and promised to
support him in every possible way.
In the afternoon I drafted a telegram as to the further successful
progress of the bombardment. On submitting it to the Chief, he struck
out a passage in which it was mentioned that our shells had fallen in
the Luxemburg Gardens, as being “impolitic.” He also instructed me to
telegraph to the Foreign Office in Berlin to omit this passage from the
report of the general staff.
The following pretty story is making the round of the newspapers. It
is taken from the private letter of a German officer, and was first
published in the _Leipziger Tageblatt_. “One day the aide-de-camp,
Count Lehndorff, visited Captain von Strantz at one of the outposts at
Ville d’Avray, near Paris. In reply to the Count’s question as to how
he was getting on, the Captain said: ‘Oh, very well; I have just been
dining for the sixty-seventh time off roast mutton.’ The Count laughed,
and after a while drove off again. Next day a policeman called upon the
captain with the following message: ‘It having come to the knowledge
of his Excellency Count Bismarck, Chancellor of the Confederation,
that Captain von Strantz would doubtless be dining to-day off his
sixty-eighth joint of roast mutton, his Excellency sends him herewith
four ducks as a change of menu.’” This anecdote has the advantage over
most of those appearing in the press, that it is in the main correct.
But the policeman did not call on the next day. Count Lehndorff dined
with us a few days before Christmas.
The Chief was shaved as usual on coming to dinner to-day. He first
mentioned that Count Bill had received the Iron Cross, and seemed to
think that it should more properly have been given to his elder son, as
he was wounded in the cavalry charge at Mars la Tour. “The wound was
an accident,” he went on, “and others who were not wounded may have
been equally brave. But it is, after all, a distinction, a kind of
compensation for the wounded.” “I remember when I was a young man that
one Herr von Reuss went about Berlin also wearing the Cross. I thought
to myself what wonders he must have done; but I afterwards ascertained
that he had an uncle who was a Minister, and he had been attached to
the general staff as a kind of private aide-de-camp.”
The Chancellor suddenly remarked; “It must be three weeks since I saw
Serenissimus.[20] It is not so long since I saw Serenior.[21] I cut the
Sereni.” The Chancellor then continued, obviously with reference to
the Sereni, that is the Princes at the Hôtel des Reservoirs, or one of
them, but without any connecting sentence: “I remember at Göttingen I
once called a student a silly youngster. (Dummer Junge, the recognised
form of offence when it is intended to provoke a duel.) On his sending
me his challenge I said I had not wished to offend him by the remark
that he was a silly youngster, but merely to express my conviction.”
While we were discussing pheasant and sauerkraut some one remarked
that the Minister had not been out shooting for a long time, although
the woods between Versailles and Paris were full of game. “Yes,” he
replied, “something has always happened to prevent me. The last time
was at Ferrières, the King was away and he had forbidden shooting, that
is to say, in the park, just as he has now given orders that Ferrières
must be spared, merely because it belongs to a rich Jew. We did not go
into the park, and there was plenty of game, but not much of it was
shot as the cartridges were bad.” Holstein, who, by the way, turns
out to be exceedingly amiable, hard-working and helpful, remarked:
“This is the account given of the affair, Excellency. You were aware
of his Majesty’s orders, and of course desired to obey them. But it
unfortunately happened as you were taking a walk on one occasion you
were suddenly set upon by three or four pheasants and were obliged to
shoot them down in self-defence.”
The French Rothschild recalled the German one, of whom the Chief
related a very amusing story. He said: “When the members of the
Reichstag were here recently, I was seated next to Rothschild at the
Crown Prince’s. The Prince sat next to me, and on his other side was
Simson. Rothschild smokes a grew deal, and smelt of that and other
things, and so I thought I would play a little practical joke before
we sat down. But it did not succeed. It is only after dinner that
stewards of the household begin to be sensible and listen to a body.
I had my revenge however, by letting my neighbour have the benefit of
my remarks. I said to him, ‘You should have a house in Berlin, and
invite people to see you, and so on.’ ‘What do you mean?’ he asked, in
a loud and almost angry voice. ‘Am I to give dinners in a restaurant?’
‘Well, you might do that too,’ I replied, ‘but to other people, not
to me. In my opinion you owe it to the credit of your house. But the
best thing would be to have a place of your own in Berlin. You know
there is nothing to be expected any longer from the Paris and London
Rothschilds, and so you ought to do something in Berlin. People are
constantly surprised that you have not yet got into the Almanach de
Gotha. Of course, what has not been done up to now may yet happen, but
I am afraid you are not going the right way to work.’”
Finally polite literature came to be discussed, and Spielhagen’s
“Problematische Naturen” was mentioned. The Chancellor had read it,
and did not think badly of it, but he said: “I shall certainly not
read it a second time. One has absolutely no time here. Otherwise
a much-occupied Minister might well take up such a book and forget
his despatches over it for a couple of hours.” Freytag’s “Soll und
Haben” was also mentioned, and his description of the Polish riots,
as well as the story of the bread-and-butter miss and the ball, were
praised, while his heroes were considered insipid. One said they had
no passion, and another no souls. Abeken, who took an active part in
the conversation, observed that he could not read any of these things
twice, and that most of the well-known modern authors had only produced
one good book apiece. “Well,” said the Chief, “I could also make you a
present of three-fourths of Goethe--the remainder, certainly--I should
like to live for a long spell on a desert island with seven or eight
volumes out of the forty.” Fritz Reuter was then referred to, and
the Minister remarked, “‘Uit de Franzosentid,’ very pretty but not a
novel.” “Stromtid” was also mentioned. “H’m,” said the Chief, “_Dat is
as dat ledder is_ (that’s just how it is, a favourite expression of one
of the characters in the book)--that, it is true, is a novel, and it
contains many good and others indifferent, but all through the peasants
are described exactly as they are.”
In the evening I translated for the King a long article from _The
Times_ on the situation in Paris. Afterwards at tea Keudell spoke very
well and sensibly of certain qualities of the Chancellor, who reminded
him of Achilles, his great gifts, the youthfulness of his character,
his quickness of temper, his tendency to _Weltschmerz_, his inclination
to withdraw from great affairs and his invariably victorious action.
Our times could boast a Troy, and also an Agamemnon, shepherd of the
nations.
_Tuesday, January 10th._--Earth and sky are full of snow. A shot is
only to be heard now and again from our batteries, or from the forts.
Count Bill is here, and General von Manteuffel calls at 1 o’clock. They
are passing through on their way to the army that is to operate against
Bourbaki in the south-east under Manteuffel. During the afternoon I
telegraph twice to London reporting the retreat of Chanzy at Le Mans,
with the loss of a thousand men who were made prisoners, and Werder’s
victorious resistance at Villersexel to a superior French force
advancing to the relief of Belfort.
The first subject mentioned at dinner is the bombardment. The Chief
holds that most of the Paris forts are of little importance, except
perhaps Mont Valérien--“Not much more than the redoubts at Düppel.”
That is to say the moats are not very deep, and formerly the walls were
also weak. The conversation then turns on the International League
of Peace and its connection with social democracy as shown by the
fact that Karl Marx, who is now living in London, has been appointed
President of the German branch. Bucher describes Marx as an intelligent
man with a good scientific education and the real leader of the
international labour movement. With reference to the League of Peace
the Chief says that its efforts are all of an equivocal character, and
that its aims are something very different to peace. It is a cloak for
communism. “But,” he concludes, “certain august personages have even
now no idea of that. Foreign countries and peace!” In this connection
he referred to the influence and attitude of Queen Augusta.
Count Bill, according to the Chief, “looks from a distance like an old
staff officer, he is so stout.” He was very lucky in being selected to
accompany Manteuffel. Of course, it would only be a temporary billet,
but he would see a great deal of the war. “For his age he has a good
opportunity to learn something. That was impossible for one of us
at eighteen. I should have been born in 1795 to have taken part in
the campaign of 1813.” “Nevertheless since the battle of--(I could
not catch the name, but he referred apparently to an engagement in
the Huguenot War) there was not one of my ancestors who did not draw
the sword against France. My father and three of his brothers were
engaged against Napoleon I. Then my grandfather fought at Rossbach;
my great-grandfather against Louis XIV., and his father against the
same King in the little war on the Rhine in 1672 or 1673. Then several
of us fought on the imperial side in the Thirty Years’ War, others,
it is true, joining the Swedes. And finally still another was amongst
the Germans who fought as mercenaries on the Huguenot side. One--there
is a picture of him at Schönhausen with his children--was an original
character. I still have a letter from him to his brother-in-law in
which he says, ‘The cask of Rhine wine costs me eighty reichsthalers.
If my worthy brother-in-law considers that too dear I will, so
God spares me, drink it myself.’ And another time: ‘If my worthy
brother-in-law maintains so-and-so, I hope, so God preserves me, to
come into closer contact with his person than will be pleasant to him.’
And again in another place: ‘I have spent 12,000 reichsthalers on the
regiment, but I hope, if God spares me, to make as much out of it in
time.’ The economies referred to consisted probably in drawing pay
for men who were on furlough or who only existed on paper. Certainly
the commander of a regiment was better off at that time than now.”
Some one observed that was also the rule at a later period, so long
as regiments were recruited, paid, and clad by the colonels and hired
by the Princes, and possibly the same thing still happened in other
countries. The Chief: “Yes, in Russia for instance, in the great
cavalry regiments in the Southern provinces which often have as many
as sixteen squadrons. There the colonel had, and doubtless yet has
other sources of income. A German once told me, for instance, that
on a new colonel taking over the command of a regiment--I believe it
was in Kursk or Woronesch--the peasants of this wealthy district came
to him with waggons full of straw and hay, and begged the ‘little
father’ to be gracious enough to accept them. ‘I did not know what
they wanted,’ said the colonel, ‘and so I told them to be off and leave
me in peace. But the ‘little father’ ought to be fair, they urged,
his predecessor had been satisfied with that much, and they could not
give more, as they were poor people. At length I got tired of it,
particularly as they became very pressing and went down on their knees
entreating me to accept it, and I had them bundled out of doors. But
then others came with loads of wheat and oats. Then I understood what
was meant, and took everything as my predecessor had done, and when
the first lot returned with more hay I told them that what they had
brought before was enough and they could take back the rest. And thus
I secured an annual sum of 20,000 roubles, as I charged the Government
for the hay and oats required by the regiment.’ He related that quite
frankly and unabashed in a drawing-room in St. Petersburg, and I was
the only one who was surprised at it.” “But what could he have done to
the peasants?” asked Delbrück. “He himself could have done nothing,”
replied the Chief, “but he might have ruined them in another way. He
only required _not_ to forbid the soldiers to take what they liked from
them.”
Manteuffel was again spoken of, and somebody mentioned that he had
broken his leg at Metz, and had to be carried on the battle-field.
Manteuffel was greatly surprised that we had not known this, and the
Minister remarked that he must certainly have thought us very badly
informed as to the incidents of the war. Later on the Chief said: “I
remember how I sat with him and ---- (I did not catch the name) on
the stones outside the Church at Blekstein. The King came up, and I
proposed that we should greet him like the three witches in _Macbeth_:
‘Hail, Thane of Lauenburg! Hail, Thane of Kiel! Hail, Thane of
Schleswig!’ It was when I was negotiating the Treaty of Gastein with
Blome. I then played quinze for the last time in my life. Although I
had not played then for a long time, I gambled recklessly, so that the
others were astounded. But I knew what I was at. Blome had heard that
quinze gave the best opportunity of testing a man’s character, and he
was anxious to try the experiment on me. I thought to myself, I’ll
teach him. I lost a few hundred thalers, for which I might well have
claimed reimbursement from the State as having been expended on his
Majesty’s service. But I got round Blome in that way, and made him do
what I wanted. He took me to be reckless, and yielded.”
The conversation then turned upon Berlin, some one having remarked
that it was from year to year assuming more the appearance of a great
capital, also in its sentiments and way of thinking, a circumstance
which to some extent reacted on its Parliamentary representatives.
“They have greatly altered during the last five years,” said Delbrück.
“That is true,” said the Chief; “but in 1862, when I first had to
deal with those gentlemen, they recognised what a hearty contempt I
entertained for them, and they have never become friends with me again.”
The Jews then came to be discussed, and the Minister wished to know
how it was that the name Meier was so common amongst them. That
name was after all of German origin, and in Westphalia it meant a
landed proprietor, yet formerly the Jews owned no land. I submitted
that the word was of Hebrew origin and occurred in the Old Testament
and also in the Talmud, being properly Meïr and akin to “Or,”
_i.e._, light, brilliance, whence the signification of Enlightened,
Brilliant, Radiant. The Chief then inquired the meaning of Kohn, a
name very common amongst them also. I said it signified Priest, and
was originally Kohen From Kohen it became Kohn, Kuhn, Cahen, and Kahn.
Kohn and Kahn were also occasionally transformed into Hahn, a remark
which caused some amusement as it probably reminded the company of the
“Presshahn,” who is at the head of the Berlin Literary Bureau. “I am
of opinion,” continued the Minister, “that to prevent mischief, the
Jews will have to be rendered innocuous by cross breeding. The results
are not bad.” He then mentioned some noble houses, Lynars, Stirums,
Gusserows: “All very clever, decent people.” He then reflected for
a while and, omitting one link from the chain of thought, probably
the marriage of distinguished Christian ladies to rich or talented
Israelites, he proceeded: “It is better the other way on. One ought to
put a Jewish mare to a Christian stallion of German breed. The money
must be brought into circulation again, and the race is not at all bad.
I do not know what I shall one day advise my sons to do.”
I spent the whole time after dinner at work, principally reading
despatches. The Rumanian (Prince Charles) has sent the Chancellor a
letter, written in his own hand, requesting advice in his difficulties.
He seems to be in the greatest perplexity, and the Powers will not
help him. England and Austria are at least indifferent; the Porte
is inclined to look upon the unification of the Principalities as to
its interests; France is now of no account; the Tsar Alexander is, it
is true, well disposed to Prince Charles but will not interfere; and
intervention on the part of Germany, who has no practical interests in
Rumania, is not to be expected. Therefore, if the Prince cannot help
himself out of his difficulties, he had better retire before he is
obliged to. Such was the counsel addressed to him by the Chief through
Keudell. Beust has been informed of this. It would appear that Beust’s
despatch in reply to the announcement of the approaching union of
South Germany with the North, shows a new departure in his political
views, and it is possible that even under him satisfactory relations
may be developed and maintained between the two newly-organised Powers,
Germany and Austria-Hungary. He reported that a new comic paper, _Der
Bismarck_, was being founded in Vienna, and that he would do everything
in his power to prevent this abuse of the name. The Chief has recently
addressed a communication to the King in which he requests: (1) That
the telegrams of the General Staff before being despatched to Berlin
should be submitted to him and his approval obtained, as they might
have political bearings--as, for example, in the case of the shells
that fell in the Luxemburg Gardens. (2) That he should receive full
information of the course of military operations, instead of being
indebted for detailed particulars to the newspapers and private
persons. Subalterns and members of the Ambulance Corps were kept better
informed than he.
At 10.30 P.M. the Chief comes down to tea, at which Count Bill also
joins us. Abeken returns from Court and brings the news that the
fortress of Péronne, with a garrison of 3,000 men, has capitulated.
The Chief, who was just looking through the _Illustrirte Zeitung_,
sighed and exclaimed: “Another 3,000! If one could only drown them in
the Seine--or at least their Commander, who has broken his word of
honour!”
This led the conversation to the subject of the numerous prisoners
in Germany, and Holstein said it would be a good idea to hire them
out to work on the Strousberg railway. “Or,” said the Chief, “if the
Tsar could be induced to settle them in military colonies beyond the
Caucasus. It is said to be a very fine country. This mass of prisoners
will really form a difficulty for us after the peace. The French
will thus have an army at once, and one fresh from a long rest. But
there will really be no alternative. We shall have to give them back
to Napoleon, and he will require 200,000 men as a Pretorian Guard to
maintain himself.” “Does he then really expect to restore the Empire?”
asked Holstein. “Oh, very much,” replied the Chief, “extremely, quite
enormously much. He thinks of it day and night, and the people in
England also.”
Holstein then related how certain people belonging to the English
Embassy had behaved very unbecomingly outside the place where the
French prisoners are confined in Spandau, and had fared badly in
consequence. Cockerell was knocked down and beaten black and blue, so
that he afterwards looked “quite as if he had been painted.” Loftus
did not at first want to intervene, but was ultimately induced by the
other diplomats to enter a complaint. “Did they give this Cockerell a
sound hiding?” asked Count Bill. “Oh, certainly,” replied Holstein,
“and Miss ---- (name escaped me), who tried to interfere on his behalf,
also received a few blows.” “Well, I am glad Cockerell got a proper
dressing,” said the Chief, “it will do him good. I am sorry for the
lady. But it is a pity that Loftus” (the British Ambassador) “himself
did not get thrashed on the occasion, as we should then be rid of him.”
_Wednesday, January 11th._--Bernstorff reports that Clement Duvernois,
a former Minister of Napoleon, wishes to come here in order to
negotiate for peace in the name of the Empress. She will agree in
principle to the cession of territory and the new frontier demanded
by us, and also to the payment of a war indemnity and the occupation
of a certain portion of France by our troops until it is paid, and
will promise not to enter into negotiations respecting peace with any
other Power than Germany. Duvernois is of opinion that although the
Empress is not popular, yet she would act energetically, and as a
legal ruler would have more authority and offer us a better security
than any person elected by and dependent upon the representatives of
the country. Duvernois assisted in provisioning Paris and accordingly
knows that it must surrender shortly, and therefore as time presses, he
is anxious to hurry on negotiations. Will he be received if he comes?
Perhaps, if only in order to make the members of the Government in
Paris and Bordeaux more yielding.
During dinner the bombardment was discussed, as is now usually the
case. Paris was said to be on fire, and some one had clearly seen thick
columns of smoke rising over the city. “That is not enough,” said the
Chief. “We must first smell it here. When Hamburg was burning the smell
could be distinguished five German miles off.” The opposition offered
by the “Patriots” in the Bavarian Chamber to the Versailles Treaty was
then referred to. The Chief said: “I wish I could go there and speak
to them. They have obviously got into a false position and can neither
advance nor retire. I have already been doing my best to bring them
into the right way. But one is so badly wanted here in order to prevent
absurdities and to preach sense.”
_Thursday, January 12th._--At dinner the conversation again turned on
the bombardment. On somebody observing that the French complain of
our aiming at their hospitals, the Chief said: “That is certainly not
done intentionally. They have hospitals near the Pantheon and the Val
de Grâce, and it is possible that a few shells may have fallen there
accidentally. H’m, Pantheon, Pandemonium?” Abeken had heard that the
Bavarians intended to storm one of the south-eastern forts that had
returned our fire in a weak way. The Chief commended the Bavarians,
adding: “If I were only in Munich now, I would bring that home to their
members of Parliament in such a way that I should immediately win them
over to our side.”
The Chancellor then told us that the King preferred the title “Emperor
of Germany” to that of “German Emperor.” “I gave him to understand
that I did not care a brass farthing. He was of a different opinion.
Rather the country than the people. I then explained to him that the
first would be a new title and would at least have no historical basis.
There had never been an Emperor of Germany, and though it was true
there had also been no German Emperor, there had been a German King.”
Bucher confirmed that statement and remarked that Charlemagne assumed
the title of “Imperator Romanorum.” Subsequently the Emperor was called
“Imperator Romanus, semper augustus, and German King.”
At 11 P.M. the King sent the Chief a pencil note in his own
handwriting on a half sheet of letter paper, informing him that we had
just won a great victory at Le Mans. The Minister, who was visibly
pleased and touched at this attention, said as he handed me the slip of
paper in order that I should telegraph the news: “He thinks the General
Staff will not let me know, and so he writes himself.”
_Friday, January 13th._--Arnim sends a florid account from Rome of
the visit paid by Victor Emmanuel to the Eternal City. He mentions
a report received from the Nuncio at Bordeaux respecting an attempt
by the Government Delegation in that city to secure the intervention
of the Pope for the purpose of negotiating a peace. The Cardinal in
communicating this to the Minister added that the French are now
disposed to make greater concessions than at Ferrières, and asked if in
principle the Pope’s mediation would be agreeable to us. Arnim replied
that the French Government knew our conditions and could conclude
peace at any time on that basis. Arnim states that the efforts made by
the Curia on behalf of peace are sincere, but are based on interested
motives. The Cardinal asked if it was not intended to grant France
any compensation for the proposed cession of territory, whereupon
Arnim replied that we had no right to dispose of the territory of
other States. The Cardinal obviously had Italy in view, and meant that
France should indemnify herself by annexing Piedmont and reinstating
the Pope in Rome. The despatch concludes as follows: “My presence here
complicates our position, as it awakens hopes that cannot be realised,
and maintains intimate relations that clog our footsteps without making
the ground upon which we stand any firmer.” Thile reports that Queen
Augusta told him the sinking of the English coal ships near Rouen
had made more bad blood in England than was believed here. The Crown
Princess knew from the letters of her mother that sympathy for our
cause was daily decreasing there. Thile replied that he was surprised
to hear it, as Bernstorff made no mention of it.
We are joined at dinner by Regierungspräsident von Ernsthausen, a
portly gentleman, still young, and by the Chief, who is to dine with
the Crown Prince, and only remains until the Varzin ham comes to
table, of which he partakes “for the sake of home memories.” Turning
to Ernsthausen, he says: “I am invited to the Crown Prince’s, but
before going there I have another important interview for which I must
strengthen myself.” “Wednesday will be the 18th, and the Festival of
the Orders, so we can publish the proclamation to the German people on
that day.” (The Proclamation of Emperor and Empire, upon which Bucher
is now at work.) (To Ernsthausen): “The King is still in doubt about
‘German Emperor’ or ‘Emperor of Germany.’ He inclines to the latter.
But it does not appear to me that there is much difference between the
two titles. It is like the Homousios or Homoiousios in the Councils of
the Church.” Abeken corrected: “Homöusios.” The Chief: “We pronounce
it _oi_. In Saxony they have the Iotacism. I remember in our school
there was a pupil from Chemnitz who read that way” (and he then quoted
a Greek sentence), “but the teacher said to him ‘Stop! That won’t do!
We don’t hail here from Saxony.’”
After dinner I read the latest despatches and some older drafts.
