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.