BLEICHRÖDER AND GERMAN DIPLOMACY IN CONSTANTINOPLE--FURTHER
INTERVIEWS WITH THE CHANCELLOR--RELATIONS WITH RUSSIA AND
AUSTRIA--THE GABLENTZ MISSION--QUEEN VICTORIA--AN UNPLEASANT
EPISTLE--A SEVERE REPRIMAND--BISMARCK COLLABORATES WITH
ME--BUCHER’S JOURNEY WITH SALAZAR--A PRESS CAMPAIGN AGAINST
ENGLAND--DOCUMENTS AND ARTICLES ON SOUTH AFRICAN QUESTIONS.
On the morning of Monday, the 27th of November, 1882, I called upon
Bucher to hand him a packet with two articles and a letter to be
forwarded to the Prince at Varzin, which he promised to do. The
latter ran as follows:--
“Hochverehrter Herr Reichskanzler,
“Every man has his own ambition. Mine consists in studying and
giving as true as possible a picture of your Serene Highness. I am
accordingly about to write a new book respecting you in which the
more important material scattered through my previous book will
be brought together and supplemented from my own observation, and
such sources as the letters in Hesekiel’s work, and the despatches
published by Poschinger and in Hahn’s collection. It will not be
a biography, but only a detailed character sketch, in a number
of chapters, such as Bismarck and Parliamentarism, Bismarck and
the German Question, Bismarck and Religion, the Legend of Junker
Bismarck, Bismarck and the Diplomatists, Bismarck and the Social
Problem, Bismarck as Public Speaker and Humorist, Bismarck and
Austria, France, Russia and the Poles, and, finally, Bismarck in
Private Life. The way in which I propose to treat the subject will
appear from the two articles herewith enclosed, which I would beg you
to regard as mere preliminary studies. The first of these, ‘Bismarck
as a Junker,’ being a harmless sketch, has already been published
in the monthly periodical, _Aus Allen Zeiten und Landen_, and the
second, ‘Bismarck and Religion,’ is to appear in the _Grenzboten_.
In case of new material coming into my possession both shall be
re-written for the book, the object of which is to assist the future
historian, and at the same time to be useful to yourself. Everything
calculated to interfere with the latter purpose shall be omitted. It
is highly desirable that I should receive your Serene Highness’s help
in the course of the work. I therefore venture most respectfully to
recall the fact that Hesekiel was greatly assisted in this way, and
that your Serene Highness in 1873 held out hopes to me of similar
assistance. Moreover, as many parts of the book will certainly
produce the impression that the author is well informed, it is to be
feared that should it at the same time contain errors, the public may
also accept them as true.
“I therefore beg in the first place that the two specimen articles
may be kindly revised and returned to me, supplemented with as much
new material as possible, and, where needful, corrected. I would
afterwards, with your permission, send in from time to time legibly
written copies of other chapters, and crave the same consideration
for them.
“It may be said that such books should not be written during the
lifetime of the person described. I take the liberty of rejoining
that they can be best done at that time, if confidence is reposed
in the writer, as he can then obtain fuller information than can be
found in archives, the contents of which are not always, later on,
rightly understood by every one.
“Should your Serene Highness desire to communicate verbally with me
on the matter, I am ready at all times to obey your commands without
delay.
“Your Serene Highness’s most respectful and devoted
“Dr. Moritz Busch.
“Berlin, _November 26th, 1882_.”
At 11.30 A.M. on the 1st of December, Bucher called upon me to return
the two articles that had been sent to Varzin, namely, “Bismarck as a
Junker” and “Bismarck and Religion.” He at the same time communicated
to me the contents of a letter from Count Herbert, to the effect that
the Prince had read the articles through, and had said with regard
to the second that he could communicate nothing on a matter of so
personal a character; and that he could not remember having made the
statement on page 2 that he had “brought about three great wars.”
It might be possible to insert the word “perhaps” in that sentence.
His (Herbert’s) personal opinion was that nothing more ought to be
written about his father, and if he had any influence with me he
would use it in this direction. I explained to Bucher that if the
Prince himself had asked me not to publish anything more about him,
I should most _probably_ forbear to do so, but that Herbert had no
claim to any influence upon me. “What is Hecuba to me?” I concluded.