Those of special interest were instructions from the Chief to the
Minister of Commerce that the amount expended for the provisioning of
Paris could not be included in the Budget; and a memorandum in which
Moltke defended the supply of provisions for the Parisians. The 2,800
waggons with provisions were, he says, not intended solely for the
Parisians, but also for our own troops--for the former seven million
rations of two pounds each for three days--and it would be well if
there were still more waggons in France. The Chief returned from the
Crown Prince’s at 9.30 P.M., and shortly afterwards he instructed
me to telegraph that we had made 8,000 prisoners at Le Mans, and
captured twelve guns, and that Gambetta, who wished to be present at
the battle, nearly fell into our hands, but just made his escape in
time. Afterwards I cut out Unruh’s speech dealing with the scarcity of
locomotives on the German railways, for submission to the King.
CHAPTER XVII
LAST WEEKS BEFORE THE CAPITULATION OF PARIS
_Saturday, January 14th._--Count Lehndorff dined with us to-day. The
Chief mentions that Jules Favre has written to him. He wishes to go
to the Conference in London, and asserts that he only ascertained on
the 10th inst. that a safe conduct was held in readiness for him. He
desires to take with him an unmarried and a married daughter, together
with her husband--who has a Spanish name--and a secretary. “He would
doubtless prefer a pass for M. le Ministre et suite. He has the longing
of a vagabond for a passport.” But he is not to receive one at all,
the soldiers being simply instructed to let him through. Bucher is to
write that it will be best for him to go by way of Corbeil, as he will
not then have to leave the carriage which he brings from Paris and to
walk for some way on foot, afterwards taking another carriage. His best
route will also be by Lagny and Metz, and not by Amiens. If he does not
wish to go by way of Corbeil he is to say so, and then the military
authorities will be instructed accordingly. “One would be inclined to
think,” added the Chief, “from his desire to take his family with him,
that he wants to get out of harm’s way.”
In the further course of conversation the Minister observed:
“Versailles is really the most unsuitable place that could have been
chosen from the point of view of communications. We ought to have
remained at Lagny or Ferrières. But I know well why it was selected.
All our princely personages would have found it too dull there. It is
true they are bored here too, and doubtless everywhere else.”
The Chief then went on to talk of German Princes in general, and said:
“Originally they were all Counts, that is to say, officials of the
Empire. The Zehringers, it is true, are an old princely family--apart
from any fresh blood that has been infused into the stock. The Austrian
Princes and Counts have only become rich and powerful through grants
of confiscated estates. The Schwarzenbergs, for instance, through the
property of a gentleman with a very unappetising name--Schmiersicki.”
The Chancellor then went into further particulars, and continued:
“They (the Hapsburgs) were grateful for services rendered to them, and
rewarded their people with rich grants. It was different with us. Our
nobles were squeezed. Any one who had large estates was forced to give
them up or to make a bad exchange.”
The Chancellor afterwards spoke about Manteuffel, and said: “He is
now heaping up coals of fire on my head by taking Bill with him. We
were on bad terms during the last few years. One of the reasons was
his extravagance in Schleswig. He kept a regular Court there, and gave
great dinners of forty to fifty covers, spending three to four thousand
thalers a month. That was all very well before the war, but later on,
when I had to account for it to the Treasury Committee, it could not go
on, and when I had to tell him so, he was angry.”
After dinner I wrote an article for the _Moniteur_, under instructions
from the Chief, respecting the difficulty of provisioning Paris when
it surrenders. It ran thus: “We find the following paragraph on the
provisioning of Paris in the _Journal Officiel_: ‘According to a
despatch from Bordeaux, dated January 3rd, the Government of National
Defence has collected a large quantity of necessaries in view of
furnishing Paris with a fresh supply of provisions. In addition to the
markets now in course of erection there is already collected, near the
means of transport and beyond the range of the enemy’s operations, a
mass of supplies that only wait the first signal to be despatched.’
When this question of reprovisioning Paris is considered from a
practical point of view, it will be seen that it bristles with serious
difficulties. If the statement of the _Journal Officiel_ that the
stores are beyond the range of the German sphere of action be correct,
it must be taken that they are some 200 miles away from Paris. Now the
condition to which the railways leading to Paris have been reduced
by the French themselves is such that it would require several weeks
at least to transport such a quantity of provisions to Paris. There
is another consideration which must also not be overlooked, namely,
that in addition to the famishing population of Paris, the German army
has a right to see that its supplies are replenished by the railways,
and that consequently the German officials with the best will in the
world can only spare a portion of the rolling stock to be employed in
reprovisioning Paris. It follows that if the Parisians put off the
surrender of the city until they have eaten their last mouthful of
bread, believing that large supplies are within easy reach, a fatal
blunder may be committed. We trust that the Government of National
Defence will very seriously consider the circumstances, and weigh
well the heavy responsibility it incurs in adopting the principle of
resistance to the bitter end. Every day increases instead of lessening
the distance between the capital and the provincial armies, whose
approach is awaited with so much impatience in Paris, which is closely
invested and entirely cut off from the outer world. Paris cannot be
rescued by fictitious reports. To suppose that it can wait till the
last moment, for the simple reason that neither the provinces nor
the enemy could allow a city of two and a half million inhabitants
to starve, might prove to be a terrible miscalculation, owing to the
absolute impossibility of preventing it. The capitulation of Paris at
the very last hour might--which God forbid!--be the commencement of a
really great calamity.”
_Sunday, January 15th._--Rather bright, cold weather. The firing is
less vigorous than during the last few days. The Chief slept badly
last night, and had Wollmann called up at 4 A.M. in order to telegraph
to London respecting Favre. In the morning read despatches. Andrassy,
the Hungarian Premier, declared to our Ambassador in Vienna that he
not only approved of Beust’s despatch of December 26th and shared the
views therein expressed respecting the new Germany, but had desired
and recommended such a policy all along. He had “always said we should
reach out our hand to Germany and shake our fist at Russia.” The
reservation at the commencement of the document in question might have
been omitted, as the reorganisation of Germany does not affect the
Treaty of Prague.
The letters in which the German Princes declare their approval of the
King of Bavaria’s proposal for the restoration of the imperial dignity
all express practically the same views. Only the elder line of the
Reuss family was moved to base its consent upon different grounds.
It regards the imperial title as “an ornamental badge of the dignity
of the Federal Commander-in-Chief, and of the right of Presidency.”
The letter then continues, literally: “I do this” (that is approve),
“fully confident that the bestowal of this dignity upon his Majesty
the King of Prussia will not affect the newly-established relations
of the Confederation.” Oberregierungsrath Wagner drafted the answers
to these letters of approval, as also the proclamation to the German
people concerning the Emperor and the Empire, which is to be published
shortly. I hear that he sometimes draws up the speech from the throne,
as he has a certain loftiness of style which the Chief likes. Read a
letter from King William to the Chancellor written in his own hand.
Contents: On the 10th of January Prince Luitpold requested an audience
of our Majesty. This was granted to him before dinner. The Prince
then delivered a message from the King of Bavaria, suggesting that
the Bavarian army should be relieved from taking the military oath of
obedience to the Federal Commander-in-Chief, and that the stipulation
to that effect should be struck out of the treaty with Bavaria. The
Prince urged, as an argument in support of this proposal, that such
a stipulation as that in question limited the sovereignty of the
King of Bavaria. No such obligation had been imposed upon the South
German States during the present war, and the obedience and loyalty
of the Bavarian army might be taken as a matter of course in the
united Germany of the future. He also observed incidentally that the
reason why the dissatisfaction in Bavaria was so great was because
it had been hoped that the imperial dignity would be held alternately
by Bavaria and Prussia. The King replied that he could not give an
immediate answer to this unforeseen demand; he must first look through
the treaties. For the moment he could only say that by yielding in the
matter of the military oath he would offend the other Princes, and that
they might put forward a similar demand, which would loosen the ties
that were to bind the new Germany together. That would necessarily
damage the King of Bavaria’s position in particular, as the concessions
made to Bavaria were already regarded with great disfavour by public
opinion. King William writes that he said nothing whatever about the
alternation of the imperial dignity. The Chief telegraphed to Werther
(Minister at Munich) that the proposal respecting the military oath
could not be entertained.
The Chief dined with the King to-day. Nothing worthy of note was said
at our table. After dinner I again read drafts and despatches. Amongst
the latter was a letter from King Lewis to the Chancellor, in which
he thanks the Minister for his good wishes for the new year, and
reciprocates them. He then claims an extension of territory on the
ground of the importance of Bavaria and the gallant co-operation of her
troops. From the construction of the sentence it is not quite clear
whether this extension of territory is intended for Bavaria herself,
but very probably it is.
Called to the Chief at 9 P.M. I am to write an article, based upon
official documents, on our position towards American ships conveying
contraband of war. In doing so I am to be guided by the 13th article of
the Treaty of 1799. We cannot seize such vessels, but only detain them,
or seize the contraband goods, for which a receipt must be given, and
in both cases we must make fair compensation.
_Monday, January 16th._--Thawing. A dull sky, with a strong south-west
wind. It is again impossible to see far, but no further shots are heard
since yesterday afternoon. Has the bombardment stopped? Or does the
wind prevent the sound from reaching us?
In the morning I read Trochu’s letter to Moltke, in which he complains
that our projectiles have struck the hospitals in the south of Paris,
although flags were hung out indicating their character. He is of
opinion that this cannot have been by accident, and calls attention
to the international treaties according to which such institutions
are to be held inviolable. Moltke strongly resented the idea of its
having been in any way intentional. The humane manner in which we
have conducted the war, “so far as the character which was given to
it by the French since the 4th of September permitted,” secured us
against any such suspicion. As soon as a clearer atmosphere and greater
proximity to Paris enabled us to recognise the Geneva flag on the
buildings in question it might be possible to avoid even accidental
injury. Treitschke writes requesting me to ask the Chief if, in view of
his deafness, he should allow himself to be elected for the Reichstag.
I lay the letter before the Minister, who says: “He must know from
experience how far his infirmity is a hindrance. For my part, I should
be extremely pleased if he were elected. Write him to that effect. Only
he should not speak too much.”
Prince Pless and Maltzahn dine with us. We learn that the proclamation
to the German people is to be read the day after to-morrow, at the
festival of the Orders, which will be held in the Gallerie des Glaces
at the Palace. There, in the midst of a brilliant assembly, the King
will be proclaimed Emperor. Detachments of troops with their flags, the
generals, the Chancellor of the Confederation, and a number of princely
personages will attend. The Chief has altered his mind as to letting
Favre pass through our lines, and has written him a letter which
amounts to a refusal. “Favre,” he said “with his demand to be allowed
to attend the Conference in London, reminds me of the way children
play the game of Fox in the Hole. They touch and then run off to a
place where they cannot be caught. But he must swallow the potion he
has brewed. His honour requires it, and, so I wrote him.” This change
of view was due to Favre’s circular of the 12th of January. Later on,
the Chief said he believed he was going to have an attack of gout.
Altogether he was not in good humour. While he was reckoning up the
fortresses taken by us, Holstein addressed a remark to him. The Chief
looked straight at him with his large grey eyes, and said in a dry
cutting tone: “One should not be interrupted when engaged in counting.
I have now lost count altogether. What you want to say might be said
later.”
I here introduce a survey of this incident, with particulars of
documents which afterwards came to my knowledge.
Favre, as Minister for Foreign Affairs, was informed on the 17th of
November (in a despatch from Chaudordy, dated from Tours, on the 11th
of the month), that it had been reported from Vienna, that the Russian
Government no longer considered itself bound by the stipulations of
the Treaty of 1856. Favre replied immediately. While recommending the
strictest reserve, until the receipt of official information, he said
that no opportunity should be neglected of emphasising the right of
France, to take part in such international deliberations as the Russian
declaration might provoke. Negotiations were then conducted, both
verbally, and in writing, between the various Powers and the French
Provisional Government, in which the French endeavoured to induce
the representatives of those Powers to admit the justice of their
contention, that the representatives of France “would be bound in duty
to bring up at the same time for discussion another matter of entirely
different import.” The Delegation at Tours, while giving expression to
these views, was of opinion that any invitation given by Europe should
be accepted, even, should no promise be obtained beforehand, nor even
an armistice. On the 31st of December, Gambetta wrote to Favre: “You
must be prepared to leave Paris, to attend the London Conference if,
as is stated, England has succeeded in obtaining a passport.” Before
this communication arrived, Favre had announced to Chaudordy that the
Government had decided that France, “if called upon in regular form,”
would send a representative to the London Conference, provided its
Parisian representatives, who were verbally invited by England, were
supplied with the necessary passport. To this the English Cabinet
agreed, and Chaudordy informed Favre in a despatch which arrived in
Paris on the 8th of January, and also contained the announcement, that
he, Favre, had been appointed by the Government to represent France at
the Conference. This communication was confirmed in a letter from Lord
Granville to Favre, dated the 29th of December, and received in Paris,
on the 10th of January, which ran as follows:
“M. de Chaudordy has informed Lord Lyons that your Excellency has
been proposed as the representative of France at the Conference.
He has at the same time requested that I should procure a passport
permitting your Excellency to go through the Prussian lines. I
immediately requested Count Bernstorff to ask for such a passport,
and to send it to you by a German officer with a flag of truce. I was
informed yesterday by Count Bernstorff that a passport will be at your
Excellency’s disposal on its being demanded at the German headquarters
by an officer despatched from Paris for the purpose. He added that it
cannot be delivered by a German officer, so long as satisfaction is not
given to the officer who was fired at while acting as the bearer of a
flag of truce. I am informed by M. Tissot, that much time would be lost
before this communication could be forwarded to you by the delegation
at Bordeaux, and I have accordingly proposed to Count Bernstorff
another way in which it may be transmitted to you. Requesting your
Excellency to permit me to take this opportunity of expressing my
satisfaction at entering into personal communication with you, &c.”
Favre regarded the last sentence in this letter as a recognition of
the present French Government, and an invitation that he might take
advantage of to address the Powers in London on French affairs. In
the circular of the 12th of January which he addressed to the French
Ministers, he says:--
“The Government, directly invited in this despatch, cannot, without
surrendering the rights of France, refuse the invitation thus conveyed
to her. It may certainly be objected that the time for a discussion
concerning the neutralisation of the Black Sea has not been happily
chosen. But the very fact that the European Powers should thus have
entered into relations with the French Republic at the present decisive
moment when France is fighting single-handled for her honour and
existence, lends it an exceptional significance. It is the commencement
of a tardy exercise of justice, an obligation which cannot again be
renounced. It endues the change of Government with the authority of
international law, and leaves a nation which is free notwithstanding
its wounds to appear in an independent position upon the stage of
the world’s history, face to face with the ruler who led it to its
ruin, and the Pretenders who desire to reduce it into subjection to
themselves. Furthermore, who does not feel that France, admitted to
a place amongst the representatives of Europe, has an unquestionable
right to raise her voice in that council? Who can prevent her,
supported by the eternal laws of justice, from defending the principles
that secure her independence and dignity? She will surrender none of
those principles. Our programme remains unaltered, and Europe, who has
invited the man who promulgated that programme, knows very well that it
is his determination and duty to maintain it. There should, therefore,
be no hesitation, and the Government would have committed a grave error
if it had declined the overtures made to it.
“While recognising that fact, however, the Government consider, as I
do, that the Minister for Foreign Affairs should not leave Paris during
the bombardment of the city by the enemy, unless greater interests
were at stake.” (Then follows a long sentimental lamentation as to the
damage caused by the “rage of the aggressor” in throwing bombs into
churches, hospitals, nurseries, &c., with the intention of “spreading
terror.” The document then proceeds): “Our brave Parisian population
feels its courage rise as the danger increases. Thus exasperated and
indignant, but animated by a firm resolve, it will not yield. The
people are more determined than ever to fight and conquer, and we also.
_I cannot think of separating myself from them during this crisis._
Perhaps it will soon be brought to a close by the protests addressed to
Europe and to the members of the Corps Diplomatique present in Paris.
_England will understand that until then my place is in the midst of my
fellow citizens._”
Favre made the same declaration, or rather the first half of it, two
days before in the reply sent to Granville’s despatch, in which he
says: “I cannot assume the right to leave my fellow citizens at a
moment when they are subjected to such acts of violence” (against
“an unarmed population,” as--in the line immediately preceding--he
describes a strong fortress with a garrison of about 200,000 soldiers
and militia). He then continues: “Communications between Paris and
London, thanks to those in command of the besieging forces” (what
naïveté!) “are so slow and uncertain that with the best will I cannot
act in accordance with the terms of the invitation contained in your
despatch. You have given me to understand that the Conference will meet
on the 3rd of February, and will then probably adjourn for a week.
Having received this information on the evening of the 10th of January,
I should not be able to avail myself in time of your invitation.
Besides, M. de Bismarck, in forwarding the despatch, did not enclose
the passport, which, nevertheless, is absolutely essential. He demands
that a French officer shall proceed to the German headquarters to
receive it, on the plea of a complaint addressed to the Governor of
Paris with regard to the treatment of the bearer of a flag of truce,
an incident which occurred on the 23rd of December. M. de Bismarck adds
that the Prussian Commander-in-Chief has forbidden all communication
under flags of truce until satisfaction is given for the incident
in question. I do not inquire whether such a decision, contrary to
the laws of war, is not an absolute denial of a higher right, always
hitherto maintained in the conduct of hostilities, which recognises
the exigencies of a situation and the claims of humane feeling. I
confine myself to informing your Excellency that the Governor of
Paris hastened to order an inquiry into the incident referred to by
M. de Bismarck, and that this inquiry brought to his knowledge much
more numerous instances of similar conduct on the part of Prussian
sentries which had never been made a pretext for interrupting the
usual exchange of communications. M. de Bismarck appears to have
acknowledged the accuracy of these remarks, at least in part, as he has
to-day commissioned the United States Minister to inform me that, with
the reservation of inquiries on both sides, he to-day re-establishes
communications under flags of truce. There is, therefore, no necessity
for a French officer to go to the Prussian headquarters. I will put
myself in communication with the Minister of the United States for the
purpose of receiving the passport which you have obtained for me. As
soon as it reaches my hands, _and the situation in Paris permits me_, I
shall proceed to London, confident that I shall not appeal in vain in
the name of my Government to the principles of justice and morality, in
securing due regard for which Europe has such a great interest.”
So far M. Favre. The condition of Paris had not altered, the protests
addressed to Europe had not put an end to the crisis, nor could they
have done so, when Favre, on January 13th, that is, three days after
the letter to Granville, and on the day of the issue of his circular to
the representatives of France abroad, sent the following despatch to
the Chancellor of the Confederation:--
“M. le Comte,--Lord Granville informs me in his despatch of December
29th, which I received on the evening of January 10th, that your
Excellency, at the request of the English Cabinet, holds a passport at
my disposal which is necessary to enable the French Plenipotentiary
to the London Conference to pass through the Prussian lines. As I
have been appointed to that office, I have the honour to request your
Excellency to give instructions to have this passport, made out in my
name, sent to me as speedily as possible.”
I reproduce all these solely with the object of illustrating the great
difference between the character and capacity of Favre and of Bismarck.
Compare the foregoing documents with those which the Chancellor
drafted. In the former, indecision, equivocation, affectation, and fine
phrases, ending in the very opposite of what had been emphatically
laid down a few lines or a few days previously. In the latter, on the
contrary, decision, simplicity, and a natural and purely business-like
manner. On January 16th the Chancellor replied to Favre as follows
(omitting the introductory phrases):--
“Your Excellency understands that, at the suggestion of the Government
of Great Britain, I hold a passport at your disposal for the purpose of
enabling you to take part in the London Conference. That supposition
is, however, not correct. I could not enter into official negotiations,
which would be based on the presupposition that the Government of
National Defence is, according to international law, in a position
to act in the name of France, so long at least as it has not been
recognised by the French nation itself.
“I presume that the officer in command of our outposts would have
granted your Excellency permission to pass through the German lines
if your Excellency had applied for the same at the headquarters of
the besieging forces. The latter would have had no reason to take
your Excellency’s political position and the object of your journey
into consideration, and the authorisation granted by the military
authorities to pass through our lines, which, from their standpoint,
they need not have hesitated to grant, would have left the Ambassador
of his Majesty the King in London a free hand to deal without prejudice
with the question whether, according to international law, your
Excellency’s declarations could be accepted as the declarations of
France. Your Excellency has rendered the adoption of such a course
impossible by officially communicating to me the object of your
journey, and the official request for a passport for the purpose of
representing France at the Conference. The above-mentioned political
considerations, in support of which I must adduce the declaration which
your Excellency has published, forbid me to accede to your request for
such a document.
“In addressing this communication to you, I must leave it to yourself
and your Government to consider whether it is possible to find another
way in which the scruples above mentioned may be overcome, and all
prejudice arising from your presence in London may be avoided.
“But even if some such way should be discovered, I take the liberty
to question whether it is advisable for your Excellency at the present
moment to leave Paris and your post as a member of the Government
there, in order to take part in a Conference on the question of the
Black Sea, at a time when interests of much greater importance to
France and Germany than Article XI. of the Treaty of 1856 are at stake
in Paris. Your Excellency would also leave behind you in Paris the
agents of neutral States and the members of their staffs who have
remained there, or rather been kept there, notwithstanding the fact
that they have long since obtained permission to pass through the
German lines, and are therefore the more specially committed to the
protection and care of your Excellency as the Minister for Foreign
Affairs of the _de facto_ Government.
“I can hardly believe that in a critical situation, _to the creation of
which you have so largely contributed_, your Excellency will deprive
yourself of the possibility of co-operating towards that solution, for
which you are equally responsible.”
I now let the diary resume its narrative.
_Tuesday, January 17th._--We were joined at dinner by the Saxon,
Count Nostitz-Wallwitz, who, it is understood, is to take up an
administrative appointment here, and a Herr Winter, or von Winter,
who is to be Prefect at Chartres. On some one referring to the future
military operations, the Chief observed: “I think that when, with God’s
help, we have taken Paris, we shall not occupy it with our troops.
That work may be left to the National Guard in the city. Also a French
commandant. We shall occupy merely the forts and walls. Everybody will
be permitted to enter, but nobody to leave. It will, therefore, be a
great prison until they consent to make peace.”