_December 19th._--Received the following letter from Bucher:--
“A horrible cough has deprived me of my night’s rest for the past
fortnight, but I am a little better since yesterday. As you do not
read many of the newspapers, I send you two extracts which will
furnish material for the history of the morals of our time.
“1. _Norddeutsche Allgemeine Zeitung_, of the 15th instant.--The
following in print:--‘_Herr Justizrath_ Primker is returning to
Constantinople in order to join the Council for the administration
of the Turkish State Debt in connection with the establishment of
the tobacco monopoly and the unification of the Debt. The reports
received from various correspondents respecting that gentleman’s
failure or success in connection with any other financial mission are
all erroneous. How far the investigations made by _Herr Justizrath_
Primker respecting matters of commerce and means of communication
in the East may be utilised in the interest of German capital
remains a question for the future.’” Bucher then goes on to say:
“Unquestionably prepared by Bleichröder, and intended to serve as
a kind of official credentials for his agent. You are sufficiently
acquainted with the position of that newspaper to know that such an
article would not have been accepted unless some one in the Foreign
Office (Hatzfeldt) had had the matter in hand.
“2. _Deutsches Tageblatt_ of the 19th instant.--The following also
in print:--‘We are pleased to learn from an incidental paragraph in
the _Norddeutsche Allgemeine Zeitung_ that _Justizrath_ Primker, one
of Messrs. Bleichröder’s agents for international transactions,
has had and has no other financial mission in Constantinople
than to represent their firm. We are glad to see this statement
in the _Norddeutsche Allgemeine Zeitung_, because--as one of our
well-informed Vienna correspondents has shown--_Justizrath_ Primker
has contrived in Constantinople to make it appear as if he were on
the staff of the German Embassy, and as if the German Government were
backing him up with all its influence and approval, a circumstance
which we should deeply regret, as Primker’s efforts are directed to
promoting the interests of Bleichröder and of the notorious Baron
Hirsch, and do not tend to the furtherance of the general interests
of the German Empire on the Bosphorus. Herr Primker is again going to
Constantinople, ostensibly to take part in the work of the Council
of the Turkish Public Debt in introducing the tobacco monopoly
administration and unifying the State Debt. The Council, as is
well known, has charge of the interests of the European creditors
of Turkey, and with this object supervises the administration of
the Turkish Public Debt. It protects, however, only the interests
of the larger creditors, as is shown by the attitude adopted by
Herr Primker, who knew how to secure all the advantages for Herr
Bleichröder and his partners, while entirely neglecting the claims
of the poorer holders of Turkish securities in Germany, so that they
actually came off worst of all in the arrangements ultimately made.
And yet it was these who ought to have been considered in the very
first place, as the net receipts of the Turkish railways amounted
to about four million francs, a sum which was sufficient to provide
for a fair interest on the securities. It is well known, however,
that Baron Hirsch is still able to withhold these receipts from the
Turkish Administration, and is assisted in doing so by his business
friend, Herr Bleichröder, who is quite indifferent as to whether
the interests of others and particularly of German creditors suffer
thereby. One hawk does not peck out another hawk’s eyes. Even if we
can do nothing to remedy this state of affairs, we can at least help
people to recognise the bird by its feathers.’ (Bucher’s letter now
follows once more.) I am sufficiently acquainted with the management
of this paper to know that such an article must at least have been
sanctioned in a higher quarter (Bismarck).”
_December 20th._--The day before yesterday I wrote to the Imperial
Chancellor begging for an interview, and in case there were anything
to mention in the press to supply me with the necessary information.
At 1.30 P.M. to-day a Chancery attendant brought me a letter from
_Hofrath_ Sachse, marked “Urgent,” in which Bismarck “requested me to
be good enough to visit him this afternoon at 4 o’clock.” I went to
the palace at the time appointed. Theiss showed me in to the Prince,
with whom I remained for three-quarters of an hour. He had a white
beard, and was sitting at his writing-table. After reaching me his
hand he said: “You have doubtless come with great expectations, and
think I shall have something to say to you about the article in the
_Kölnische Zeitung_--the one on Russian armaments.” I asked: “Did
that come from here?”
He: “No, not from me; but from the military authorities.”
I: “And the statements are correct?”
He: “Certainly. They are constructing many more railways than they
require for trade and traffic, and the garrisons in the western
towns and fortresses have been placed almost upon a war footing. I
should not be surprised if there were a war with them next year. The
Bourse has also shown itself much concerned, but I believe that the
fall in quotations arises rather from anxiety respecting France. But
(he continued) you have been indiscreet in the _Grenzboten_ in your
reference to the alliance with Austria. It has been very awkward for
them (in Austria), for the Hungarian Diet can now come and demand
information on the subject.”
I replied: “I thought that the matter had gradually leaked out. Three
or four months ago some one, I forget now who it was, said to me that
everybody now knew that a formal alliance existed, and not a mere
memorandum. Perhaps my informant had it from Vienna. I was therefore
of opinion that it could do no harm, and might possibly be of use if
I mentioned it incidentally, as I did in the _Grenzboten_ article,
and I was quite astounded when all the newspapers wrote leading
articles upon it. I must be very much mistaken if I have not seen
something similar elsewhere.”
“Yes,” he said; “but it was a State secret, and if you had only
remembered from whom you had it, an inquiry might well be instituted.
It is quite possible that something of the kind had already been
said elsewhere; and if what you wrote had appeared in another paper,
perhaps no one would have taken any notice of it. But you have given
the _Grenzboten_ such a nimbus that it is placed on a level with
the Official Gazette. That is not good for you as a writer. You are
regarded as, in the highest degree, inspired.”
I: “That is a matter of indifference to me. It only excites hatred
and envy; and I have never associated with the local journalists.”
“Well,” he said, smiling, “you can destroy this nimbus if you will
only write something thoroughly silly.”
I: “And if you then have a vigorous _démenti_ inflicted upon me.”
He: “But, seriously, you can to a certain extent correct the
statement which you blurted out inadvertently, by saying that in
doing so you believed you were only repeating what was already known;
and you might go on to add a number of useful observations, as, for
instance, that, if the alliance did not actually exist, it ought to
be brought about, as it would be of great advantage and would fulfil
the requirements of two peace-loving Powers--and, further, that
we should very much regret the truth of the assertion made by the
_Kölnische Zeitung_ that it had only been concluded for five years;
in that case it should be extended over a longer period. Finally,
it would be in accordance with the interests of both Empires to
strengthen and consolidate the good political relations existing
between them by closer commercial relations on a treaty basis.”
He then returned to the question of the Russian armaments, and said,
_inter alia_: “Now I am to assist! But they can settle the matter
themselves. Three years ago I made proposals to them which they would
not accept. Now let _them_ settle it!”
He reflected for a while, and then suddenly exclaimed: “Can you find
us money, and rid us of the bailiff?... Parliament will not agree
to the licensing tax, not even the Conservatives, each one of whom
is cleverer than the other, while they are all of them wiser than
the Government. Here there is nothing but discord, and the majority
are blockheads. What is the use of their Conservatism when they will
not support us? A progressive income tax is unjust, and would not
be of much assistance, but an equitable income tax would be good
and useful. That can be obtained by self-assessment, and it would
in a short time cover the deficit in the four classes. The higher
classes--14,000--pay about seven million marks, and to double that
amount would be oppressive, it would mean a tax of 26 per cent. The
capitalist is either a mortgagee, and if his taxes are raised, he
turns upon his debtor and raises his interest to 5 or 5½ per cent.
interest, instead of 4; or a loan and debenture company, and then
its securities would lose as much in value as the tax amounts to;
or a holder of industrial shares, and then the tax might reduce or
indeed destroy the export trade in the manufactured article. The
State cannot tax its own securities, and therefore there only remain
foreign securities and railway shares. People are not afraid of the
capitalist, but only of the tobacconist, the wine merchant, and the
brewer. Of the capitalist one may say:--
“‘I prithee take thy fingers from my throat;
For though I am not splenetive and rash,
Yet have I in me something dangerous,
Which let thy wisdom fear!’