The Minister then spoke to Nostitz about the French Conseils Généraux,
and said we should try to come to an understanding with them. They
would form a good field here for further political operations. “So
far as the military side of the affair is concerned,” he continued,
“I am in favour of greater concentration. We should not go beyond
a certain line, but deal with that portion thoroughly, making the
administration effectual, and in particular collect the taxes. The
military authorities are always for advancing. They have a centrifugal
plan of operations and I a centripetal. It is a question whether we
ought to hold Orleans, and even whether it would not be better to
retire also from Rouen and Amiens. In the south-east--I do not know
why--they want to go as far as Dijon. And if we cannot supply garrisons
for every place within our sphere of occupation, we should from time to
time send a flying column wherever they show themselves recalcitrant,
and shoot, hang and burn. When that has been done a couple of times
they will learn sense.” Winter was of opinion that the mere appearance
of a detachment of troops entrusted with the task of restoring order,
would be sufficient in such districts. The Chief: “I am not so sure. A
little hanging would certainly have a better effect, and a few shells
thrown in and a couple of houses burned down. That reminds me of the
Bavarian who said to a Prussian officer of artillery: ‘What do you
think, comrade; shall we set that little village on fire, or only knock
it about a little?’ but they decided after all to set it on fire.”
I do not now remember how it was that the Chief came to speak again of
his letter he wrote yesterday to Favre. “I have given him clearly to
understand that it would not do, and that I could not believe that he
who had taken part in the affair of the 4th of September would fail to
await the issue. I wrote the letter in French, first because I do not
regard the correspondence as official but rather as private, and then
in order that every one may be able to read it in the French lines
until it reaches him.” Nostitz asked how diplomatic correspondence in
general was now conducted. The Chief: “In German. Formerly it was in
French. But I have introduced German--only, however, with Cabinets
whose language is understood in our own Foreign Office. England, Italy
and also Spain--even Spanish can be read in case of need. Not with
Russia, as I am the only one in the Foreign Office who understands
Russian. Also not with Holland, Denmark and Sweden--people do not learn
those languages as a rule. They write in French and we reply in the
same language.” “At Ferrières I spoke to Thiers” (he meant Favre) “in
French. But I told him that was only because I was not treating with
him officially. He laughed, whereupon I said to him: ‘You will see that
we shall talk plain German to you in the negotiations for peace.’”
At tea we hear from Holstein that the bombardment on the south side
has been stopped, Blumenthal, who was always against it, having got
his way. It is hoped, however, that the Crown Prince of Saxony will
proceed vigorously with the bombardment on the north side. One would
like to tell this to our own Crown Prince, and to ask him what would be
said when it was known that the Saxons had forced Paris to capitulate?
“Unless you are quite certain of that,” said Wagener, “and have it on
absolutely trustworthy authority, do not let the Chief hear of it. I
should not like to guarantee that in that case he would not be off
to-morrow. He is a volcano whose action is incalculable, and he does
not stand jokes in such matters.” Holstein, however, appears to have
been misinformed. At least Count Dönhoff, who came in afterwards,
declared that our siege guns in the south were also at work, but that
owing to the south-west wind we did not hear the firing, and, moreover,
it was not so heavy as during the preceding days. Fire would probably
be opened to-morrow from St. Denis upon the city, a pleasant surprise
for the inhabitants of the northern quarters.
_Wednesday, January 18th._--In the morning read despatches and
newspapers. Wollmann tells me that an order has been issued promoting
our Chief to the rank of Lieutenant-General. When Wollmann took the
order up to him and congratulated him, the Chancellor threw it angrily
on the bed and said: “What is the good of that to me?” (“_Wat ik mich
davor koofe?_”--low German dialect.) Doubtless imagination, but it
appears to be correct that the Minister is to-day in very bad humour
and exceptionally irritable.
The festival of the Orders and the Proclamation of the German Empire
and Emperor took place in the great hall of the palace between 12 and
1.30 P.M. It was held with much military pomp and ceremony, and is said
to have been a very magnificent and imposing spectacle. In the meantime
I took a long walk with Wollmann.
The Chief did not dine with us, as he was bidden to the Emperor’s
table. On his return I was called to him twice to receive instructions.
His voice was an unusually weak voice, and looked very tired and worn
out.
The Chief has received a communication from a number of diplomats
who have remained behind in Paris. Kern, the Swiss Minister, who is
their spokesman, requests the Chancellor to use his influence in order
to obtain permission for the persons committed to their protection
to leave the city. At the same time our right to bombard Paris is
questioned, and it is insinuated that we intentionally fire at
buildings that ought to be respected. The reply is to point out that
we have already repeatedly, through their diplomatic representatives,
called the attention of the citizens of neutral states living in
Paris to the consequences of the city’s prolonged resistance. This
was done as early as the end of September, and again several times in
October. Furthermore, we have for months past allowed every citizen of
a neutral State, who was able to give evidence of his nationality, to
pass through our lines without any difficulty. At the present time,
for military reasons, we can only extend that permission to members
of the Corps Diplomatique. It is not our fault if subjects of neutral
states have not hitherto availed themselves of the permission to seek
a place of safety for their persons and their property. Either they
have not wished to leave, or they have not been allowed to do so by
those who at present hold power in Paris. We are fully justified
by international law in bombarding Paris, as it is a fortress, the
principal fortress of France--an entrenched camp which serves the enemy
as a base of offensive and defensive action against our armies. Our
generals cannot, therefore, be expected to refrain from attacking it,
or to handle it with velvet gloves. Furthermore, the object of the
bombardment is not to destroy the city, but to capture the fortress. If
our fire renders residence in Paris uncomfortable and dangerous, those
who recognise that fact ought not to have gone to live in a fortified
town, or should not have remained there. They may, therefore, address
their complaints not to us, but to those who transformed Paris into
a fortress, and who now use its fortifications as an instrument of
war against us. Finally, our artillery does not intentionally fire at
private houses and benevolent institutions, such as hospitals, &c. That
should be understood as a matter of course from the care with which we
have observed the provisions of the Geneva Convention. Such accidents
as do occur are due to the great distance at which we are firing. It
cannot, however, be tolerated that Paris, which has been and still is
the chief centre of military resistance, should bring forward these
cases as an argument for forbidding the vigorous bombardment which is
intended to render the city untenable. Wrote articles to the above
effect.
_Thursday, January 19th._--Dull weather. The post has not been
delivered, and it is ascertained on inquiry that the railway line
has been destroyed at a place called Vitry la Ville, near Châlons.
From 10 A.M. we hear a rather vigorous cannonade, in which field guns
ultimately join. I write two articles on the sentimental report of
the _Journal des Débats_, according to which our shells only strike
ambulances, mothers with their daughters, and babies in swaddling
clothes. What evil-minded shells!
Keudell tells us at lunch that to-day’s cannonade was directed against
a great sortie with twenty-four battalions and numerous guns in the
direction of La Celle and Saint Cloud. In my room after lunch Wollmann
treats me to a number of anecdotes of doubtful authenticity. According
to him the Chief yesterday remarked to the King, when his Majesty
changed the Minister’s title to that of Chancellor of the Empire, that
this new title brought him into bad company. To which the King replied
that the bad company would be transformed into good company on his
joining it. (From whom can Wollmann have heard that?) My gossip also
informs me that the King made a slip of the tongue yesterday at the
palace, when in announcing his assumption of the title of Emperor he
added the words “by the Grace of God.” This requires to be confirmed by
some more trustworthy authority. Another story of Wollmann’s seems more
probable, namely, that the Minister sends in a written request to the
King, almost every day, to be supplied with the reports of the General
Staff respecting the English coal ships sunk by our people near Rouen.
He used in the same way to telegraph day after day to Eulenburg who
has always been very dilatory: “What about Villiers?” And before that
in Berlin he had a request addressed to Eulenburg at least once every
week: Would he kindly have the draft of the district regulations sent
forward as early as possible?
Towards 2 o’clock, when the rattle of the mitrailleuse could be clearly
distinguished, and the French artillery was at the outside only half
a German mile in a straight line from Versailles, the Chief rode out
to the aqueduct at Marly, whither the King and the Crown Prince were
understood to have gone.
The affair must have caused some anxiety at Versailles in the meantime,
as we see that the Bavarian troops have been called out. They are
posted in large masses in the Place d’Armes and the Avenue de Paris.
The French are camped, sixty thousand strong it is said, beneath Mont
Valérien and in the fields to the east of it. They are understood to
have captured the Montretout redoubt, and the village of Garches to
the west of Saint Cloud, which is not much more than three-quarters
of an hour from here, is also in their hands. They may, it is feared,
advance further to-morrow and oblige us to withdraw from Versailles,
but this seems to be at least an exaggeration. At dinner there is
scarcely any talk of immediate danger. Geheimrath von Löper, who
is understood to be Under Secretary in the Ministry of the Royal
Household, dines with us. We hear that there is no longer any danger
for our communications in the south-east, as Bourbaki, after pressing
Werder very hard for three days without however being able to defeat
him, has given up the attempt to relieve Belfort and is now in full
retreat, probably owing to the approach of Manteuffel. The Chief then
refers to a report that the taxes cannot be collected in various
districts of the occupied territory. He says it is difficult, indeed
impossible, to garrison every place where the population must be made
to pay the taxes. “Nor,” he adds, “is it necessary to do so? Flying
columns of infantry accompanied by a couple of guns are all that is
needed. Without even entering into the places, the people should be
simply told, ‘If you do not produce the taxes in arrear within two
hours we shall pitch some shells in amongst you.’ If they see that we
are in earnest they will pay. If not the place should be bombarded, and
that would help in other cases. They must learn what war means.”
The conversation afterwards turned on the grants that were to be
expected after the conclusion of peace, and alluding to those made
in 1866, the Chief said, _inter alia_: “They should not be grants of
money. I at least was reluctant for a long time to accept one, but at
length I yielded to the temptation. Besides, it was worse still in my
case, as I received it not from the King but from the Diet. I did not
want to take any money from people with whom I had fought so bitterly
for years.
“Moreover, the King was to some extent in my debt, as I had sent him
forty pounds of fine fresh caviare--a present for which he made me no
return. It is true that perhaps he never received it. Probably that fat
rascal Borck intercepted it.” “These rewards ought to have taken the
form of grants of land, as in 1815; and there was a good opportunity of
doing so, particularly in the corner of Bavaria which we acquired, and
which consisted almost entirely of State property.”
While we were alone at tea, Bucher told me that “before the war he had
a good deal to do with the Spanish affair.” (This was not exactly news
to me, as I remembered that long before that he suddenly ordered the
_Imparcial_, and gave directions for various articles directed against
Montpensier.) He had negotiated in the matter with the Hohenzollerns,
father and son, and had also spoken to the King on the affair in an
audience of one hour’s duration which he had had with him at Ems.
_Friday, January 20th._--I am called to the Chief at 12 o’clock. He
wishes to have his reply to Kern’s communication, and the letter in
which he declined to supply Favre with a passport, published in the
_Moniteur_.
Bohlen again came to dinner, at which we were also joined by Lauer
and von Knobelsdorff. The Chief was very cheerful and talkative. He
related, amongst other things, that while he was at Frankfurt he
frequently received and accepted invitations from the Grand Ducal Court
at Darmstadt. They had excellent shooting there. “But,” he added, “I
have reason to believe that the Grand Duchess Mathilde did not like
me. She said to some one at that time: ‘He always stands there and
looks as important as if he were the Grand Duke himself.’”
While we were smoking our cigars, the Crown Prince’s aide-de-camp
suddenly appeared, and reported that Count ---- (I could not catch the
name) had come, ostensibly on behalf of, and under instructions from,
Trochu, to ask for a two days’ armistice in order to remove the wounded
and bury those who fell in yesterday’s engagement. The Chief replied
that the request should be refused. A few hours would be sufficient for
the removal of the wounded and the burial of the dead; and, besides,
the latter were just as well off lying on the ground as they would be
under it. The Major returned shortly afterwards and announced that
the King would come here; and, hardly a quarter of an hour later, his
Majesty arrived with the Crown Prince. They went with the Chancellor
into the drawing-room, where a negative answer was prepared for
Trochu’s messenger.
About 9 P.M. Bucher sent me up a couple of lines in pencil to the
effect that the letter to Kern should be published in the _Moniteur_
to-morrow, but that the communication to Favre should be held over for
the present.
_Saturday, January 21st._--At 9.30 A.M. the _Moniteur_ is delivered,
and contains the Chief’s letter to Favre. Very disagreeable; but I
suppose my letter to Bamberg only arrived after the paper was printed.
At 10 o’clock I am called to the Minister, who says nothing about this
mishap, although he has the newspaper before him. He is still in bed,
and wishes the protest of the Comte de Chambord against the bombardment
cut out for the King. I then write an article for the _Kölnische
Zeitung_, and a paragraph for the local journal.
Voigts-Rhetz, Prince Putbus, and the Bavarian Count Berghem were the
Chancellor’s guests at dinner. The Bavarian brought the pleasant news
that the Versailles treaties were carried in the second chamber at
Munich by two votes over the necessary two-thirds majority. The German
Empire was, therefore, complete in every respect. Thereupon the Chief
invited the company to drink the health of the King of Bavaria, “who,
after all, has really helped us through to a successful conclusion.”
“I always thought that it would be carried,” he added, “if only by one
vote--but I had not hoped for two. The last good news from the seat of
war will doubtless have contributed to the result.”
It was then mentioned that in the engagement the day before yesterday
the French brought a much larger force against us than was thought at
first, probably over 80,000 men. The Montretout redoubt was actually
in their hands for some hours, and also a portion of Garches and Saint
Cloud. The French had lost enormously in storming the position--it
was said 1,200 dead and 4,000 wounded. The Chancellor observed: “The
capitulation must follow soon. I imagine it may be even next week.
After the capitulation we shall supply them with provisions as a
matter of course. But before they deliver up 700,000 rifles and 4,000
guns they shall not get a single mouthful of bread--and then no one
shall be allowed to leave. We shall occupy the forts and the walls
and keep them on short commons until they accommodate themselves to a
peace satisfactory to us. After all there are still many persons of
intelligence and consideration in Paris with whom it must be possible
to come to some arrangement.”
Then followed a learned discussion on the difference between the titles
“German Emperor” and “Emperor of Germany,” and that of “Emperor of
the Germans” was also mooted. After this had gone on for a while the
Chief, who had taken no part in it, asked: “Does any one know the Latin
word for sausage (Wurscht)?” Abeken answered “Farcimentum,” and I said
“Farcimen.” The Chief, smiling: “Farcimentum or farcimen, it is all the
same to me. _Nescio quid mihi magis farcimentum esset._” (“_Es ist mir
Wurst_” is student’s slang, and means “It is a matter of the utmost
indifference to me.”)
_Sunday, January 22nd._--In the forenoon I wrote two paragraphs for the
German newspapers, and one for the _Moniteur_, in connection with which
I was twice called to see the Chief.
Von Könneritz, a Saxon, General von Stosch, and Löper joined us at
dinner. There was nothing worth noting in the conversation except that
the Minister again insisted that it would be only fair to invest the
wounded with the Iron Cross. “The Coburger,” he went on, “said to me
the other day, ‘It would really be a satisfaction if the soldiers also
got the Cross now.’ I replied, ‘Yes, but it is less satisfactory that
we two should have received it.’”
_Monday, January 23rd._--I telegraph that the bombardment on the north
side has made good progress, that the fort at Saint Denis has been
silenced, and that an outbreak of fire has been observed in Saint Denis
itself as well as in Paris. All our batteries are firing vigorously,
although one cannot hear them. So we are told by Lieutenant von Uslar,
of the Hussars, who brings a letter to the Chief from Favre. What can
he want?
Shortly after 7 P.M. Favre arrived, and the Chancellor had an interview
with him, which lasted about two and a half hours. In the meantime
Hatzfeldt and Bismarck-Bohlen conversed down stairs in the drawing-room
with the gentleman who accompanied Favre, and who is understood to be
his son-in-law, del Rio. He is a portrait painter by profession, but
came with his father-in-law in the capacity of secretary. Both were
treated to a hastily improvised meal, consisting of cutlets, scrambled
eggs, ham, &c., which will doubtless have been welcome to these poor
martyrs to their own obstinacy. Shortly after 10 o’clock they drove
off, accompanied by Hatzfeldt, to the lodgings assigned to them in a
house on the Boulevard du Roi, where Stieber and the military police
also happen to have their quarters. Hatzfeldt accompanied the gentlemen
there. Favre looked very depressed.
The Chief drove off to see the King at 10.30 P.M., returning in about
three-quarters of an hour. He looks exceedingly pleased as he enters
the room where we are sitting at tea. He first asks me to pour him
out a cup of tea, and he eats a few mouthfuls of bread with it. After
a while he says to his cousin, “Do you know this?” and then whistled
a short tune, the signal of the hunter that he has brought down the
deer. Bohlen replies, “Yes, in at the death.” The Chief: “No, this
way,” and he whistled again. “A _hallali_,” he adds. “I think the thing
is finished.” Bohlen remarked that Favre looked “awfully shabby.” The
Chief said: “I find he has grown much greyer than when I saw him at
Ferrières--also stouter, probably on horseflesh. Otherwise he looks
like one who has been through a great deal of trouble and excitement
lately, and to whom everything is now indifferent. Moreover, he was
very frank, and confessed that things are not going on well in Paris. I
also ascertained from him that Trochu has been superseded. Vinoy is now
in command of the city.” Bohlen then related that Martinez del Rio was
exceedingly reserved. They, for their part, had not tried to pump him;
but they once inquired how things were going on at the Villa Rothschild
in the Bois de Boulogne, where Thiers said the General Staff of the
Paris army was quartered. Del Rio answered curtly that he did not know.
For the rest, they had talked solely about high-class restaurants
in Paris, which, they acknowledged, was an unmannerly thing to do.
Hatzfeldt on his return, after conducting the two Parisians to their
lodgings, reported that Favre was glad to have arrived after dark, and
that he does not wish to go out in the daytime in order not to create
a sensation, and to avoid being pestered by the Versailles people.
_Tuesday, January 24th._--The Chief gets up before 9 o’clock and works
with Abeken. Shortly before 10 he drives off to see the King, or,
let us now say, the Emperor. It is nearly 1 o’clock when he returns.
We are still at lunch, and he sits down and takes some roast ham and
a glass of Tivoli beer. After a while he heaves a sigh and says:
“Until now I always thought that Parliamentary negotiations were the
slowest of all, but I no longer think so. There was at least one way
of escape there--to move ‘that the question should be now put.’ But
here everybody says whatever occurs to him, and when one imagines
the matter is finally settled, somebody brings forward an argument
that has already been disposed of, and so the whole thing has to be
gone over again, which is quite hopeless. That is stewing thought to
rags--mere flatulence which people ought really to be able to restrain.
Well, it’s all the same to me! I even prefer that nothing should have
been yet decided or shall be decided till to-morrow. It is merely the
waste of time in having to listen to them, but of course such people
do not think of that.” The Chief then said that he expected Favre to
call upon him again, and that he had advised him to leave at 3 o’clock
(Favre wishes to return to Paris) “on account of the soldiers who would
challenge him after dark, and to whom he could not reply.”
Favre arrived at 1.30 P.M. and spent nearly two hours in negotiation
with the Chancellor. He afterwards drove off towards Paris, being
accompanied by Bismarck-Bohlen as far as the bridge at Sèvres.
These negotiations were not mentioned at dinner. It would appear,
however, to be a matter of course that the preliminaries of the
capitulation were discussed. The Chief spoke at first of Bernstorff,
and said: “Anyhow, that is a thing I have never yet been able to
manage--to fill page after page of foolscap with the most insignificant
twaddle. A pile so high has come in again to-day”--he pointed with his
hand--“and then the back references: ‘As I had the honour to report in
my despatch of January 3rd, 1863, No. so-and-so; as I announced most
obediently in my telegram No. 1666.’ I send them to the King, and he
wants to know what Bernstorff means, and always writes in pencil on
the margin, ‘Don’t understand this. This is awful!’” Somebody observed
that it was only Goltz who wrote as much as Bernstorff: “Yes,” said the
Chief, “and in addition he often sent me private letters that filled
six to eight closely-written sheets. He must have had a terrible amount
of spare time. Fortunately I fell out with him, and then that blessing
ceased.” One of the company wondered, what Goltz would say if he now
heard that the Emperor was a prisoner, and the Empress in London,
while Paris was being besieged and bombarded by us. “Well,” replied
the Chief, “he was not so desperately attached to the Emperor--but the
Empress in London! Nevertheless, in spite of his devotion to her, he
would not have given himself away as Werther did.”
The death of a Belgian Princess having been mentioned, Abeken, as in
duty bound, expressed his grief at the event. The Chief said: “How can
that affect you so much? To my knowledge, there is no Belgian here at
table, nor even a cousin.”
The Minister then related that Favre complained of our firing at the
sick and blind--that is to say, the blind asylum. “I said to him, ‘I
really do not see what you have to complain about. You yourselves
do much worse, seeing that you shoot at our sound and healthy men.’
He will have thought: What a barbarian!” Hohenlohe’s name was then
mentioned, and it was said that much of the success of the bombardment
was due to him. The Chief: “I shall propose for him the title of
Poliorketes.” The conversation then turned on the statues and paintings
of the Restoration, and their artificiality and bad taste. “I
remember,” said the Chief, “that Schuckmann, the Minister, was painted
by his wife, _en coquille_ I think it was called at that time, that is,
in a rose-coloured shell, and wearing a kind of antique costume. He was
naked down to the waist--I had never seen him like that.” “That is one
of my earliest remembrances. They often gave what used to be called
_assemblées_, and are now known as routs--a ball without supper. My
parents usually went there.” Thereupon, the Chief once more described
his mother’s costume, and then continued: “There was afterwards a
Russian Minister in Berlin, Ribeaupierre, who also gave balls, where
people danced till 2 o’clock in the morning, and there was nothing to
eat. I know that, because I and a couple of good friends were often
there. At length we got tired of it, and played them a trick. When it
got late, we pulled out some bread and butter from our pockets, and
after we had finished, we pitched the paper on the drawing-room floor.
Refreshments were provided next time, but we were not invited any
more.”
CHAPTER XVIII
DURING THE NEGOTIATIONS RESPECTING THE CAPITULATION OF PARIS
_Wednesday, January 25th._--Count Lehndorff dined with us, and talked
about hunting and hunting dinners, including a great banquet given
by some Baron which consisted of no less than twenty-four courses.
His brother was present and fell asleep propped on his elbows, while
a neighbour of his sunk into slumber on the shoulder of a governess
who was sitting next him. The dinner lasted over five hours and the
people were most horribly bored, as often happens in the country. The
Chief remarked: “I always know how to get over that difficulty. One
must put down a good bit of liquor right at the beginning, and under
its influence one’s neighbours to the left and right grow ever so much
cleverer and pleasanter.”
The Minister then spoke about his first journey to St. Petersburg.
He drove in a carriage, as at first there was no snow. It fell very
heavily later on, however, and progress was terribly slow. It took him
five full days and six nights to reach the first railway station, and
he spent the whole time cramped up in a narrow carriage without sleep
and with the thermometer at fifteen degrees Reaumur below zero. In the
train, however he fell so fast asleep that on their arrival in St.
Petersburg, after a ten hours’ run, he felt as if he had been only five
minutes in the railway carriage.
“The old times before the railways were completed had also their good
side,” continued the Minister. “There was not so much to do. The mail
only came in twice a week, and then one worked as if for a wager. But
when the mail was over we got on horseback, and had a good time of it
until its next arrival.” Somebody observed that the increased work,
both abroad and at the Foreign Office, was due more to the telegraph
than to the railways. This led the Chief to talk about diplomatic
reports in general, many of which, while written in a pleasant style,
were quite empty. “They are like feuilletons, written merely because
something has to be written. That was the case, for instance, with the
reports of Bamberg, our Consul in Paris. One read them through always
thinking: Now something is coming. But nothing ever came. They sounded
very well and one read on and on. But there was really nothing in them.
All barren and empty.” Another instance was then mentioned, Bernhardi,
our Military Plenipotentiary at Florence, of whom the Chief said: “He
passes for being a good writer on military subjects because of his work
on Toll. We do not know, however, how much of that he himself wrote.
Thereupon he was given the rank of major, although it is not certain
that he ever was an officer at all, and he was appointed Military
Plenipotentiary in Italy. Great things were expected of him there, and
in the matter of quantity he did a great deal--also in the matter of
style. He writes in an agreeable way, as if for a feuilleton, but when
I have got to the end of his closely-written reports in a small neat
hand, for all their length I have found nothing in them.”...
The Minister then returned to the subject of tiresome journeys and
long rides. He said: “I remember after the battle of Sadowa I was the
whole day in the saddle on a big horse. At first I did not want to ride
him as he was too high and it was too much trouble to mount. At last,
however, I did so, and I was not sorry for it. It was an excellent
animal! But the long waiting above the valley had exhausted me and my
seat and legs were very sore. The skin was not broken, that has never
happened to me, but afterwards when I sat down on a wooden bench I
had a feeling as if I were sitting on something that came between me
and the wood. It was only a blister. After Sadowa we arrived late at
night in the market-place of Horsitz. There we were told that we were
to seek out our own quarters. That, however, was much easier said than
done. The houses were bolted and barred, and the sappers, who might
have broken in the doors for us, were not to arrive before five in
the morning.” “His Excellency knew how to help himself in a similar
case at Gravelotte,” interrupted Delbrück. The Chief continued his
story: “Well, I went to several houses at Horsitz, three or four, and
at length I found a door open. After making a few steps into the dark
I fell into a kind of pit. Luckily it was not deep, and I was able
to satisfy myself that it was filled with horse-dung. I thought at
first, ‘How would it be to remain here,’--on the dung-heap, but I soon
recognised other smells. What curious things happen sometimes! If that
pit had been twenty feet deep, and full, they would have had a long
search next morning for their Minister, and doubtless there would be no
Chancellor of the Confederation to-day.” “I went out again and finally
found a corner for myself in an arcade on the market-place. I laid
a couple of carriage cushions on the ground and made a pillow of a
third, and then stretched myself out to sleep. Later on some one waked
me. It was Perponcher, who told me that the Grand Duke of Mecklenburg
had a room for me and an unoccupied bed. That turned out to be correct,
but the bed was only a child’s cot. I managed to fix it, however, by
arranging the back of a chair at the end of it. But in the morning I
could hardly stand, as my knees had been resting on the bare boards.”
“One can sleep quite comfortably if one has only a sackful of straw,
however small. You cut it open in the middle, push the straw to the
two ends, and let yourself into the hollow part. I used to do that in
Russia when out hunting. I ripped the bag open with my hunting knife,
crept into it and slept like a log.” “That was when the despatch from
Napoleon came,” observed Bohlen. The Chief replied: “Yes, the one at
which the King was so pleased, because it showed that he had won a
great battle--his first great battle.” “And you were also glad,” said
Bohlen, “and you swore an oath that you would one day requite the Gauls
when an opportunity offered.”...
Finally the Chief related: “Favre told me the day before yesterday
that the first shell that fell in the Pantheon cut off the head of the
statue of Henri IV.” “He doubtless thought that was a very pathetic
piece of news,” suggested Bohlen. “Oh, no,” replied the Chief, “I
rather fancy that, as a democrat, he was pleased that it should have
happened to a King.” Bohlen: “That is the second piece of bad luck that
Henri has had in Paris. First a Frenchman stabbed him there, and now we
have beheaded him.”
The dinner lasted very long this evening, from 5.30 till after 7.
Favre was expected back from Paris every moment. He came at length at
7.30, again accompanied by his son-in-law with the Spanish name. It is
understood that neither hesitated this time, as they did on the former
occasion, to take the food that was offered to them, but, like sensible
people, did justice to the good things that were laid before them. It
is doubtless to be inferred from this that they have also listened to
reason in the main point, or will do so. That will soon appear, as
Favre is again conferring with the Chancellor.
After dinner read drafts. Instructions have been sent to
Rosenberg-Grudcinski at Reims respecting the collection of taxes. The
Municipalities are to be called upon to pay five per cent. extra for
each day of arrears. Flying columns with artillery are to be sent to
districts where payment is obstinately refused. They are to summon the
inhabitants to pay up the taxes and if this is not done immediately
to shell the place and set it on fire. Three examples would render a
fourth unnecessary. It is not our business to win over the French by
considerate treatment or to take their welfare into account. On the
contrary, in view of their character, it is desirable to inspire them
with a greater fear of us than of their own Government, which, of
course, also enforces compulsory measures against them. According to a
report by the Minister of the Netherlands to his Government, the Red
Republicans in Paris attempted a rising the night before last, released
some of their leaders, and then provoked a riot outside the Hôtel de
Ville. The National Guard fired upon the Mobiles, and there were some
dead and wounded, but ultimately order was restored.
About 10 o’clock, while Favre was still here, there was heavy firing
from big guns which continued for perhaps an hour. I went to tea at
10.30 P.M., and found Hatzfeldt and Bismarck-Bohlen in conversation
with Del Rio in the dining-room. He is a man of medium height, dark
beard, slightly bald, and wears a pince-nez. Shortly after I came down,
he left for his quarters at Stieber’s house, accompanied by Mantey,
and he was followed a quarter of an hour later by Favre. Del Rio spoke
of Paris as being the “centre du monde,” so that the bombardment is a
kind of target practice at the centre of the world. He mentioned that
Favre has a villa at Reuil and a large cellar in Paris with all sorts
of wine, and that he himself has an estate in Mexico of six square
German miles in extent. After Favre’s departure the Chief came out to
us, ate some cold partridge, asked for some ham, and drank a bottle
of beer. After a while he sighed, and sitting up straight in his
chair, he exclaimed: “If one could only decide and order these things
one’s self! But to bring others to do it!” He paused for a minute and
then continued: “What surprises me is that they have not sent out
any general. And it is difficult to make Favre understand military
matters.” He then mentioned a couple of French technical terms of which
Favre did not know the meaning. “Well, it is to be hoped that he had a
proper meal to-day,” said Bohlen. The Chief replied in the affirmative,
and then Bohlen said he had heard it rumoured that this time Favre had
not despised the champagne. The Chief: “Yes, the day before yesterday
he refused to take any, but to-day he had several glasses. The first
time he had some scruples of conscience about eating, but I persuaded
him, and his hunger doubtless supported me, for he ate like one who had
had a long fast.”
Hatzfeldt reported that the Mayor, Rameau, had called about an hour
before and asked if M. Favre was here. He wanted to speak to him and
to place himself at his disposal. Might he do so? He, Hatzfeldt, had
replied that of course he did not know. The Chief: “For a man to come
in the night to a person who is returning to Paris is sufficient of
itself to bring him before a court-martial. The audacious fellow!”
Bohlen: “Mantey has doubtless already told Stieber. Probably this M.
Rameau is anxious to return to his cell.” (Rameau was obliged some time
since to study the interior of one of the cells in the prison in the
Rue Saint Pierre for a few days in company with some other members of
the corporation--if I am not mistaken, on account of some refusal or
some insolent reply about supplying provisions for Versailles.)
The Minister then related some particulars of his interview with Favre.
“I like him better now than at Ferrières,” he said. “He spoke a good
deal and in long, well-rounded periods. It was often not necessary to
pay attention or to answer. They were anecdotes of former times. He
is a very good _raconteur_.” “He was not at all offended at my recent
letter to him. On the contrary, he felt indebted to me for calling his
attention to what he owed to himself.” “He also spoke of having a villa
near Paris, which was, however, wrecked and pillaged. I had it on the
tip of my tongue to say, ‘But not by us!’ but he himself immediately
added that it had doubtless been done by the Mobiles.” “He then
complained that Saint Cloud had been burning for the last three days,
and wanted to persuade me that we had set the palace there on fire.”
“In speaking of the franctireurs and their misdeeds, he wished to call
my attention to our guerillas in 1813--they indeed had been much worse.
I said to him: ‘I don’t want to deny that, but you are also aware
that the French shot them whenever they caught them. And they did not
shoot them all in one place, but one batch on the spot where the act
was committed, another batch at the next halt, and so on, in order to
serve as a deterrent.’” “He maintained that in the last engagement, on
the 19th, the National Guard, recruited from the well-to-do classes,
fought best, while the battalions raised from the lower classes were
worthless.”
The Chief paused for a while and seemed to be reflecting. He then
continued: “If the Parisians first received a supply of provisions
and were then again put on half rations and once more obliged to
starve, that ought, I think, to work. It is like flogging. When it
is administered continuously it is not felt so much. But when it is
suspended for a time and then another dose inflicted, it hurts! I know
that from the criminal court where I was employed. Flogging was still
in use there.”
The subject of flogging in general was then discussed, and Bohlen, who
favours its retention, observed that the English had re-introduced it.
“Yes,” said Bucher, “but first for personal insult to the Queen, on the
occasion of an outrage against the Royal person, and afterwards for
garrotting.” The Chief then related that in 1863, when the garrotters
appeared in London, he was often obliged to go after twelve o’clock
at night through a solitary lane, containing only stables and full of
heaps of horse-dung, which led from Regent Street to his lodgings in
Park Street. To his terror, he read in the papers that a number of
these attacks had taken place on that very spot.
Then, after a pause, the Minister said: “This is really an unheard-of
proceeding on the part of the English. They want to send a gunboat up
the Seine” (Odo Russell put forward this demand, which the Chancellor
absolutely refused) “in order, they say, to remove the English families
there. They merely want to ascertain if we have laid down torpedoes and
then to let the French ships follow them. What swine! They are full
of vexation and envy because we have fought great battles here--and
won them. They cannot bear to think that shabby little Prussia should
prosper so. The Prussians are a people who should merely exist in
order to carry on war for them in their pay. This is the view taken by
all the upper classes in England. They have never been well disposed
towards us, and have always done their utmost to injure us.” “The
Crown Princess herself is an incarnation of this way of thinking. She
is full of her own great condescension in marrying into our country.
I remember her once telling me that two or three merchant families in
Liverpool had more silver-plate than the entire Prussian nobility.
‘Yes,’ I replied, ‘that is possibly true, your Royal Highness, but we
value ourselves for other things besides silver.’”
The Minister remained silent for a while. Then he said: “I have often
thought over what would have happened if we had gone to war about
Luxemburg--should I now be in Paris or would the French be in Berlin?
I think I did well to prevent war at that time. We should not have
been nearly so strong as we are to-day. At that time the Hanoverians
would not have made trustworthy soldiers. I will say nothing about
the Hessians--they would have done well. The Schleswig-Holstein men
have now fought like lions, but there was no army there then. Saxony
was also useless. The army had been disbanded and had to be recruited
over again. And there was little confidence to be placed in the
South Germans. The Würtembergers, what excellent fellows they are
now, quite first rate! But in 1866 they would have been laughed at by
every soldier as they marched into Frankfurt like so many militiamen.
The Baden troops were also not up to the mark. Beyer, and indeed
the Grand Duke, has since then done a great deal for them.” “It is
true that public opinion throughout Germany would have been on our
side had we wished to fight for Luxemburg. But that was not enough
to compensate for such deficiencies. Moreover, we had not right on
our side. I have never confessed it publicly, but I can say it here:
after the dissolution of the Confederation the Grand Duke had become
the sovereign of Luxemburg and could have done what he liked with the
country. It would have been mean of him to part with it for money, but
it was open to him to cede it to France. Our right of occupation was
also not well founded. Properly speaking, after the dissolution of the
Confederation we ought no longer to have occupied even Rastatt and
Mainz. I said that in the Council--I had at that time yet another
idea, namely, to hand over Luxemburg to Belgium. In that case we
should have united it to a country on behalf of whose neutrality, as
people then thought, England would intervene. That would also have
strengthened the German element there against the French speaking
inhabitants, and at the same time have secured a good frontier. My
proposal was not received with any favour, and it is just as well as it
has turned out.”
Bismarck-Bohlen drew attention to a capital cartoon in
_Kladderadatsch_: Napoleon waiting on the platform of the railway
station and saying “They have already given the signal to start.” He
has put on an ermine cloak for his journey to Paris, and is carrying
his portmanteau in his hand. The Chief, however, observed: “Doubtless
he thinks so, and he may be right. But I fear he will miss the train.
Yet, after all, there may be no other way left. He would be easier
to convince than Favre. But he would always require half the army to
maintain him on the throne.”
_Thursday, January 26th._--The Chief drove off to see the King at 10.30
A.M.
Herr Hans von Rochow and Count Lehndorff dined with us. The Chief
talked about Favre: “He told me that on Sundays the boulevards are
still full of fashionably dressed women with pretty children. I
remarked to him, ‘I am surprised at that. I wonder you have not yet
eaten them!’” As some one noticed that the firing was particularly
heavy to-day, the Minister observed: “I remember in the criminal
court we once had a subordinate official--I believe his name was
Stepki--whose business it was to administer the floggings. He was
accustomed to lay on the last three strokes with exceptional vigour--as
a wholesome memento!” The conversation then turned upon Strousberg,
whose bankruptcy was said to be imminent, and the Chief said: “He once
told me, ‘I know I shall not even die in my own house.’ But for the
war, it would not have happened so soon, perhaps not at all. He always
kept afloat by issuing new shares, and the game succeeded, although
other Jews, who had made money before him, did their best to spoil it.
But now comes the war, and his Rumanians have fallen lower and lower,
so that at present one might ask how much they cost per hundredweight.
For all that, he remains a clever man and indefatigable.” The mention
of Strousberg’s cleverness and restless activity led on to Gambetta,
who was said to have also “made his five millions out of the war.”
But doubts were expressed on this point, and I believe rightly. After
the Dictator of Bordeaux, it was Napoleon’s turn to be discussed,
and according to Bohlen, people said he had saved at least fifty
millions during the nineteen years of his reign. “Others say eighty
millions,” added the Chief, “but I doubt it. Louis Philippe spoiled
the business. He had riots arranged, and then bought stocks on the
Amsterdam Exchange, but at last business men saw through it.” Hatzfeldt
or Keudell then observed that this resourceful monarch used to fall ill
from time to time with a similar object.
Morny was then spoken of as having been specially ingenious in making
money in every possible way under the Empire. The Chief told us that
“when Morny was appointed Ambassador to St. Petersburg he appeared
with a whole collection of elegant carriages, some forty-three of them
altogether, and all his chests, trunks and boxes were full of laces,
silks, and feminine finery, upon which, as Ambassador, he had to pay
no customs duty. Every servant had his own carriage, and every attaché
and secretary had at least two. A few days after his arrival he sold
off the whole lot by auction, clearing at least 800,000 roubles. He
was a thief, but an amiable one.” The Chief then, pursuing the same
subject and quoting further instances, continued: “For the matter of
that, influential people in St. Petersburg understood this sort of
business--not that they were willing to take money directly. But when a
person wanted something, he went to a certain French shop, and bought
expensive laces, gloves or jewellery, perhaps for five or six thousand
roubles. The shop was run on behalf of some official or his wife.
This process repeated, say, twice a week, produced quite a respectable
amount in the course of the year.”
Bohlen called out across the table: “Do, please, tell that lovely
story about the Jew with the torn boots who got twenty-five lashes.”
The Chief: “It came about in this way. One day a Jew called at our
Chancellerie declaring that he was penniless, and wanted to be sent
back to Prussia. He was terribly tattered, and he had on in particular
a pair of boots that showed his naked toes. He was told that he would
be sent home, but then he wanted to get other boots as it was so cold.
He demanded them as a right, and became so forward and impudent,
screaming and calling names, that our people did not know what to do
with him. And the servants also could not trust themselves to deal with
the furious creature. At length, when the row had become intolerable,
I was called to render physical assistance. I told the man to be quiet
or I would have him locked up. He answered defiantly: ‘You can’t do
that. You have no right whatever to do that in Russia!’ ‘We shall
see!’ I replied. ‘I must send you home, but I am not called upon to
give you boots, although perhaps I might have done so. But first you
shall receive punishment for your abominable behaviour.’ He then
repeated that I could not touch him. Thereupon I opened the window
and beckoned to a Russian policeman, who was stationed a little way
off. My Jew continued to shriek and abuse us until the policeman, a
tall stout man, came in. I said, ‘Take him with you--lock him up till
to-morrow--twenty-five!’ The big policeman took the little Jew with
him, and locked him up. He came again next morning quite transformed,
very humble and submissive, and declared himself ready for the journey
without new boots. I asked how he had got on in the interval. Badly,
he said, very badly. But what had they done to him? They had--well,
they had--physically maltreated him. I thought that when he got home
he would enter a complaint against me, or get his case into the
newspapers--the _Volkszeitung_, or some such popular organ. The Jews
know how to make a row. But he must have decided otherwise, for nothing
more was heard of him.”
When I came down to tea at 10.30 P.M. I found the Chief in conversation
with the members of Parliament, Von Köller and Von Forckenbeck. The
Minister was just saying that more money would soon be required. “We
did not want to ask more from the Reichstag,” he said, “as we did
not anticipate that the war would last so long. I have written to
Camphausen, but he suggests requisitions and contributions. They are
very difficult to collect, as the immense area of country over which we
are dispersed requires more troops than we can spare for purposes of
coercion. Two million soldiers would be necessary to deal thoroughly
with a territory of 12,000 German square miles. Besides, everything
has grown dearer in consequence of the war. When we make a requisition
we get nothing. When we pay cash there is always enough to be had in
the market, and cheaper than in Germany. Here the bushel of oats costs
four francs, and if it is brought from Germany six francs. I thought
at first of getting the contributions of the different States paid in
advance. But that would only amount to twenty millions, as Bavaria will
keep her own accounts until 1872. Another way out of the difficulty
occurred to me, namely, to apply to our Diet for a sum on account.
But we must first find out what Moltke proposes to extort from the
Parisians, that is to say, from the city of Paris--for that is what
we are dealing with for the present.” Forckenbeck was of opinion that
the Chief’s plan would meet with no insurmountable resistance in the
Diet. It is true the doctrinaires would raise objections, and others
would complain that Prussia should again have to come to the rescue and
make sacrifices for the rest of the country, but in all probability
the majority would go with the Government. Köller could confirm that
opinion, which he did.
Afterwards an officer of the dark blue hussars, a Count Arnim who
had just arrived from Le Mans, came in and gave us a great deal of
interesting news. He said the inhabitants of the town appeared to
be very sensible people who disapproved of Gambetta’s policy, and
everywhere expressed their desire for peace. “Yes,” replied the Chief,
“that is very good of the people, but how does it help us if with all
their good sense they allow Gambetta, time after time, to stamp new
armies of 150,000 men out of the ground?” Arnim having further related
that they had again made great numbers of prisoners, the Minister
exclaimed: “That is most unsatisfactory! What shall we do with them all
in the end? Why make so many prisoners? Every one who makes prisoners
ought to be tried by court-martial.” This, like many other similar
expressions, must doubtless not be taken literally, and applies only to
the franctireurs.
_Friday, January 27th._--It is said that the bombardment ceased at
midnight. It was to have recommenced at 6 o’clock this morning in case
the Paris Government was not prepared to agree to our conditions for
a truce. As it has ceased, the Parisians have doubtless yielded. But
Gambetta?
Moltke arrives at 8.30 A.M., and remains in conference with the Chief
for about three-quarters of an hour. The Frenchmen put in an appearance
shortly before 11. Favre (who has had his grey Radical beard clipped)
with thick underlip, yellow complexion, and light grey eyes; General
Beaufort d’Hautpoule, with his aide-de-camp, Calvel; and Dürrbach, a
“Chief of the Engineers of the Eastern Railway.” Beaufort is understood
to have led the attack on the redoubt at Montretout on the 19th. Their
negotiations with the Chief appear to have come to a speedy conclusion,
or to have been broken off. Shortly after twelve o’clock, just as we
sit down to lunch, they drive off again in the carriages that brought
them here. Favre looks very depressed. The general is noticeably red
in the face, and does not seem to be quite steady on his legs. Shortly
after the French had gone the Chancellor came in to us and said: “I
only want a breath of fresh air. Please do not disturb yourselves.”
Then, turning to Delbrück and shaking his head, he said: “There is
nothing to be done with him. Mentally incapable--drunk, I believe. I
told him to think it over until half-past one. Perhaps he will have
recovered by that time. Muddle-headed and ill-mannered. What is his
name? Something like Bouffre or Pauvre?” Keudell said: “Beaufort.” The
Chief: “A distinguished name, but not at all distinguished manners.”
It appears, then, that the general has actually taken more than he was
able to carry, perhaps in consequence of his natural capacity having
been weakened by hunger.
At lunch it was mentioned that on his way here, Forckenbeck saw the
village of Fontenay still in flames. It had been fired by our troops as
a punishment for the destruction of the railway bridges by the mutinous
peasantry. Delbrück rejoiced with us “that at last adequate punishment
had been once more inflicted.”