“If the Conservatives were at one with the Government all would be
well. As it is, however, we shall doubtless be obliged to dissolve
again in February, and then there will not be so many Conservatives
returned. The King has so far committed himself that he can no longer
govern with the bailiff. His position is most painful, and he will
ultimately ask the country again and again whether the bailiff is to
be retained.”
He then spoke about Wedell-Malchoff’s motion for taxing time
bargains on the Bourse. In his opinion it was not a bad idea, but
the phrase “time bargains” should be defined, and in such a way
as not to include genuine transactions in rye and spirits or cash
transactions. Furthermore, it should start, not with two per mille,
but, as the Government had proposed, with one per mille. The latter
would be feasible, and of course once a beginning had been made it
could be raised. The mistake here was that they were trying to get
at dishonest transactions, and thus to introduce a moral tax, whilst
such transactions could not possibly be defined or reached. The
Chancellor’s statements were somewhat to the foregoing effect. More I
cannot say, as I did not understand all these financial explanations,
in which he doubtless credited me with more technical knowledge and
capacity than I possess to supplement their purport.
In the course of his remarks he mentioned Bleichröder’s name, and
I asked whether he had noticed certain hints that Bleichröder’s
schemes with regard to the Turkish tobacco monopoly and railways were
being promoted by German diplomacy. He denied the fact. It was true,
indeed, that in the Rumanian affair Bleichröder had been supported,
because, in that instance, in addition to some distinguished
gentlemen, a great number of small investors were concerned. Of the
former he mentioned Ujest, and, if I am not mistaken, Lehndorff.
There Bleichröder had really done good service, “gallantly risking
his money, and it was for that reason that he had been ennobled by
the King.” Primker, on the other hand, he described as “clever but
unscrupulous.” As to the Austrian Government, he observed that they
had committed themselves too far with Hirsch.
We finally came to speak about his neuralgia, which caused him a
great deal of pain. I suggested that it probably came from a bad
tooth.
He: “Others have thought the same, but the doctor has hammered at all
my teeth, and says they are sound. No, it is a nervous affection,
muscular pain, particularly when I am worried and excited. That is
why I do not attend the Parliamentary sittings; for what a delight it
would be to certain people if, in the middle of a speech, I suddenly
made a wry face, and were unable to proceed!” He dismissed me with
the words: “Adieu, Büschlein, auf Wiedersehen! But take care to avoid
further indiscretions.”
_January 14th, 1883._--Called this morning on Bucher to give him my
new address.
Bucher then expressed a hope that the Bleichröder swindle, which was
becoming more and more widely known, would ultimately be mentioned in
the Reichstag. I told him that, in speaking to the Chief recently,
I had referred to certain newspaper articles on the subjects, and
that he declared he knew nothing of diplomatic influence having
been exercised in that way at Constantinople, and had, moreover,
praised Bleichröder’s action in the Rumanian affair. Bucher exclaimed
angrily: “Well then, he lied to you in that matter.... It is true,
indeed, that Bleichröder and the Disconto Bank plunged into the
affair gallantly, but it was not for the sake of the poor tailors,
cobblers and cooks that had blundered into it, but because the Prince
of Hohenzollern was also involved.”
Bucher also denounced as “a lie” the Prince’s statement that the
article in the _Kölnische Zeitung_ which followed the paragraph in
_Grenzboten_ on the Austro-German Alliance, and emphasised, first
its five years’ duration, and then the warlike preparations of the
Russians, did not come from the Foreign Office, but from the military
authorities. (Perhaps this assertion was intended to lead me into
some “blunder” which would have deprived the _Grenzboten_ of its
“nimbus.”)... “The article is by Kruse, who as you are aware is
here. I know also who corrected it.” (Probably Bismarck, or possibly
Bucher himself under his instructions.) The fact that the Chief
told me to advocate the renewal or prolongation of the treaty, with
additional commercial provisions, (this was done subsequently in the
_Grenzboten_ and was noted and emphasised by the _Post_) tallies
according to Bucher with a proposal which the Chancellor made in
Vienna. He was, however, informed in reply that that would not do,
as Austria-Hungary consisted of an industrial and an agricultural
country, with different interests. Bucher condemned the proposal,
saying: “He is in too great a hurry, because he thinks he has only
a few more years to live.” I shall now take care to get away from
Berlin as soon as I can, and thus avoid further risk of hearing and
circulating untruths from the Chief’s mouth.