In the afternoon we heard that the Chancellor drove off shortly before
1 o’clock, first to see the Emperor, and then to Moltke’s, where he
and Podbielski again met the Frenchmen. The latter afterwards left
for Paris, about 4 o’clock, and will return to-morrow at noon for the
purpose of completing the capitulation.
At dinner, the Chief, speaking of Beaufort, said he had behaved like
a man without any breeding. “He blustered and shouted and swore like
a trooper, and with his ‘moi, général de l’armée française,’ he was
almost unendurable. Favre, who is not very well bred either, said to
me: ‘J’en suis humilié!’ Besides, he was not so very drunk; it was,
rather, his vulgar manners. At the General Staff they were of opinion
that a man of that sort had been chosen in order that no arrangement
should be come to. I said that, on the contrary, they had selected him
because it did not matter for such a person to lose credit with the
public by signing the capitulation.”
The Chief then continued: “I said to Favre during our last interview:
‘Vous avez été trahi--par la fortune.’ He saw the point clearly, but
only said: ‘A qui le dites-vous! Dans trois fois vingt quatre heures
je serai aussi compté au nombre des traîtres.’ He added that his
position in Paris was very critical. I proposed to him: ‘Provoquez donc
une émeute pendant que vous avez encore une armée pour l’etouffer.’
He looked at me quite terror-stricken, as if he wished to say, How
bloodthirsty you are. I explained to him, however, that that was the
only right way to manage the mob.” “Then, again, he has no idea of how
things are with us. He mentioned several times that France was the
land of liberty, while Germany was governed by a despotism. I told
him, for instance, that we wanted money and that Paris must supply
some. He suggested that we should raise a loan. I replied that that
could not be done without the approval of the Diet. ‘Ah’ he said, ‘you
can surely get five hundred million francs without the Chamber.’ I
answered: ‘No, not five francs.’ But he would not believe it. I told
him that I had been at loggerheads with the popular representatives
for four whole years, but that the raising of a loan without the Diet
was the limit to which I went, and which it never occurred to me to
overstep. That seemed to disconcert him somewhat, but he only said
that in France ‘on ne se gênerait pas.’ And yet he returned afterwards
to the immense freedom which they enjoy in France. It is really funny
to hear a Frenchman talk in that way, and particularly Favre, who has
always been a member of the Opposition. But that’s their way. You can
give a Frenchman twenty-five lashes, and if you only make a fine speech
to him about the freedom and dignity of man of which those lashes are
the expression, and at the same time strike a fitting attitude, he will
persuade himself that he is not being thrashed.”
“Ah, Keudell,” said the Chief suddenly, “it just occurs to me. I must
have my full powers drawn up for to-morrow, of course in German. The
German Emperor must only write German. The Minister can be guided by
circumstances. Official communications must be written in the language
of the country, not in a foreign tongue. Bernstorff was the first to
try to introduce that system in our case, but he went too far with it.
He wrote to all the diplomatists in German, and they replied, of course
by agreement, each in his own language, Russian, Spanish, Swedish and
what not, so that he had to have a whole army of translators in the
office. That was how I found matters when I came into power. Budberg
(the Russian Ambassador in Berlin) sent me a note in Russian. That was
too much for me. If they wanted to have their revenge Gortschakoff
should have written in Russian to our Ambassador in St. Petersburg.
That would have been the right way. It is only fair to ask that the
representatives of foreign countries should understand and speak the
language of the State to which they are accredited. But it was unfair
to send me in Berlin a reply in Russian to a note in German. I decided
that all communications received in other languages than German,
French, English and Italian should be left unnoticed and put away
in the archives. Budberg then wrote screed after screed, always in
Russian. No answer was returned and the documents were all laid by with
the State papers. At last he came himself and asked why he had received
no reply. ‘Reply!’ I exclaimed. ‘To what?’ Why, he had written a month
ago and had afterwards sent me several reminders. ‘Ah, quite so!’ I
said. ‘There is a great pile of documents in Russian down stairs, and
yours are probably amongst them. But we have no one who understands
Russian, and I have given instructions for all documents written in
a language we do not understand to be put away in the archives.’” It
was then arranged that Budberg should write in French, and the Foreign
Office also when it suited them.
The Chief then talked about the French negotiators and said: “M.
Dürrbach introduced himself as ‘membre de l’administration du Chemin
de fer de l’Est; j’y suis beaucoup intéressé.’--If he only knew what
we intend.” (Probably the cession of the Eastern Railway.) Hatzfeldt:
“He threw up his hands in dismay when the General Staff pointed out
to him on the map the tunnels, bridges, &c., destroyed by the French
themselves. ‘I have always been against that’ he said, ‘and I pointed
out to them that a bridge could be repaired in three hours--but they
would not listen to me.’” The Chief: “Repaired after a fashion,
certainly, but not a railway bridge capable of carrying a train. They
will find it hard now to bring up provisions to Paris, particularly if
they have committed the same stupid destruction in the west. I think
they rely upon drawing supplies from Brittany and Normandy, where there
are large flocks of sheep, and from the ports. To my knowledge there
are plenty of bridges and tunnels in those parts too, and if they have
destroyed them they will find themselves in great straits. I hope,
moreover, that people in London will only send them hams and not bread!”
_Saturday, January 28th._--At 11 o’clock the French negotiators again
arrived--Favre, Dürrbach and two others, who are understood to be also
leading railway officials; and two officers, another general, and an
aide-de-camp, both men with a good presence. They take lunch with us.
Then follows a lengthy negotiation at Moltke’s lodgings. The Chief
afterwards dictates to the Secretaries Willisch and Saint Blanquart
the treaties of capitulation and armistice, which are drawn up in
duplicate. They are afterwards signed and sealed by Bismarck and Favre,
at twenty minutes past seven, in the green room next to the Minister’s
study up stairs.
The Frenchmen dined with us. The general (Valden is his name) ate
little and hardly spoke at all. Favre was also dejected and taciturn.
The aide-de-camp, M. d’Hérisson, did not appear to be so much affected,
and the railway officials, after their long privations, devoted
themselves with considerable gusto to the pleasures of the table.
According to what I can gather from the latter they have, as a matter
of fact, been on very short commons in Paris for some time past,
and the death rate last week amounted to about five thousand. The
mortality was especially heavy amongst children up to two years of
age, and coffins for these tiny French citizens were to be seen in all
directions. Delbrück declared afterwards that “Favre and the General
looked like two condemned prisoners who were going to the gallows next
morning. I pitied them.”
Keudell expects that peace will soon be concluded and that we shall
be back in Berlin within a month. Shortly before 10 o’clock a bearded
gentleman apparently about forty-five, who gave his name as Duparc,
called and was immediately conducted to the Chief, with whom he spent
about two hours. He is understood to be the former French Minister
Duvernois, coming from Wilhelmshöhe with proposals for peace. The
capitulation and armistice do not yet mean the end of the war with
France.
_Sunday, January 29th._--Our troops moved forward to occupy the forts.
In the morning read despatches respecting the London Conference,
and other subjects, as well as the treaties for the armistice and
capitulation signed yesterday. Bernstorff reported that Musurus became
very violent at one of the sittings of the Conference. He could not
conceive why the stipulation closing the Dardanelles against Russian
men-of-war should not be worded in an indirect and therefore less
offensive form for Russia, and at the same time quite as acceptable to
the Porte. From another of Bernstorff’s despatches the Chief appears
to have hinted that Napoleon should not miss the right moment. It is
also stated that Palikao, who was of the same opinion, thought it would
be dangerous to agree in the capitulation to leave the National Guard
under arms. Vinoy and Roncière, being in favour of the Emperor, would
doubtless be the right men to assume command of the troops in the city.
Our copy of the capitulation fills ten folio pages, and is stitched
together with silk in the French colours, on the end of which Favre has
impressed his seal.
We were joined at lunch by Count Henckel, who has been appointed
Prefect at Metz. He maintained that in about five years the elections
in his department would be favourable to the Government; indeed, he was
confident even now of being able to bring about that result. In Alsace,
however, the prospect was not so good, as Germans are not so docile
to authority as the French. He also mentioned that his department had
really suffered severely. At the commencement of the war it had some
thirty-two to thirty-five thousand horses, and now he believed there
were not more than five thousand left.
Before dinner I read further drafts, including a memorandum, in which
the Chief explained to the King that it was impossible to demand from
Favre, after the conclusion of the capitulation, the surrender of the
flags of the French regiments in Paris.
We were joined at dinner by Count Henckel and the French aide-de-camp
who was here yesterday. The latter, whose full name is d’Hérisson de
Saulnier, wore a black hussar uniform, with yellow shoulder straps and
embroidery on the sleeves. He is said to understand and speak German,
yet the conversation, into which the Chief entered with zest, was
for the most part carried on in French. In the absence of Favre and
the General (the former was still in the house, but as he was very
busy he had his dinner sent up to him in the small drawing-room) the
aide-de-camp was more lively and amusing than yesterday. He bore the
whole burden of the conversation for a considerable time, with a series
of droll anecdotes. The scarcity of food in the city had become of
late very painfully perceptible, but his experience would appear to
have been more with the amusing, than with the serious, side of the
question. He said that for him the most interesting period of their
fast was “while they were eating up the Jardin des Plantes.” Elephant
meat cost twenty francs per kilogramme and tasted like coarse beef, and
they had really had “filets de chameau” and “côtelettes de tigre.” A
dog flesh market was held in the Rue Saint Honoré, the price being two
francs fifty per kilo. There were hardly any more dogs to be seen in
Paris, and whenever people caught sight of one, they immediately hunted
it down. It was the same with cats. If a pigeon alighted on a roof a
view holloa was at once raised in the street. Only the carrier pigeons
were spared. The despatches were fastened in the middle of their tail
feathers, of which they ought to have nine. If one of them happened
to have only eight, they said: “ce n’est qu’un civil” and it had to
go the way of all flesh. A lady is said to have remarked: “Jamais je
ne mangerai plus de pigeon, car je croirais toujours avoir mangé un
facteur.”
In return for these and other stories the Chief related a number of
things which were not yet known in the drawing-rooms and clubs of
Paris, and which people there might be glad to hear, as for instance
the shabby behaviour of Rothschild at Ferrières, and the way in which
the Elector of Hesse transformed Rothschild’s grandfather Amschel from
a little Jew into a great one. The Chancellor repeatedly referred to
the latter as the “Juif de cour,” and afterwards gave a description of
the domesticated Jews of the Polish nobility.
On Bohlen reporting later on that he had, in accordance with
instructions, sent certain papers to “the Emperor,” the Chief observed:
“The Emperor? I envy those to whom the new title already comes so
trippingly.” Abeken returned from his Majesty’s and announced that “The
matter of the flags was settled.” The Chief: “Have you also fired off
my revolver letter?” Abeken: “Yes, Excellency, it has been discharged.”
After dinner read drafts and reports, amongst the latter a very
interesting one in which Russia advises us to leave Metz and German
Lorraine to the French, and to annex a neighbouring piece of
territory instead. According to a recent despatch from St. Petersburg
Gortschakoff has suggested that Germany might take Luxemburg and leave
the French a corresponding portion of Lorraine. The geographical
position of the Grand Duchy indicated that it should form part of
Germany, and Prince Henry, who is devotedly attached to his separate
Court, alone stood in the way. King William wrote on the margin of the
despatch that this suggestion was to be absolutely rejected. The Chief
then replied as follows: The future position of Luxemburg would, it
is true, be an unpleasant one--not for us, but rather for the Grand
Duchy itself. We must not, however, exercise any compulsion, nor take
the property of others. We must therefore adhere to the programme
communicated five months ago to St. Petersburg, especially as we have
since then made great sacrifices. The realisation of that programme
is indispensable for the security of Germany. We must have Metz. The
German people would not tolerate any alteration of the programme.
Favre did not leave till 10.15 P.M., and then not for Paris, but for
his quarters here in the Boulevard du Roi. He will come again to-morrow
at noon.
The Chief afterwards joined us at tea. In speaking of the capitulation
and the armistice, Bohlen asked: “But what if the others do not
agree--Gambetta and the Prefects in the south?” “Well, in that case
we have the forts which give us the control of the city,” replied the
Chief. “The King also could not understand that, and inquired what was
to happen if the people at Bordeaux did not ratify the arrangement.
‘Well,’ I replied, ‘then we remain in the forts and keep the Parisians
shut up, and perhaps in that case we may refuse to prolong the
armistice on the 19th of February. In the meantime they have delivered
up their arms, and they must pay the contribution. Those who have given
a material pledge under a treaty are all the worse off if they cannot
fulfil its conditions.’”
Favre had, it seems, confessed to the Chief that he had proceeded “un
peu témérairement” in the matter of the revictualling of Paris. He
really did not know whether he would be able to provide in good time
for the hundreds of thousands in the city. Somebody observed: “In case
of necessity Stosch could supply them with live stock and flour.” The
Chief: “Yes, so long as he can do so without injury to ourselves.”
Bismarck-Bohlen was of opinion that we need not give them anything; let
them see for themselves where they could get supplies, &c. The Chief:
“Well, then, you would let them starve?” Bohlen: “Certainly.” The
Chief: “But then how are we to get our contribution?”
Later on the Minister said: “Business of State, negotiations with the
enemy, do not irritate me. Their objections to my ideas and demands,
even when they are unreasonable, leave me quite cool. But the petty
grumbling and meddling of the military authorities in political
questions, and their ignorance of what is possible and not possible
in such matters! One of them comes and wants this, another one that,
and when you have got rid of the first two, a third one turns up--an
aide-de-camp or aide-de-camp general--who says: ‘But, your Excellency,
surely that is impossible,’ or ‘We must have this too in addition, else
we shall be in danger of our lives.’ And yesterday they went so far as
to insist that a condition (_i.e._, for the surrender of the flags),
which was not mentioned in the negotiations, should be introduced into
a document that was already signed. I said to them, however: ‘We have
committed many a crime in this war--but falsification of deeds! No,
gentlemen, really that cannot be done.’”
Bernstorff, it was mentioned, reports that he had informed the
Conference that from this time forward he represented the German Empire
and Emperor; and that the other members received this announcement
with approval. Thereupon the Chief remarked: “Bernstorff is after all
a man who has had business experience. How can he do such things? His
wife--what’s her name? Augusta--no, Anna--will have a fine opinion of
herself now. Imperial Ambassadress! I cannot lay much store by such
titles. A prosperous and powerful King is better than a weak Emperor,
and a rich Baron better than a poor Count.” “Such an Emperor as that
of Brazil or Mexico!” “With a salary of 800,000 florins,” interjected
Holstein. The Chief: “Well, that would be enough to get on with. They
require no firing and no winter clothes.”
Hatzfeldt mentioned that a Spanish secretary of embassy had called.
He had come from Bordeaux and wanted to enter Paris in order to bring
away his countrymen. He also had a letter from Chaudordy for Favre,
and was in great haste. What answer should be given to him? The Chief
stooped down a little over the table, then sat bolt upright again, and
said: “Attempting to carry a despatch from one member of the enemy’s
Government to another through our lines--that is a case exactly suited
for a court-martial. When he comes back you will treat the matter in
a very serious way: receive him coolly, look surprised, and say that
we must complain to the new King of Spain with regard to such a breach
of neutrality and demand satisfaction. Besides, I am astonished that
Stiehle should have let the fellow pass. These soldiers always pay too
much deference to diplomats. And even if he had been an ambassador,
Metternich for instance, he should have been turned back even if he
had to freeze and starve in consequence. Indeed, such carrier service
borders closely on spying.”
The rush of people to and out of Paris that was now to be apprehended
then came up for discussion. The Chief: “Well, the French will not let
so very many out, and we shall only let those pass who have a permit
from the authorities inside, and perhaps not all of those.”
Some one said that Rothschild, who had been supplied with a safe
conduct, wanted to come out; upon which the Chief: “It would be well to
detain him--as a franctireur, and include him amongst the prisoners of
war. (To Keudell) Just inquire into the matter. I mean it seriously.”
Bohlen exclaimed: “Then Bleichröder will come rushing over here and
prostrate himself in the name of all the Rothschild family.” The
Chief: “In that case we will send him in to join them in Paris, where
he can have his share of the dog hunting.”
Astonishment was then expressed that the _Daily Telegraph_ should
have already published a detailed epitome of the convention signed
yesterday, and in this connection Stieber, Favre’s fellow lodger, was
mentioned. The English correspondent had acknowledged, according to
Bucher, that he had received the news from Stieber, and the Minister
added: “I am convinced that Stieber opened Favre’s writing-desk with
a picklock, and then made extracts from his papers which he gave to
the Englishman.” This is scarcely probable, as Stieber’s knowledge of
French is inadequate for that purpose. He much more probably received
the news from his patron Bohlen, or perhaps from some officer who
heard it from the General Staff, who--as the Chancellor recently
remarked--“are very obliging and communicative in such matters.”
_Monday, January 30th._--Favre and other Frenchmen, including the
Chief or Prefect of the Paris police, were busily engaged with the
Chief during the afternoon, and dined with him at 5.30 P.M. The
secretaries and I were to go to the Hôtel des Reservoirs, as there was
not room enough at table. I remained at home, however, and translated
Granville’s latest peace proposals for the Emperor.
Abeken came up to me after dinner to get the translation, and was sorry
I had not been present as the conversation was specially interesting.
The Chief had told the Frenchmen, amongst other things, that to be
consistent in one’s policy was frequently a mistake, and only showed
obstinacy and narrow-mindedness. One must modify his course of action
in accordance with events, with the situation of affairs, with the
possibilities of the case, taking the relations of things into account
and serving his country as the opportunity offers and not according
to his opinions, which are often prejudices. When he first entered
into political life, as a young and inexperienced man, he had very
different views and aims to those which he had at present. He had,
however, altered and reconsidered his opinions, and had not hesitated
to sacrifice his wishes, either partially or wholly to the requirements
of the day, in order to be of service. One must not impose his own
leanings and desires upon his country. “La patrie veut être servie et
pas dominée.” This remark greatly impressed the Parisian gentlemen, of
course principally because of its striking form. Favre replied: “C’est
bien juste, Monsieur le Comte, c’est profond.” Another of the Frenchmen
also declared enthusiastically: “Oui, Messieurs, c’est un mot profond.”
Bucher, when I went down to tea, confirmed the above particulars,
and related that Favre after praising the truth and profundity of
the Chief’s remark--which, of course, was made for the edification
of the Parisians, just as in general his table talk is intended for
the benefit of his guests--must needs add the following _bêtise_:
“Néanmoins c’est un beau spectacle de voir un homme, qui n’a jamais
changé ses principes.” The railway director, who appeared to Bucher
to be more intelligent than Favre, added, in reference to the “servie
et pas dominée,” that that amounted to men of genius subordinating
themselves to the will and opinions of the majority, and that
majorities were always deficient in intelligence, knowledge, and
character. The Chief made a lofty reply to this objection, stating that
with him (_i.e._, with the man of genius, the hero) the consciousness
of his responsibility before God was one of his guiding stars. He
opposed to the _droit du génie_, to which his interlocutor had given
such a high place, the sense of duty (doubtless meaning what Kant
describes as the categorical imperative), which he maintained to be
nobler and more powerful.
A little after 11 o’clock the Chancellor joined us at tea. “I am really
curious,” he said, “to see what Gambetta will do. It looks as if he
wanted to think over the matter further, as he has not yet replied. I
think, too, he will ultimately give way. Besides, if not it will be
all right. I should have no objection to a little ‘Main line’ across
France. These Frenchmen are really very funny people. Favre comes to
me with a face like a martyred saint, and looks as if he had some
most important communication to make. So I say to him, ‘Shall we go
up stairs?’ ‘Yes,’ he says, ‘let us do so.’ But when we are there he
sits down and writes letter after letter, and I wait in vain for any
important statement or piece of news from him. As a matter of fact, he
had nothing to say. What he has done for us would go into two pages
of note-paper.” “And this Prefect of Police! I have never in my whole
life met such an unpractical man. We are expected to advise and help
them in everything. In the course of half an hour he fires all sorts
of requests into me, so that at last I nearly lost patience, and said
to him, ‘But, my good sir, would it not be better to let me have all
this in writing? Otherwise it cannot be properly attended to, for it is
impossible for me to carry it all in my head.’ Thousands of things pass
through one’s mind, and when I think seriously of one matter I lose
sight of all others.”
The conversation then turned on the difficulty of supplying the
Parisians with provisions. Several railways were useless, at least
for the time being; to allow supplies to be drawn from those parts
of France immediately adjoining the districts we occupy might result
in scarcity and embarrassment to ourselves; and the port of Dieppe,
where they count upon receiving consignments from abroad, could only
hold a few vessels. The Chief reckoned out how many rations would be
required daily, and how much could be transported in moderately normal
circumstances. He found that the supply would be a very scanty one, and
that possibly large numbers might still have to starve. He then added:
“Favre himself said to me that they had held out too long. That was,
however, as he confessed, merely because they knew we had provisions
stored for them at Lagny. They had exact particulars on that point. At
one time we had collected for them there 1,400 loaded waggons.”
The levying of taxes and contributions was then discussed, and the
Chief explained to Maltzahn the arrangements he wished to see made.
Instead of scattering our forces they should in general be massed in
the chief town of the department or arrondissement, and from these
centres flying columns should be despatched against those who refused
to pay taxes, as well as against the guerillas and their aiders and
abettors.
With regard to the ten million francs contribution imposed upon the
district of Fontenay for the destruction of the railway bridges,
Henckel declared, as an expert, that that was an impossible
demand--they could not squeeze even two millions out of the people.
“Probably not one million,” remarked the Chief. “But that is our way of
doing things. All sorts of terrible threats are constantly uttered, and
then afterwards they cannot be carried out. The people end by seeing
through that sort of thing, and get accustomed to the threats.”
Then followed a highly interesting and detailed review of the various
phases in the development of the scheme for the accession of the South
German states to the Northern Confederation. “While we were still in
Mainz,” related the Chancellor, “the King of Bavaria wrote a letter to
our most gracious master in which he expressed a hope that he would not
be mediatised. As a matter of course, his mind was set at ease on that
point. But the King did not want the answer to be quite so categorical.
That was the first conflict between the King and myself during the war.
I told him that King Lewis would probably in that case withdraw his
troops, and that he would be within his right in doing so. I remember
it was in the corner room. It was a hard struggle, and finally he left
me still in doubt as to what he was going to do. After the first great
victories and before Sedan, there was another idea, namely, that of
a military revolution and a military Emperor of Germany, who should
be proclaimed by the troops, including the Bavarians. That idea was
not to my liking. Subsequently, when Bray came here, they had thought
out a plan of their own in Munich. They felt themselves to be safe,
and wished for something more. Bray brought with him the plan of
the alternating imperial dignity. As Bray said to me, an agreement
could be come to between the North German Confederation and Bavaria
or between Germany and Bavaria. In the meantime we might very well
conclude treaties with Baden and Würtemberg, and afterwards come to an
understanding with Bavaria. I was quite satisfied with that. But when
I told it to Delbrück, he looked as if he were going to faint. I said
to him, ‘For Heaven’s sake, why not accept it? It is exactly what we
want.’ And so it was too. For when I informed Suckow and Mittnacht,
they were beside themselves with rage, and immediately came to terms
with me. Later on, however, the King (of Würtemberg) was induced to
strike out again in a new line. It was through Frau von Gasser, who had
great influence at the Court in Stuttgart. He wanted to act once more
with Bavaria. The Ministers, however, remained firm, and assured me
they would rather resign, and thus it came about that the Treaty with
Würtemberg was not concluded until afterwards in Berlin. Finally, after
all sorts of difficulties on both sides, the arrangement with Bavaria
was also settled. Now there was only one thing wanting--but that was
the most important of all! I saw a way, and wrote a letter--and after
that the credit belongs to a Bavarian Court official. He achieved an
almost impossible feat. In six days he made the journey there and
back, eighteen German miles, without a railway, to the palace in the
mountains where the King was staying--and in addition to that his
wife was ill at the time. It was really a great deal for him to do.
He arrives at the palace, finds the King unwell--suffering from a
tumour in the gum, or from the after effects of an operation under
chloroform. He is not to be seen. Well, but he had a letter from me to
deliver--very pressing. In vain; the King will not be disturbed; he
will do no business to-day. At last his Majesty’s curiosity is aroused,
and he wants to know what I have to communicate to him--and the letter
is well received. But there is no ink, no paper, no writing materials.
They send off a groom, who ultimately comes back with some coarse
letter paper; the King writes his answer, just as he is, in bed--and
the German Empire is made!”
Jacoby’s arrest having been mentioned, the Chief observed: “Otherwise,
Falkenstein acted quite sensibly, but thanks to that measure of his and
to his refusal to release Jacoby when I requested him to do so, we were
unable to convoke the Diet for a whole month. As far as I am concerned,
he might have had Jacoby carved up for himself into rhinoceros cutlets,
but he ought not to have locked him up! All he had to show for his
pains was the possession of a dried up old Jew. The King, too, would
not at first listen to my representations. We were accordingly obliged
to wait, as the Diet would have been within its right in demanding his
liberation.”
Jacoby’s name brought up that of another congenial mind, viz., Waldeck
(the Radical leader in the Prussian Diet), of whom the Chief gave the
following description: “Something like Favre, always consistent, his
views and decisions cut and dried in advance, and, in addition to that,
a stately presence and a venerable white beard, fine speeches delivered
with the earnestness of deep-toned conviction, even on trifling
matters, that is so impressive! He makes a speech in a voice throbbing
with devotion to principle in order to prove to you that this spoon is
in the glass, and he proclaims that any one who refuses to accept that
statement is a scoundrel! And all the world believes him, and praises
him for his staunchness in every key from treble to bass.”
_Tuesday, January 31st._--The King of Sweden has delivered a bellicose
speech from the throne. Why, ye gods? I write two paragraphs under
instructions from the Chief, and then a third, which calls attention to
the sufferings during the bombardment of a number of inoffensive German
families who, for various reasons, remained behind in Paris after the
expulsion of their fellow countrymen, and commend Washburne, the
United States Minister, for the efforts he made to alleviate the lot
of these unfortunate people. In this respect he has really acted in a
manner that deserves our warmest thanks, and has been loyally assisted
by his subordinates.
The Parisian gentlemen are again here, including Favre, who has sent
a telegram to Gambetta urgently requesting him to yield. It is to be
feared he will not do so. At least the Prefect of Marseilles is showing
his teeth and snarling at poor Favre with the patriotic declaration:
“Je n’obéis plus le capitule de Bismarck. Je ne le connais plus.” Proud
and staunch--but danger is best at a distance.
At tea I hear from Bucher that the Chief has been speaking very
strongly about Garibaldi, that old dreamer, whom Favre declares to be
a hero.
Subsequently Duparc had an interview with the Minister. Shortly after
ten the Chief joined us at tea. He first spoke of the unpractical
character of the Frenchmen who have been working with him during
the past few days. Two Ministers, Favre and Magnin, the Minister of
Finance who has accompanied him this time, spent half an hour to-day
worrying over one telegram. This led him to speak of the French in
general and of the entire Latin race, and to compare them with the
Germanic peoples. “The Germans, the Germanic race,” he said, “is,
so to speak, the male principle throughout Europe--the fructifying
principle. The Celtic and Slav peoples represent the female sex. That
principle extends as far as the North Sea and then across to England.”
I ventured to add: “And also as far as America and the Western States
of the Union, where some of our people form the best part of the
population and influence the manners of the rest.” “Yes,” he replied,
“those are their children, the fruit they bear.” “But that was to
be seen in France while the Franks had still the upper hand. The
Revolution of 1789 was the overthrow of the Germanic element by the
Celtic. And what have we seen since then? And this held good in Spain
so long as the Gothic blood predominated. And also in Italy, where in
the North the Germans also played a leading part. When that element
had exhausted itself, there was nothing decent left. It was much the
same thing in Russia, where the Germanic Waräger, the Ruriks, first
bound them together. As soon as the natives there prevail over the
German immigrants and the Germans of the Baltic Provinces, they fall
asunder into mere communes.” “It is true that the unmixed Germans are
not of much account either. In the south and west where they were
left to themselves, there were only Knights of the Empire, Imperial
Towns, and Immediate Villages of the Empire, each for itself, and all
tumbling to pieces. The Germans are all right when they are forced to
unite--excellent, irresistible, invincible--otherwise each one will
act according to his own ideas.” “Really, after all, an intelligent
absolutism is the best form of government. Without a certain amount
of it everything falls asunder. One wishes this thing and another
that, there is eternal vacillation, eternal delays.” “But we have no
longer any genuine absolutists--that is to say, no kings. They have
disappeared. The variety has died out.” “A Republic is perhaps after
all the right form of government, and it will doubtless come in the
future; but I dislike our Republicans. Formerly things were different,
when princes still appeared in brocaded coats and covered with stars.
They are declining everywhere, and that decline will be much greater in
future. One sees that in the younger generation. It is the case with
us also. No more _rocher de bronce._ They no longer want to govern,
and are glad when some one relieves them of the trouble. All they
care for is to be praised in the newspapers, and to get as much money
as possible for their personal requirements. The only one who still
conducts his business properly is the old King of Saxony.” “And when
they sit at the _table d’hôte_ in the Hôtel des Reservoirs, here near
the Palace of Louis XIV., and every one sees that they are ordinary
human beings--and how ordinary!--why, the halo is quite lost. And then
one fine morning three Grand Dukes pay their respects to me, and find
me in my dressing gown!”
I ventured to relate that as a little child I pictured to myself the
King of Saxony, who was the only monarch I knew of at that time, as
resembling the king in the pack of cards--clad in ermine, and wearing
a crown with orb and sceptre, stiff, gorgeous, and imperturbable:
and that it was a fearful disappointment for me when my nurse once
pointed out to me a gentleman in the passage between the palace and
the Catholic church in Dresden, and told me that that little, crooked,
frail, old man, whose uniform became him so badly, was King Anton. The
Chief said:--“Our peasants also had very curious conceptions, and the
following story was current amongst them. It was to the effect that on
one occasion, when a number of us young people were gathered together
in some public place, we said something against the King, who happened
to be close to us, but was unknown to us. He suddenly stood up,
opened his mantle and showed the star on his breast. The others were
terrified, but it did not affect me, and I pitched him down the stairs.
I received ten years imprisonment for it and was not allowed to shave
myself. As I wore a beard at that time, a habit which I had acquired
in France (1842) where it was then the fashion, it was said that the
executioner came once every year on St. Sylvester’s night to shave it
off. Those who told this story were rich peasants and otherwise not at
all stupid, and they repeated it, not because they had anything against
me but quite in a friendly way, and full of sympathy for a young man’s
rashness. The pitching down stairs was rather a coarse invention, but
I was pleased all the same that it was only to me they gave credit for
not being intimidated by the star.”
I thereupon asked the Chief if there was any truth in the story of the
beer glass he was said to have broken on some one’s head in a Berlin
restaurant because he had insulted the Queen or refused to drink her
health. “It was quite different,” he replied, “and had no political
significance whatever. As I was going home late one evening--it must
have been in the year 1847--I met some one who tried to pick a quarrel
with me. As I pulled him up on account of his language, I discovered
that he was an old acquaintance. We had not seen each other for a
long time, and on his proposing to me, ‘Come, let’s go to ----’ (he
mentioned a name), I went with him, although I really had had enough
already. But after getting our beer he fell asleep. Now there were a
lot of people sitting near us, one of whom had also taken more than he
could carry, and who was attracting attention by his noisy behaviour.
I quietly drank my beer, and this man got angry at my being so quiet
and began to taunt me. I took no notice, and that made him only the
more angry and his language grew more and more violent. I did not want
to have any quarrel, nor did I like to go away, as people would have
thought I was afraid. At last, however, he came over to my table and
threatened to throw the beer in my face. That was too much for me. I
stood up and told him to go away, and as he made a motion to throw
the beer at me, I gave him a blow under the chin, so that he fell
backwards, breaking the chair and the glass, and rolled across the
room right on to the wall. The landlady then came and I told her she
need not worry, as I would pay for the chair and the beer glass. I
said to the others: ‘You are witnesses, gentlemen, that I did not seek
a quarrel, and that I endured it as long as possible. But I cannot
be expected to allow a glass of beer to be poured on my head simply
because I was quietly drinking my glass. If the gentleman has lost a
tooth in consequence I shall be sorry. But I was obliged to defend
myself. Besides, if anybody wishes to know more, here is my card.’ It
turned out that they were quite sensible people and took my view of the
case. They were annoyed with their comrade and acknowledged that I was
in the right. I afterwards met two of them at the Brandenburg Gate. I
said: ‘I think, gentlemen; you were present when I had that affair in
the beer house in the Jägerstrasse. What has happened to my adversary?
I should be sorry if he had been hurt.’ I must explain to you that
he had to be carried away on that occasion. ‘Oh,’ they replied; ‘he
is all right, and his teeth are quite sound again. He is altogether
subdued, and extremely sorry for what he did. He had just entered the
army to serve his year, as he is a doctor, and it would have been very
unpleasant for him if people had heard of the affair, and especially
if it had come to the knowledge of his superiors.’”
The Chief then related that when he was attending the University at
Göttingen he fought twenty-eight students’ duels in three terms,
and was always lucky enough to escape with a whole skin. Once his
opponent’s blade flew off, probably because it was badly screwed in,
and caught him in the face, where it remained sticking. Otherwise he
had never received a scar. “I had one very narrow escape, though, at
Greifswald. There they had introduced an extraordinary head-dress, a
white felt, sugar-loaf hat, and I took it into my head that I must snip
off the top of the sugar-loaf, and thus I exposed myself so that his
blade whizzed by close to my face. I bent back, however, in good time.”
_Wednesday, February 1st._--It was stated at lunch that Gambetta
had approved of the armistice, but expressed surprise that we still
continued to attack the French in the south-east. Favre, with his
unbusinesslike habits, had omitted to telegraph to him that operations
were not suspended there. This, by the way, was at his own request.
There were no guests at lunch. The Minister, speaking about Favre,
said: “I believe he came here to-day merely in consequence of our
conversation of yesterday, when I would not acknowledge that Garibaldi
was a hero. He was evidently anxious about him, because I would not
include him in the armistice. He pointed to the first article like a
thorough lawyer. I said: ‘Yes, that was the rule, but the exceptions
followed, and Garibaldi comes under them.’ I quite understood that a
Frenchman should bear arms against us--he defended his country, and
had a right to do so; but I could not recognise the right of this
foreign adventurer with his cosmopolitan Republic and his band of
revolutionaries from every corner of the earth. He asked me then what
we should do with Garibaldi in case we took him prisoner. ‘Oh,’ I said,
‘we will exhibit him for money, and hang a placard round his neck
bearing the word “Ingratitude.”’”
The Chief then asked: “But where is Scheidtmann?” Somebody told him.
“He will have, I think, to give me legal advice in the matter” (viz.,
the war contribution of two hundred millions to be paid by Paris).
“Is he not a lawyer?” Bucher said no, he had not studied at all, was
originally a tradesman, &c. The Chief: “Well, then, Bleichröder must
first go into action. He must go into Paris immediately, smell and be
smelt at by his brethren in the faith, and discuss with the bankers
how it is to be done. Surely he is coming?” Keudell: “Yes, in a few
days.” The Chief: “Please telegraph him at once, that we want him
immediately--then it will be Scheidtmann’s turn. I suppose he can
speak French?” No one could say. “I am disposed to select Henckel as
the third string. He is well acquainted with Paris, and knows the
financiers. A member of the _haute finance_ once said to me: ‘On the
Stock Exchange we always lay our money on lucky players,’ and if we are
to follow that rule Count Henckel is our man.”
_À propos_ of German unity, the Minister told us that thirty years ago,
at Göttingen, he had made a bet with an American as to whether Germany
would be united within twenty-five years. “The winner was to provide
twenty-five bottles of champagne, and the loser was to cross the ocean
to drink them. The American wagered against union, and I in favour. The
interesting point is that, as far back as 1833, I must have had the
idea which has now, with God’s help, been realised, although at that
time I was opposed to all those who professed to desire such a change.”
Finally, the Chief declared his belief in the influence of the moon on
the growth of the hair and of plants. This subject came up through his
jocularly congratulating Abeken on the style in which his locks had
been trimmed. “You look twice as young, Herr Geheimrath,” he said. “If
I were only your wife! You have had it cut exactly at the right time,
under a crescent moon. It is just the same as with trees. When they are
intended to shoot again they are felled when the moon is in the first
quarter, but when they are to be rooted up then it is done in the last
quarter, as in that case the stump decays sooner. There are people who
will not believe it, learned men, but the State itself acts on this
belief, although it will not openly confess to it. No woodman will
think of felling a birch tree which is intended to throw out shoots
when the moon is waning.”
After dinner I read a number of documents relating to the armistice and
the revictualling of Paris, including several letters in Favre’s own
hand, which is neat and legible. One of the letters states that Paris
has only flour enough to last up to the 4th of February, and after that
nothing but horseflesh. Moltke is requested by the Chief not to treat
Garibaldi on the same footing as the French, and in any case to demand
that he and his followers shall lay down their arms--the Minister
desires this to be done on political grounds. Instructions have been
sent to Alsace that the elections for the Assembly at Bordeaux, which
is to decide as to the continuance of the war, or peace, and eventually
as to the conditions on which the latter is to be concluded, are not to
be hindered, but rather ignored. The elections are to be conducted by
the Maires and not by the Prefects in the districts we occupy.
_Thursday, February 2nd._--We were joined at dinner by Odo Russell,
and a tall stout young gentleman in a dark blue uniform, who, I was
told, was Count Bray, a son of the Minister, and formerly attached
to the Bavarian Embassy in Berlin. The Chief said to Russell: “The
English newspapers and also some German ones have censured my letter
to Favre and consider it too sharply worded. He himself, however, does
not appear to be of that opinion. He said of his own accord: ‘You were
right in reminding me of my duty. I ought not to leave before this is
finished.’ The Minister praised this self-abnegation. He then repeated
that our Parisians were unpractical people and that we had constantly
to counsel and assist them. He added that they now wished apparently to
ask for alterations in the Convention of the 28th of January. Outside
Paris little disposition was shown to help in reprovisioning the city.
The directors of the Rouen-Dieppe railway, for instance, upon whom
they had relied for assistance, declared there was not enough rolling
stock, as the locomotives had been taken to pieces and sent to England.
Gambetta’s attitude was still doubtful, and he seemed to contemplate a
continuation of the war. It was necessary that France should soon have
a proper Government.” “If one is not speedily established I shall give
them a sovereign. Everything is already prepared. Amadeus arrived in
Madrid with a travelling bag in his hand as King of Spain, and he seems
to get on all right. My sovereign will come immediately with a retinue,
Ministers, cooks, chamberlains, and an army.”
With regard to Napoleon’s fortune, very different opinions were
expressed. Some said it was large, others that it was inconsiderable.
Russell doubted if he had much. He thought the Empress at least could
not have much, as she had only deposited £6,000 in the Bank of England.
The Chancellor then related that on the way to Saint Cloud to-day he
met many people removing their furniture and bedding. Probably they
were inhabitants of neighbouring villages, who had nevertheless been
unable to leave Paris. “The women looked quite friendly,” he said,
“but on catching sight of the uniforms the men began to scowl and
struck heroic attitudes. That reminds me that in the old Neapolitan
army they had a word of command, when we say, ‘Prepare to charge,
right!’ the command was ‘Faccia feroce!’ (Look ferocious!). A fine
presence, a pompous style of speech, and a theatrical attitude are
everything with the French. So long as it sounds right and looks well
the substance is a matter of indifference. It reminds me of a citizen
of Potsdam who once told me he had been deeply impressed by a speech of
Radowitz’s. I asked him to show me the passage that had particularly
stirred his feelings. He could not mention one. I then took the speech
itself and read it through to him in order to discover its beauties,
but it turned out that there was nothing in it either pathetic or
sublime. As a matter of fact it was merely the air and attitude of
Radowitz, who looked as if he were speaking of something most profound
and significant and thrillingly impressive,--the thoughtful mien,
the contemplative eye, and the sonorous and weighty voice. It was
much the same with Waldeck, although he was not nearly such a clever
man nor so distinguished looking. In his case it was more the white
beard and the staunch convictions. The gift of eloquence has greatly
spoilt Parliamentary life. A great deal of time is consumed as every
one who thinks he has anything in him wants to speak, even when he
has nothing new to say. There are far too many speeches that simply
float in the air and pass out through the windows, and too few that
go straight to the point. The parties have already settled everything
beforehand, and the set speeches are merely intended for the public,
to show what members can do, and more especially for the newspapers
that are expected to praise them. It will come to this in the end, that
eloquence will be regarded as dangerous to the public welfare, and that
people will be punished for making long speeches. We have one body,”
he continued, “that is not in the least eloquent, and has nevertheless
done more for the German cause than any other, that is the Federal
Council. I remember, indeed, that at first some attempts were made in
that direction. I cut them short, however, though as a matter of fact I
had no right to do so, albeit I was President. I addressed them much as
follows: ‘Gentlemen, eloquence and speeches intended to affect people’s
convictions are of no use here, as every one brings his own convictions
with him in his pocket--that is to say, his instructions. It is merely
waste of time. I think we had better restrict ourselves to statements
of fact.’ And so we did. No one made a big speech after that, business
was speedily transacted, and the Federal Council has really done a
great deal of good.”
_Friday, February 3rd._--In addition to a violently warlike
proclamation, Gambetta has issued a decree declaring a number of
persons ineligible for the new Representative Assembly. “Justice
demands that all those who have been accessory to the acts of the
Government which began with the outrage of the 2nd of December, and
ended with the capitulation of Sedan, should now be reduced to the
same political impotence as the dynasty whose accomplices and tools
they were. That is a necessary consequence of the responsibility which
they assumed in carrying out the Emperor’s measures. These include
all persons who have occupied the positions of Minister, Senator,
Councillor of State, or Prefect from the 2nd of December, 1851, to the
4th of September, 1870. Furthermore, all persons who, in the elections
to the legislative bodies during the period from the 2nd of December,
1851, to the 4th of September, 1870, have been put forward in any way
as Government candidates, as well as the members of those families that
have reigned in France since 1789, are ineligible for election.”
The Chief instructs me to telegraph to London and Cologne with respect
to this decree, that the Government at Bordeaux has declared whole
classes of the population--Ministers, Senators, Councillors of State,
and all who have formerly been official candidates--as ineligible for
election. The apprehension expressed by Count Bismarck during the
negotiations for the Convention of the 28th of January, that freedom of
suffrage could not be secured, has thus been confirmed. In consequence
of that apprehension the Chancellor of the Confederation at that time
proposed the convocation of the Corps Législatif, but Favre would not
agree to it. The Chancellor has now protested in a Note against the
exclusion of these classes. Only an Assembly that has been freely
elected, as provided by the Convention, will be recognised by Germany
as representing France.
Count Herbert Bismarck arrived this evening from Germany.
_Saturday, February 4th._--The Chief has protested against Gambetta’s
decree in a telegram to Gambetta himself and in a note to Favre.
The telegram runs: “In the name of the freedom guaranteed by the
Armistice Convention, I protest against the decree issued in your
name which robs numerous classes of French citizens of the right to
be elected to the Assembly. The rights guaranteed by that Convention
to the freely elected representatives of the country cannot be
acquired through elections conducted under an oppressive and arbitrary
rule.” The despatch to Favre after giving an epitome of Gambetta’s
decree, goes on to say: “I have the honour to ask your Excellency
if you consider this to be in harmony with the stipulation of the
Convention that the Assembly is to be freely elected? Allow me to
recall to your Excellency’s memory the negotiations which preceded the
arrangement of the 28th of January. Already at that time I expressed
the apprehension that in presence of the conditions then prevailing
it would be difficult to secure the entire freedom of the elections,
and to prevent attempts being made to restrict it. In consequence of
that apprehension, the justice of which M. Gambetta’s circular of
to-day seems to confirm, I raised the question whether it would not be
better to convoke the Corps Législatif, which would constitute a legal
authority returned by universal suffrage. Your Excellency declined to
adopt that suggestion and expressly promised that no pressure should
be exercised upon the electors, and that perfect freedom of voting
should be secured. I appeal to your Excellency’s sense of rectitude in
requesting you to say whether the exclusion of whole categories laid
down as a matter of principle in the decree in question is in harmony
with the freedom of election guaranteed in the Convention of the 28th
of January? I believe I may confidently express the hope that the
decree in question, the application of which would appear to be an
infraction of the stipulations of that Convention, will be immediately
withdrawn and that the Government of National Defence will take the
necessary measures to ensure the freedom of election guaranteed by
Article II. We could not grant to persons elected in pursuance of the
Bordeaux decree the rights secured by the Armistice to the members of
the Assembly.”
After 10 o’clock I was called to the Chief, who said: “They complain
in Berlin that the English papers are much better informed than ours,
and that we have communicated so little to our journals respecting the
negotiations for the armistice. How has that come about?” I replied:
“The fact is, Excellency, that the English have more money and go
everywhere to get information. Besides, they stand well with certain
august personages who know everything, and finally the military
authorities are not always very reserved with regard to matters that
ought, for the time being, to be kept secret. I, of course, can
only make public what it is proper that the public should know.”
“Well, then,” he said, “just write and explain how it is that the
extraordinary state of affairs here is to blame, and not we.”
I then took the opportunity of congratulating him on the freedom of the
city of Leipzig, which has been conferred upon him within the last few
days, and I added that it was a good city, the best in Saxony, and one
for which I had always had a great regard. “Yes,” he replied. “Now I
am a Saxon, too, and a Hamburger, for they have also presented me with
the freedom of Hamburg. One would hardly have expected that from them
in 1866.”
As I was leaving he said: “That reminds me--it is also one of
the wonders of our time--please write an article showing up the
extraordinary action of Gambetta, who after posing so long as the
champion of liberty and denouncing the Government for influencing the
elections, is now laying violent hands on the freedom of suffrage. He
wants to disqualify all those who differ from him, _i.e._, the whole
official world of France with the exception of thirteen Republicans.
It is certainly very odd that I should have to defend such a principle
against Gambetta and his associate and ally Garibaldi.” I said: “I do
not know whether it was intended, but in your despatch to Gambetta the
contrast is very striking where you protest, _au nom de la liberté
des élections_ against _les dispositions en votre nom pour priver des
catégories nombreuses du droit d’être élues_.” “Yes,” he replied,
“you might also mention that Thiers, after his negotiations with me,
described me as an amiable barbarian--_un barbare aimable_. Now they
call me in Paris a crafty barbarian--_un barbare astutieux_, and
perhaps to-morrow I shall be _un barbare constitutionnel_.”
The Chief had more time and interest for the newspapers this morning
than during the past few days. I was called to him six times before
midday. On one occasion he handed me a lying French pamphlet, “_La
Guerre comme la font les Prussiens_,” and observed: “Please write to
Berlin that they should put together something of this description
from our point of view, quoting all the cruelties, barbarities, and
breaches of the Geneva Convention committed by the French. Not too much
however, or no one will read it, and it must be done speedily.” Later
on the Minister handed me a small journal published by a certain Armand
le Chevalier at 61 Rue Richelieu, with a woodcut of the Chancellor of
the Confederation as frontispiece. The Chief said: “Look at this.
Here is a man who refers to the attempt by Blind, and recommends that
I should be murdered, and at the same time gives my portrait--like the
photographs carried by the franctireurs. You know that in the forests
of the Ardennes the portraits of our rangers were found in the pockets
of the franctireurs who were to shoot them. Luckily it cannot be said
that this is a particularly good likeness of me--and the biography is
no better.” Then reading over a passage and handing me the paper, he
said: “This portion should be made use of in the press, and afterwards
be introduced in the pamphlet.”
Finally he gave me some more French newspapers saying: “Look through
these and see if there is anything in them for me or for the King.
I must manage to get away or I shall be caught by our Paris friends
again.”
Prince Putbus and Count Lehndorff joined us at dinner. The Chief
related how he had called Favre’s attention to the singular
circumstance that he, Count von Bismarck, who had been denounced as
a tyrant and a despot, had to protest in the name of liberty against
Gambetta’s proclamation. Favre agreed, with a “_Oui, c’est bien
drôle._” The restriction on the freedom of election decreed by Gambetta
has, however, now been withdrawn by the Paris section of the French
Government. “He announced that to me this morning in writing, and he
had previously given me a verbal assurance.”
It was then mentioned that several German newspapers were dissatisfied
with the capitulation, as they expected our troops to march into Paris
at once. “That comes,” said the Chief, “of a complete misapprehension
of the situation here and in Paris. I could have managed Favre, but
the population! They have strong barricades and 300,000 men of whom
certainly 100,000 would have fought. Blood enough has been shed in this
war--enough German blood. Had we appealed to force much more would
have been spilt--in the excited condition of the people. And merely to
inflict one additional humiliation upon them--that would have been too
dearly bought.” After reflecting for a moment, he continued: “And who
told them that we shall not still enter Paris and occupy a portion of
it? Or at least march through, when they have cooled down and come to
reason. The armistice will probably be prolonged, and then, in return
for our readiness to make concessions, we can demand the occupation of
the city on the right bank of the river. I think we shall be there in
about three weeks.” “The 24th”--he reflected for a moment--“yes, it was
on the 24th that the Constitution of the North German Confederation
was made public. It was also on the 24th of February, 1859, that we
had to submit to certain particularly mean treatment. I told them that
it would have to be expiated. _Exoriare aliquis._ I am only sorry that
the Würtemberg Minister to the Bundestag, old Reinhard, has not lived
to see it. Prokesch has though, and I am glad of that, because he was
the worst. According to a despatch from Constantinople, which I read
this morning, Prokesch is now quite in agreement with us, praises the
energies and intelligence of Prussia’s policy, and (here the Minister
smiled scornfully) has always, or at least for a long time past,
recommended co-operation with us.”
The Chief had been to Mont Valérien to-day. “I was never there before,”
he said, “and when one sees the strong works and the numerous
contrivances for defence--we should have terrible losses in storming
it. One dares not even think of it.”
The Minister said one of the objects of Favre’s visit to-day was to
request that the masses of country people who had fled to Paris in
September should be allowed to leave. They were mostly inhabitants of
the environs and there must be nearly 300,000 of them, “I declined
permission,” he continued, “explaining to him that our soldiers now
occupied their houses. If the owners came out and saw how their
property had been wrecked and ruined they would be furious, and no
blame to them, and they would upbraid our people and then there might
be dangerous brawls and perhaps something still worse.” The Chancellor
had also been to St. Cloud, and whilst he was looking at the burnt
palace and recalling to mind the condition of the room in which he had
dined with Napoleon, there was a well-dressed Frenchman there--probably
from Paris--who was being shown round by a man in a blouse. “I could
catch every word they said, as they spoke aloud, and I have sharp ears.
‘C’est l’œuvre de Bismarck,’ said the man in the blouse, but the other
merely replied ‘C’est la guerre.’ If they had only known that I was
listening to them!”
Count Bismarck-Bohlen mentioned that the Landwehr, somewhere in this
neighbourhood, gave a refractory Frenchman, who tried to stab an
officer with a penknife, seventy-five blows with the flat of the sword.
“Seventy-five!” said the Chief. “H’m, that, after all, is somewhat
too much.” Somebody related a similar instance that had occurred in
the neighbourhood of Meaux. As Count Herbert was passing recently, a
miller, who had abused Count Bismarck and said he wished he had him
between two millstones, was laid flat by the soldiers and so fearfully
beaten that he was not able to stir for a couple of hours.
The election addresses posted on the walls by the candidates for the
National Assembly were then discussed, and it was observed that, in
general, they were still very aggressive, and promised to achieve
wonders at Bordeaux. “Yes,” said the Chief; “I quite believe that.
Favre also tried once or twice to ride the high horse. But it did not
last long. I always brought him down with a jesting remark.”
Some one referred to the speech made by Klaczko on the 30th of January
in the Delegation of the Reichsrath against Austria’s co-operation
with Prussia, and to Giskra’s revelation in the morning edition of the
_National Zeitung_ of the 2nd of February. Giskra said that Bismarck
wished to send him from Brünn to Vienna with proposals for peace. These
were, in effect: Apart from the maintenance in Venetia of the _status
quo_ before the war, the Main line was to be recognised as the limit
of Prussian ascendancy, there was to be no war indemnity, but French
mediation was to be excluded. Giskra sent Baron Herring to Vienna with
these proposals. The latter was, however, coolly received by Moritz
Esterhazy, and after waiting for sixteen hours obtained only an evasive
answer. On proceeding to Nikolsburg, Herring found Benedetti already
there, and was told: “You come too late.” As Giskra points out, the
French mediation accordingly cost Austria a war indemnity of thirty
millions. It was observed that Prussia could have extorted more from
Austria at that time, and also a cession of territory, for instance,
Austrian Silesia, and perhaps Bohemia. The Chief replied: “Possibly,
as for money, what more could the poor devils give? Bohemia would
have been something and there were people who entertained the thought.
But we should have created difficulties for ourselves in that way,
and Austrian Silesia was not of much value to us; for just there the
devotion to the Imperial house and the Austrian connection was greater
than elsewhere. In such cases one must ask for what one really wants
and not what one might be able to get.”
In this connection he related that on one occasion, as he was walking
about in mufti at Nikolsburg, he met two policemen who wished to arrest
a man. “I asked what he had done, but of course as a civilian I got no
answer. I then inquired of the man himself, who told me that it was
because he had spoken disrespectfully of Count Bismarck. They nearly
took me along with him because I said that doubtless many others had
done the same.”
“That reminds me that I was once obliged to join in a cheer for myself.
It was in 1866, in the evening, after the entry of the troops. I was
unwell just then, and my wife did not wish to let me go out. I went,
however--on the sly--and as I was about to cross the street again
near the palace of Prince Charles, there was a great crowd of people
collected there, who desired to give me an ovation. I was in plain
clothes, and with my broad brimmed hat pulled down over my eyes, I
perhaps looked like a suspicious character--I don’t know why. As some
of them seemed inclined to be unpleasant, I thought the best thing to
do was to join in their hurrah.”
From 8 P.M. on read drafts and despatches, including Favre’s answer to
the Chief in the matter of Gambetta’s electioneering manœuvre. It runs
as follows:--
“You are right in appealing to my sense of rectitude. You shall never
find it fail me in my dealings with you. It is perfectly true that your
Excellency strongly urged upon me as the sole way out of the difficulty
to convoke the former legislative bodies. I declined to adopt that
course for various reasons which it is needless to recall, but which
you will doubtless not have forgotten. In reply to your Excellency’s
objections, I said I was convinced that my country only desired the
free exercise of the suffrage, and that its sole resource lay in the
popular sovereignty. That will make it clear to you that I cannot agree
to the restrictions that have been imposed upon the franchise. I have
not opposed the system of official candidatures in order to revive it
now for the benefit of the present Government. Your Excellency may
therefore rest assured that if the decree mentioned in your letter to
me has been issued by the Delegation at Bordeaux, it will be withdrawn
by the Government of National Defence. For this purpose I only require
to obtain official evidence of the existence of the decree in question.
This will be done by means of a telegram to be despatched to-day. There
are, therefore, no differences of opinion between us, and we must
both continue to co-operate in resolutely carrying into execution the
Convention which we have signed.”
Called to the Chief at 9 P.M. He wants to have an article written
pointing out that the entry of our troops into Paris is at present
impracticable, but may be possible later on. This is in answer in the
_National Zeitung_ to an article criticising the terms of armistice.
With regard to an article in the _Cologne Volkszeitung_ showing that
the Ultramontanes have offered a subsidy to the leaders of the General
Association of German Workers on condition that they promote the
election of clerical candidates, the Minister says: “Look here. Please
see that the newspapers speak of a ‘Savigny-Bebel party’ whenever an
opportunity occurs, and that must be repeated.” And just as I am going
out of the room he calls after me: “Or the ‘Liebknecht-Savigny party.’”
We take note of that, and shall speak from time to time of this new
party.
_Sunday, February 5th._--We are joined at dinner by Favre, d’Hérisson,
and the Director of the Western Railway, a man with a broad,
comfortable, smiling face, apparently about thirty-six years of
age. Favre, who sits next to the Chief, looks anxious, worried and
depressed. His head hangs on one side, and sometimes for a change sinks
on to his breast, his underlip following suit. When he is not eating,
he lays his two hands on the table-cloth, one on top of the other,
in submission to the decrees of fate, or he crosses his arms in the
style of Napoleon the First, a sign that, on closer consideration, he
still feels confident in himself. During dinner the Chief speaks only
French, and mostly in a low voice, and I am too tired to follow the
conversation.
The Chief instructs me to send the following short paragraph to
one of our newspapers: The _Kölnische Zeitung_ has made itself the
organ, it is true with some reservations, of those who complain of
the alleged destruction of French forests by our officials. One would
think it could have found some other occupation than to scrutinise our
administration of the public forests of France. We act in accordance
with the principles of forestry, even if we do not follow the French
system. Moreover, we should be within our rights if we exploited these
resources of the enemy in the most ruthless manner, as that would
render the French more disposed to conclude peace.
He also warmly praised the active part taken by the Duke of Meiningen
in the conduct of the war. He concluded: “I wish that to be mentioned
in the press. The background is ready to hand in the princely loafing
and palace looting of the rest of them.”
_Monday, February 6th._--The Chief desires to have an article against
Gambetta published in the _Moniteur_. I write the following:--
“The Convention of the 28th of January, concluded between Count von
Bismarck and M. Jules Favre, has revived the hopes of all sincere
friends of peace. Since the events of the 4th of September the
military honour of Germany has received sufficient satisfaction, so
that it may now yield to the desire to enter into negotiations with a
Government which truly represents the French nation for a peace that
will guarantee the fruits of victory and secure our future. When the
Governments represented at Versailles and Paris finally succeeded in
coming to an understanding, of which the conditions were prescribed by
the force of circumstances, and France was restored to herself, they
were justified in expecting that these preliminaries of a new era in
the relations of the two countries would be generally respected. The
decree issued by M. Gambetta disqualifying all former functionaries
and dignitaries, senators, and official candidates from election
to the National Assembly was perhaps necessary to show France the
abyss towards which it has been gravitating since the dictatorship,
sacrificing the best blood of the country, refused to convoke the
representatives of the nation in the regular way.
“The second article of the Convention of the 28th of January shows
clearly and plainly that the freedom of the elections is one of
the conditions of the Convention itself. In entering into such an
arrangement for the elections, Germany only took into consideration the
existing French laws, and not the good will and pleasure of this or
that popular Tribune. It would be just as easy to call together a Rump
Parliament in Bordeaux, and make it a tool for the subjection of the
other half of France. We are convinced that all honourable and sincere
French patriots will protest against the action of the Delegation at
Bordeaux, which is entirely arbitrary and opposed to all sound reason.
If there were any prospect that this action would be allowed to unite
all the anarchical parties who tolerate the dictatorship in so far as
it represents their favourite ideas, the most serious complications
would inevitably ensue.
“Germany does not intend to interfere in any way in the domestic
affairs of France. She has, however, through the agreement of the
28th of January, secured the right to see that a public authority is
established which will possess the attributes necessary to enable it to
negotiate peace in the name of France. If Germany is denied the right
to negotiate for peace with the whole nation, if an attempt is made to
substitute the representatives of a faction for the representatives
of the nation, the armistice convention would thereby become null and
void. We readily acknowledge that the Government of National Defence
has immediately recognised the justice of the complaints made by Count
von Bismarck in his despatch of the 3rd of February. That Government
has addressed itself to the French nation in language marked by
nobility and elevation of feeling, setting forth the difficulties of
the situation and the efforts made to relieve the country from the
last consequences of an unfortunate campaign. At the same time, it
has cancelled the decree of the Delegation at Bordeaux. Let us hope,
therefore, that the action of M. Gambetta will receive no support in
the country, and that it will be possible to conduct the elections in
perfect harmony with the spirit and letter of the Convention of the
28th of January.”
I am called to the Minister again at 11 o’clock, and instructed to
defend Favre against the rabid attacks of some French newspapers. The
Chief says: “They actually take him to task for having dined with me.
I had much trouble in getting him to do so. But it is unfair to expect
that, after working with me for eight or ten hours, he should either
starve as a staunch Republican, or go out to a hotel where the people
would run after him and stare at him.”
The Frenchmen are again here between 2 and 4 P.M. They are six or seven
in number, including Favre and, if I rightly heard the name, General
Leflô. The Chief’s eldest son and Count Dönhoff join us at dinner.
Subsequently I despatch a _démenti_ of a Berlin telegram published by
_The Times_, according to which we propose to demand the surrender
of twenty ironclads and the colony of Pondicherry, together with a
war indemnity of ten milliards of francs. This I describe as a gross
invention which cannot possibly have been credited in England, or have
created any anxiety there. I then hint at the probable source, namely,
the clumsy imagination of an unfriendly and intriguing diplomatist.
“That comes from Loftus,” says the Chief, as he gives me these
instructions. “An ill-mannered fellow who was always seeking to make
mischief with us.”
_Tuesday, February 7th._--From Bucarest despatches it seems as if the
reign of Prince Charles were really coming to a speedy end. With the
retention of Dalwigk at Darmstadt, the old confederacy of opponents of
German unity remains firmly entrenched, and the well-known intrigues
continue unhindered. A telegram from Bordeaux brings the expected
news. Gambetta yesterday announced in a circular to the Prefects that
his Parisian colleagues having annulled his decree with regard to the
elections, he has informed them of his resignation. A good sign. He
can hardly have a strong party behind him or he would scarcely have
resigned.
_Wednesday, February 8th._--The Chief is up at an unusually early hour,
and drives off at 9.45 to see the King. Favre arrives shortly before
1 o’clock, accompanied by a swarm of Frenchmen. There must be ten or
twelve of them. He confers with the Minister after first lunching with
us.
In the evening the Chief and his son dined with the Crown Prince, but
first remained for a while with us. He again observed with satisfaction
that Favre had not taken offence at his “spiteful letter,” but, on
the contrary, had thanked him for it. The Chief had repeated to him
verbally that it was his duty to share the dish which he had helped
to cook. To-day they had discussed the way of raising the Paris war
contribution; the French wanted to pay the greater part of it in bank
notes, and we might lose in that way. “I do not know the value of what
they offer,” he said; “but in any case it is to their advantage. They
must, however, pay the whole amount agreed upon. I will not remit a
single franc.”
_Thursday, February 9th._--Speaking again of the Paris contribution,
the Chancellor observed at dinner: “Stosch tells me he can dispose
of fifty million francs in bank notes to pay for provisions, &c., in
France. We must have proper security, however, for the remaining
hundred and fifty millions.” Then alluding to the foolish story about
our wanting Pondicherry, he continued: “I do not want any colonies at
all. Their only use is to provide sinecures. That is all England at
present gets out of her colonies, and Spain too. And as for us Germans,
colonies would be exactly like the silks and sables of the Polish
nobleman who had no shirt to wear under them.”
CHAPTER XIX
FROM GAMBETTA’S RESIGNATION TO THE CONCLUSION OF THE PRELIMINARIES OF
PEACE
_Friday, February 10th._ Fresh complaints respecting the intrigues
of Dalwigk, and especially the measures for depriving the national
constituencies in Hesse of their representatives and securing the
victory of the Ultramontane and Democratic coalition. The Chief desires
me to see that an “immediate and energetic campaign in the press” is
organised against these and other mischievous proceedings inspired by
Beust’s friends. He also wishes the _Moniteur_ to reprint the long
list of French officers who have broken their parole and escaped from
Germany.
We were joined at dinner by the Duke of Ratibor and a Herr von Kotze,
the husband of the Chief’s niece. Strousberg, a business friend of
the Duke’s, was mentioned, and the Chief observed that nearly all, or
at least very many of the members of the Provisional Government were
Jews: Simon, Cremieux, Magnin, also Picard, whose Semitic origin he
would hardly have suspected, and “very probably Gambetta also, from his
features.” “For the same reason, I suspect even Favre,” he added.
_Saturday, February 11th._--In the morning I read the newspapers,
and particularly certain debates in the English Parliament at the
end of last month. It really looks as if our good friends across the
Channel had a suspicious leaning towards France, and as if they were
not at all disinclined to interfere once more--indeed, in certain
circumstances, an Anglo-French alliance would appear quite possible.
It is a question, however, whether they might not fall between two
stools. A very different result might well ensue. From what one hears
and reads in the newspapers, the feeling in this country is almost as
hostile to the English as to ourselves, and in certain circles more
so. It may well happen that if England adopts a threatening attitude
towards us, we may surprise our cousins in London with the very reverse
of a Franco-English alliance against Germany. We may even be obliged to
seriously consider the forcible restoration of Napoleon, which we have
not hitherto contemplated. According to a telegram of the 2nd inst.,
Bernstorff is to see that these ideas are cautiously ventilated in the
press.
Count Henckel and Bleichröder dined with us. It seems that in the
negotiations with the French financiers, Scheidtmann described them
to their faces in language more vigorous than flattering, talking of
them as pigs, dogs, rabble, &c., in ignorance of the fact that some of
them understood German. The Chief then spoke of the insolence of the
Parisian press, which behaved as if the city were not in our power:
“If that goes on we must tell them that we will no longer stand it. It
must cease, or we shall answer their articles by a few shells from the
forts.” Henckel having alluded to the unsatisfactory state of public
opinion in Alsace, the Chief said that, properly speaking, no elections
ought to have been allowed there at all, and he had not intended to
allow them. But inadvertently the same instructions were sent to the
German officials there as elsewhere. The melancholy situation of the
Prince of Rumania was then referred to, and from the Rumanian Radicals
the conversation turned to Rumanian stocks. Bleichröder said that
financiers always speculated on the ignorance of the masses, and upon
their blind cupidity. This was confirmed by Henckel, who said: “I had a
quantity of Rumanian securities, but after I had made about 8 per cent.
I got rid of them, as I knew they could not yield 15 per cent, and that
alone could have saved them.” The Chief then related that the French
were committing all sorts of fraud in the revictualling of Paris. It
was not out of pride that they refused our contributions, but merely
because they could make no profit out of them. Even members of the
Government were involved, and Magnin was understood to have recently
made 700,000 francs on the purchase of sheep. “We must let them see
that we know that,” said the Chief, glancing at me; “it will be useful
in the peace negotiations.” This was done without delay.
After dinner I wrote some paragraphs on the instructions of the Chief.
The first was to the effect that we ought no longer to tolerate the
insolence of the Parisian journalists. However generous and patient we
might be, it was past endurance that the French press should venture
to deride and insult to his face the victor who stood before the walls
of the capital which he had absolutely in his power. Moreover, such
mendacity and violence would prove an obstacle to the conclusion of
peace, by producing bitterness on both sides and delaying the advent
of a calmer spirit. This could not be foreseen when the armistice
Convention was concluded, and in discussing any prolongation of the
truce, effective means would have to be found for preventing further
provocation of the kind. Undoubtedly the best way would be the
occupation of the city itself by our troops. We should thus relieve
the French Government of a source of grave anxiety, and avert the evil
consequences of inflammatory articles in the press, which they are
perhaps not in a position to repress.
_Sunday, February 12th._--It is announced in a telegram from Cassel
that Napoleon has issued a proclamation to the French. The Minister
handed it to me, saying: “Please have this published in our local
paper. It is in order to lead them astray, so that they may not know
where they stand. But for God’s sake don’t date it from Wilhelmshöhe,
or they will think that we are in communication with him. ‘_Le bureau
Wolff télégraphie._’” The Chief seems to be unwell. He does not come to
dinner.
_Wednesday, February 15th._--I again draw attention in the _Moniteur_
to the disgraceful tone of the Parisian press. I intimate that this
agitation is delaying the conclusion of peace, and that the most
certain way of putting an end to it would be the occupation of Paris.
_Wednesday, February 22nd._--During the last week I have written
a number of articles and paragraphs, and despatched about a dozen
telegrams.
The Assembly at Bordeaux shows a proper appreciation of the position.
It has declined to support Gambetta, and has elected Thiers as chief
of the Executive and spokesman on behalf of France in the negotiations
for peace which began here yesterday. At dinner yesterday, at which we
were joined by Henckel, the Chief remarked, with reference to these
negotiations, “If they were to give us another milliard we might
perhaps leave them Metz, and build a fortress a few miles further back,
in the neighbourhood of Falkenberg or towards Saarbrücken--there must
be some suitable position there. I do not want so many Frenchmen in our
house. It is the same with Belfort, which is entirely French. But the
soldiers will not hear of giving up Metz, and perhaps they are right.”
Generals von Kameke and von Treskow dined with us to-day. The Chief
spoke about his second meeting with Thiers to-day: “On my making that
demand” (what the demand was escaped me), “he jumped up, although he
is otherwise quite capable of controlling himself, and said, ‘Mais
c’est une indignité!’ I did not allow that to put me out, however,
but began to speak to him in German. He listened for a while, and
evidently did not know what to make of it. He then said in a querulous
voice, ‘Mais, Monsieur le Comte, vows savez bien que je ne sais point
l’allemand.’ I replied, speaking in French again, ‘When you spoke just
now of _indignité_ I found that I did not know enough French, and so
preferred to use German, in which I understand what I say and hear.’
He immediately caught my meaning, and wrote down as a concession the
demand which he had previously resented as an _indignité_.”
The Chief continued: “Yesterday he spoke of Europe, which would
intervene if we did not moderate our demands. But I replied, ‘If you
speak to me of Europe I shall speak to you of Napoleon.’ He would not
believe that they had anything to fear from him. I proved the contrary
to him, however. He should remember the plebiscite and the peasantry,
together with the officers and soldiers. It was only under the Emperor
that the Guards could again have the position which they formerly
occupied; and with a little cleverness it could not be difficult
for Napoleon to win over 100,000 soldiers among the prisoners in
Germany. We should then only have to arm them and let them cross the
frontier, and France would be his once more. If they would concede
good conditions of peace we might even put up with one of the Orleans,
though we knew that that would mean another war within two or three
years. If not, we should have to interfere, which we had avoided doing
up to the present, and they would have to take Napoleon back again.
That, after all, must have produced a certain effect upon him, as,
to-day, just as he was going to talk about Europe again, he suddenly
broke off and said, ‘Excuse me.’ For the rest, I like him very well. He
is at least highly intelligent, has good manners, and is an excellent
story-teller. Besides, I often pity him, for he is in an extremely
awkward position. But all that can’t help him in the least.”
With regard to the war indemnity, the Chief said: “Thiers insisted that
fifteen hundred million francs was the maximum, as it was incredible
how much the war had cost them. And in addition to that everything
supplied to them was of bad quality. If a soldier only slipped and fell
down, his trousers went to pieces, the cloth was so wretched. It was
the same with the shoes which had pasteboard soles, and also with the
rifles, particularly those from America.” I replied: “But just imagine,
you are suddenly pounced upon by a man who wants to thrash you, and
after defending yourself and getting the better of him, you demand
compensation--what would you say if he asked you to bear in mind how
much he had had to pay for the stick with which he had intended to beat
you, and how worthless the stick had proved to be? However there is a
very wide margin between fifteen hundred and six thousand millions.”
The conversation then lost itself--I can no longer remember how--in the
depths of the Polish forests and marshes, turning for a while on the
large solitary farm houses in those districts and upon colonisation in
the “backwoods of the east.” The Chief said: “Formerly when so many
things were going wrong--even in private affairs--I often thought that
if the worst came to the worst I would take my last thousand thalers
and buy one of those farms out there and set up as a farmer. But things
turned out differently.”
Later on, diplomatic reports were again discussed, and the Chief, who
seems in general to have a poor opinion of them said: “For the most
part, they are just paper smeared with ink. The worst of it is that
they are so lengthy. In Bernstorff’s case, for instance, when he sends
a ream of paper filled with stale newspaper extracts--why, one gets
accustomed to it! But when some one else writes at interminable length,
and as a rule there is nothing in it, one becomes exasperated. As for
using them some day as material for history, nothing of any value will
be found in them. I believe the archives are open to the public at
the end of thirty years--but it might be done much sooner. Even the
despatches which do contain information are scarcely intelligible to
those who do not know the people and their relations to each other. In
thirty years time who will know what sort of a man the writer himself
was, how he looked at things, and how his individuality affected the
manner in which he presented them? And who has really an intimate
knowledge of the people mentioned in his reports? One must know what
Gortschakoff, or Gladstone, or Granville had in his own mind when
making the statements reported in the despatch. It is easier to find
out something from the newspapers, of which indeed governments also
make use, and in which they frequently say much more clearly what they
want. But that also requires a knowledge of the circumstances. The most
important points, however, are always dealt with in private letters
and confidential communications, also verbal ones, and these are not
included in the archives.
“The Emperor of Russia, for instance, is on the whole very friendly to
us--from tradition, for family reasons, and so on--and also the Grand
Duchesse Hélène, who influences him and watches him on our behalf. The
Empress, on the other hand, is not our friend. But that is only to be
ascertained through confidential channels and not officially.”
_Thursday, February 23rd._--We retain Metz, but not Belfort. It has
been practically decided that a portion of our army shall enter Paris.
And I write the following intimation for the _Moniteur_:--
“The arrogance with which the Parisian press insults and abuses the
victorious German army that stands outside the gates of the capital
has been frequently stigmatised by us as it deserves. We have likewise
pointed out that the occupation of Paris by our troops would be the
most effectual means of putting an end to this sort of insolence. At
the present moment these lies and calumnies and provocations know
no bounds. For instance, the _Figaro_ of the 21st of February, in
a feuilleton entitled ‘Les Prussiens en France,’ and signed Alfred
d’Aunay, charges German officers and the Germans in general with the
most disgraceful conduct such as theft and pillage. We learn that these
proceedings, which we forbear to characterise, have entirely frustrated
the efforts made by the Parisian negotiators to prevent the German
army entering into Paris. We are positively assured that the entry of
the German forces into the French capital will take place immediately
after the expiration of the armistice.”
_Friday, February 24th._--Thiers and Favre were here from 1 to 5.30
P.M. After they left, the Duc de Mouchy and the Comte de Gobineau were
announced. The object of their visit was to complain of the oppressive
action of the German Prefect at Beauvais, who is apparently rather
harsh, or at least not very conciliatory or indulgent. The Chief came
to dinner in plain clothes for the first time during the war. Is
this a sign that peace has been concluded? He again complained that
when he went to see the King, the Grand Dukes, “with their feminine
curiosity, pestered him with questions.” With regard to the deputation
from Beauvais, Hatzfeldt said that Mouchy and Gobineau were both
sensible men and Conservatives, and that our Prefect, Schwarzkoppen,
bullied them and the other notables of the town and neighbourhood in an
unpardonable way. Amongst other things, two days before the expiration
of the term on which a contribution of two millions was to be paid,
they brought him a million and a half and said that the balance would
follow shortly, whereupon he told them brutally that he was there for
the purpose of ruining them and meant to do so, and he threatened to
have them locked up in order to “coerce” them, which was not in the
least necessary. The Chief was very angry and called Schwarzkoppen a
“blockhead.”
_Saturday, February 25th._--Unpleasant news has again been received
from Bavaria. Werther (who, it is true, is described by Bucher as
unreliable and a visionary) writes that Count Holnstein regards the
condition of King Lewis with very great anxiety. Prince Adalbert, who
combines “the Wittelsbach haughtiness with Jesuitry,” is inciting him
against us. He asserts that he signed the treaties under pressure.
Before every Court dinner and even before every audience he drinks
large quantities of the strongest wines, and then says the most
extraordinary things to every one without distinction of persons.
He wants to abdicate and leave the crown to his brother Otto, who,
however, has no wish for it, and he is always inquiring about deadly
poisons, &c. The Ultramontanes are aware of all this, and their
candidate for the Reichstag, Prince Luitpold, is also their candidate
for the throne, and they mean to get him chosen in spite of Prince
Otto’s claims.
_Wednesday, March 1st._--In the morning I crossed the bridge of boats
at Suresnes to the Bois de Boulogne where, from the half-ruined stand
on the racecourse, I saw the Emperor review the troops before they
marched into Paris.
We were joined at dinner by Mittnacht, and the Würtemberg Minister,
von Wächter, who was formerly attached to the Embassy in Paris, and
while there did his utmost against Prussia. The Chief said he had
ridden in to Paris, and was recognised by the populace, but there
was no demonstration against him. He rode up to one man who looked
particularly vicious, and asked him for a light, which he willingly
gave.
The Chancellor afterwards took occasion once more to speak his mind out
on the obtrusiveness of certain princely personages. “They are like
flies,” he said, “there is no getting rid of them. But Weimar is the
worst of the lot. He said to me to-day, ‘Please tell me where did you
disappear to so quickly yesterday? I should have been glad to put some
further questions to you.’ I replied, ‘That was exactly it, your Royal
Highness. I had business to do, and could not enter into a lengthy
conversation.’ He fancies that the whole world has been created merely
for his sake, for his amusement, the improvement of his education,
and the satisfaction of his curiosity, which is insatiable, and he has
absolutely no tact.” Somebody observed that as a rule when he talks
he does not think of what he says, but rather repeats phrases that he
has learnt by rote. Mittnacht told another story about this august
personage. “Some one was introduced to him: ‘Ah, very pleased indeed, I
have heard so much to your credit. Let me see, what was it I heard?’”
_Thursday, March 2nd._--Favre arrived this morning at 7.30 A.M., and
wished to be shown in to the Chief. Wollmann declined to wake him,
however, at which the Parisian Excellency was very indignant. Favre
wanted to inform the Chancellor of the news he had received during
the night that the National Assembly at Bordeaux had ratified the
preliminaries of peace, and thereupon to ask that Paris and the forts
on the left bank of the Seine should be evacuated. This request was
submitted in a letter which he left behind him.
_Sunday, March 5th._--We leave to-morrow, first going to Lagny and
thence to Metz. The Chief is present at dinner. The conversation first
turned upon our landlady, Madame Jesse, who put in an appearance either
to-day or yesterday and made a variety of complaints to the Minister as
to the damage we are supposed to have done to her property. He replied
that was the way in war, particularly when people deserted their homes.
Besides she had reasons to be thankful that she had got off so easily.
The little table on which the Treaty of Peace was signed is to be
taken with us to Germany. Taglioni, who is to remain behind a few days
with the King, is instructed to have it replaced by an exactly similar
piece of furniture. In speaking of the preparations for our departure
the Chief says: “Kühnel thinks we ought not to travel by night, as
Lorraine will be haunted, and they might lay something on the rails.”
I replied, “Then I will travel incognito as the Duke of Coburg. Nobody
owes him a grudge. He is regarded as perfectly innocent--and with
justice.”
_Monday, March 6th._--A lovely morning. Thrushes and finches warble the
signal for our departure. At 1 o’clock the carriages get under way,
and with light hearts we drive off towards the gate that we entered
five months ago, and passed Villa Coublay, Villeneuve Saint Georges,
Charenton, and La Fasanerie to Lagny, where we take up our quarters for
the night.
We leave here next day by a special train for Metz, where we arrive
late at night. We put up at an hotel, while the Chief stays with Count
Henckel at the Prefecture. Next morning we stroll through the town,
visit the cathedral, and survey the neighbourhood from the bastions of
the fortress. Shortly before 11 o’clock we are again in the train, and
travel by Saarbrücken and Kreuznach to Mainz, and thence to Frankfurt.
The Chief has an enthusiastic reception everywhere along the line
and particularly at Saarbrücken and Mainz. Frankfurt is the only
exception. We arrive there at a late hour, and start again in the
night. At 7.30 on the following morning we reach Berlin, after exactly
seven months’ absence. All things considered, everything has been done
during those seven months which it was possible to do.
FOOTNOTES
[1] Strictly speaking, _almost_ complete, as some passages must still
be omitted for the present.
[2] The despatch was understood to contain a sentence to the effect
that Rome should take care not to challenge Europe, and that whatever
the Church might say, the Austrian Courts of Justice would not allow
themselves to be influenced into according any indulgence towards those
who broke the laws or instigated others to do so.
[3] At that time it had only been accepted by the Committee of the
House of Commons,--without any important amendments however, and its
adoption on a third reading was assured. It is true, objections were
raised. Gladstone very characteristically observed that the law now
only empowered the Administration to proceed against incitements to
treasonable _action_; it was, however, necessary to provide for the
punishment of attempts by the press to create a “treasonable state of
mind” amongst the people. The sole concession made by the Government
was that the threatened measures should not be put into execution until
warning (once only) had been given.
[4] The loyal Hanoverian circles did not tell the truth in this matter.
Stoffel’s reports were, on the whole, good, and he himself was a man of
respectable character.
[5] Not quite correct, according to a subsequent statement of the
Minister’s and Count Bill’s own account.
[6] Louis de Condé was treacherously murdered on the 12th of March,
1569, after the engagement at Jarnac, just as he had delivered up his
sword to an officer of the royal army, being shot by one Montesquieu,
a captain of the Guards.
[7] These particulars are worked up into the preceding chapter.
[8] In presence of later events he can hardly have expressed himself in
this way.
[9] The Würtemberger was Von Reinhard, and the Darmstadter Von
Munch-Bellinghausen, both determined opponents of Prussia.
[10] Compare this passage with the speech delivered by Bismarck in the
United Diet on the 15th of June, 1847. On that occasion he said, “I
am of opinion that the conception of the Christian state is as old as
the so-called Holy Roman Empire, as old as all the European States,
and that it is exactly the ground in which those States have struck
deep roots; and further, that each State that wishes to secure its
own permanence, or even if it merely desires to prove its right to
existence, must act upon religious principles. The words ‘By the grace
of God,’ which Christian rulers add to their names, are for me no mere
empty sound. On the contrary, I recognise in them the confession that
Princes desire to wield the sceptre with which God has invested them
in accordance with His Will.” Certain remarks made by the Chancellor
in his speech of the 9th of October, 1878, during the debate on the
Anti-Socialist Bill, should also be remembered in this connection. He
said, _inter alia_: “If I had come to believe as these men (the Social
Democrats) do--yes, I live a full and busy life and am in opulent
circumstances--but that would not be sufficient to make me wish to
live another day if I had not, in the words of the poet, ‘an Gott und
bessere Zukunft Glauben’ (faith in God and a better future).”
[11] It was a report from Mohl, originally intended, for his Government
at Carlsruhe, which was communicated to the Chief, under whose
instructions extracts therefrom were utilised in the press.
[12] At that time Secretary of State in the Foreign Office. He was not
a Catholic.
[13] Bucher afterwards told me that the Chancellor was affected both
by the superstition respecting the number thirteen and that relating
to Friday. Other diplomats, as, for instance, the French, seem to
entertain the same objection both to the number and the day. The
following anecdote, which I was assured was perfectly genuine, may
serve as an example. After the negotiations respecting the duty payable
by ships passing through the Sound had been completed, it was arranged
that the treaty containing the terms agreed upon should be signed at
Copenhagen on the 13th of March, 1587. It turned out that the day thus
chosen was not only the thirteenth of the month, but was also a Friday,
and that there were thirteen Plenipotentiaries to sign the document. “A
threefold misfortune!” exclaimed the French Ambassador Dotezac. To his
delight, however, the addition of the signatures was postponed for some
days owing to difficulties occasioned by the difference in the rate of
exchange of Danish and Prussian thalers. The number of representatives
still caused him so much anxiety, however, that it made him ill, and
it was only on the decease of the Hanoverian Plenipotentiary a few
weeks later that the French Ambassador and the other signatories of the
treaty felt that they were no longer in danger of sudden death.
[14] Walker, the English Kutusow of Count Bismarck-Bohlen, H. B.
M.’s Military Plenipotentiary at headquarters, was not held in much
estimation by the Chancellor and his _entourage_.
[15] These suspicions, though fully justified by appearances, were
subsequently shown to be for the greater part unfounded, except that
there was inadequate provision for the requirements of the wounded.
I reproduce the episode as evidence of the Minister’s usual humane
feeling and love of justice.
[16] A reference to the popular Thuringian ballad of “The Landgrave and
the Smith.”
[17] His greeting to those who brought him the news of his election as
Emperor while he was netting birds in the forest.
[18] Thun, Rechberg and Prokesch held in succession the position of
Austrian Minister to the Bundestag.
[19] The communication referred to is a letter by Thomas Carlyle
published in _The Times_ of November 18, in which it occupied two and a
half columns. The passages quoted by Dr. Busch are here reproduced from
the original:--
“The question for the Germans, in this crisis, is not one of
‘magnanimity,’ of ‘heroic pity and forgiveness to a fallen foe,’ but of
solid prudence and practical consideration what the fallen foe will, in
all likelihood, do when once on his feet again. Written on her memory,
in a distinctly instructive manner, Germany has an experience of 400
years on this point; of which on the English memory, if it ever was
recorded there, there is now little or no trace visible.... No nation
ever had so bad a neighbour as Germany has had in France for the last
400 years; bad in all manner of ways; insolent, rapacious, insatiable,
unappeasable, continually aggressive.... Germany, I do clearly believe,
would be a foolish nation not to think of raising up some secure
boundary fence between herself and such a neighbour now that she has
the chance. There is no law of nature that I know of, no Heavens Act
of Parliament whereby France, alone of terrestrial beings, shall not
restore any portion of her plundered goods when the owners they were
wrenched from have an opportunity upon them.... The French complain
dreadfully of threatened ‘loss of honour’; and lamentable bystanders
plead earnestly, ‘Don’t dishonour France; leave poor France’s honour
bright.’ But will it save the _honour_ of France to refuse paying for
the glass she has voluntarily broken in her neighbour’s windows. The
attack upon the windows was her dishonour. Signally disgraceful to
any nation was her late assault on Germany; equally signal has been
the ignominy of its execution on the part of France. The honour of
France can be saved only by the deep repentance of France, and by
the serious determination never to do so again--to do the reverse
of so for ever henceforth.... For the present, I must say, France
looks more and more delirious, miserable, blamable, pitiable and even
contemptible. She refuses to see the facts that are lying palpably
before her face, and the penalties she has brought upon herself. A
France scattered into anarchic ruin, without recognisable head; _head_,
or chief, indistinguishable from _feet_, or rabble; Ministers flying
up in balloons ballasted with nothing else but outrageous public
lies, proclamations of victories that were creatures of the fancy; a
Government subsisting altogether on mendacity, willing that horrid
bloodshed should continue and increase rather than that they, beautiful
Republican creatures, should cease to have the guidance of it; I know
not when and where there was seen a nation so covering itself with
_dis_honour.... The quantity of conscious mendacity that France,
official and other, has perpetrated latterly, especially since July
last, is something wonderful and fearful. And, alas! perhaps even that
is small compared to the self-delusion and _un_conscious mendacity long
prevalent among the French.... To me at times the mournfullest symptom
in France is the figure its ‘men of genius,’ its highest literary
speakers, who should be prophets and seers to it, make at present, and,
indeed, for a generation back have been making. It is evidently their
belief that new celestial wisdom is radiating out of France upon all
the other overshadowed nations; that France is the new Mount Zion of
the universe; and that all this sad, sordid, semi-delirious, and, in
good part, _infernal_ stuff which French literature has been preaching
to us for the last fifty years is a veritable new Gospel out of Heaven,
pregnant with blessedness for all the sons of men.... I believe
Bismarck (_sic_) will get his Alsace and what he wants of Lorraine,
and likewise that it will do him, and us, and all the world, and even
France itself by and by, a great deal of good.... (Bismarck) in fact
seems to me to be striving with strong faculty, by patient, grand and
successful steps, towards an object beneficial to Germans and to all
other men. That noble, patient, deep, and solid Germany should be at
length welded into a nation and become Queen of the Continent, instead
of vapouring, vain-glorious, gesticulating, quarrelsome, restless and
over-sensitive France, seems to me the hopefullest public fact that has
occurred in my time.”--THE TRANSLATOR.
[20] The King.
[21] The Crown Prince.
END OF VOL. I.
RICHARD CLAY AND SONS, LIMITED, LONDON AND BUNGAY.
Transcriber's Notes
The following changes have been made to the text as printed. In
cases of doubt, recourse has been had to the original German work
(_Tagebuchblätter_).
1. Obvious typographical errors have been corrected.
2. Errors in use of quote marks and other punctuation have been
corrected.
3. In cases of inconsistent spelling of German and French names, the
spelling used in the original language has been preferred. Examples
include changing "Frankfort" to "Frankfurt", "Mayence" to "Mainz",
"Rheims" to "Reims", "Delbruck" to "Delbrück". However, where the
English text is consistent in spelling, that spelling has been retained
("Cologne", "Munich", "Jahrbuecher").
4. Where a word is used repeatedly in the same way, hyphenation has
been made consistent, preferring the form most often used in the printed
work, or failing that the more usual form in general use at the time of
publication.
5. Page 113: "the result would not been" has been changed to "the
result would not have been".
*** End of this LibraryBlog Digital Book "Bismarck: some secret pages of his history (Vol. 1 of 3)" ***
Copyright 2023 LibraryBlog. All rights reserved.