_January 28th._--Wrote to the Chief yesterday, informing him that the
editor of _Harper’s Monthly_ (published in London) had asked me to
write an article upon him, and if possible, also to send a photograph
of the Prince with his new full beard. At the same time I added a
request for an interview. On the same evening I received an answer
from the Imperial Chancellerie that the Prince begged me to do him
the honour of calling upon him to-morrow, Sunday, at two o’clock. I
went accordingly to-day, and had to wait for a while, as the Minister
of Justice was with the Chancellor, and Hatzfeldt was already waiting
in the antechamber with Möller, the Under-Secretary of State. When
Hatzfeldt was called in Möller dropped into conversation with me, and
asked me whether I was the author of _Count Bismarck and his People_.
He then turned out to be an admirer of my former books also. He had
read, among others, the _Pilgrimage to Jerusalem_ and even the
_Wanderings between the Hudson and the Mississippi_. When Hatzfeldt
came out, the attendant immediately called me in. The Chief, who gave
me a very friendly reception, had a particularly bright colour in the
face. He asked: “Now then, what is it you want me to tell you for the
article? All the principal facts are known.” I replied that I had
come less on that account than for the photograph. They had written
to me that thousands of Germans in America would be much interested
in seeing his portrait with the new beard. “Yes,” he observed, “they
now show their interest in the old country by overloading me with
contributions for those who have suffered by the inundations on
the Rhine. I have not the least idea what I am to do with them. I
have talked over the matter with the people in the Reichstag, they
must distribute the money. As to the photograph, however, the man
suggested in your letter (Brasch, in the Wilhelmstrasse) cannot do
it, as I have promised Löscher and Petsch, with whom I have always
been satisfied. But I cannot go to them at present as I should
catch cold in this weather, and also because I do not go to the
Emperor, and he would be surprised if I were to be seen going to the
photographer. But I should myself like to see a portrait with the
beard, as I do not know how long I shall keep it.” I suggested that
he should let Brasch take two photographs only, as he lived close by
and would bring his camera here, one of them being for _Harper_ and
one for me. He could be forbidden to sell any copies. But the Chief
considered that that would be a breach of his word, and showed a
disposition to lose his temper, so I let the matter drop.
He spoke of the way in which they “hated him in Parliament,” although
“he had done them no harm.” “I cannot understand it,” he continued.
“It is not so with other Ministers, even with those who have done
nothing but commit blunder after blunder, while I, at least, have
maintained peace for them. Surely the present Ministry in France
is a wretched concern, English policy has been an unbroken series
of blunders for the last three years, and Gortschakoff, with his
vanity, also makes all sorts of mistakes; yet no one in their own
countries worries and hampers them in every direction. Nor in other
respects have I ever given them ground for dissatisfaction. Other
Ministers speculate on the Stock Exchange, and take advantage of
their office and information to make money. It is asserted that
several French Ministers do so, and such cases also occur in Austria,
and particularly in Hungary, where the Zichys have made millions in
railway shares. Manteuffel and Schleinitz took advantage of their
position in the same way. No one can say anything of the kind against
me. The Diest-Daber statements were slanders. I have never held
speculative securities, but only regular dividend-bearing stock. It
is only the national grants that have given me my competency. I have
made nothing, but was, on the contrary, much better off formerly
than I am now, in consequence of the low prices of corn and timber
and unwise purchases of land.... Nor have I led a loose life, but
have, on the contrary, been always a respectable father of a family.
And nothing of the kind can be said of my sons either. (Really?) No
charge can be brought against me, and nevertheless I am hated. But I
am tired. I have lost my old passion for shooting and riding, and I
fear I shall soon lose my liking for politics. I am sacrificing my
health. I ought to live in the country, and the doctors say that if I
were free from business, and could spend three or four hours a day in
the open air, I should be well again. But I do not like to desert the
Emperor, who will soon be eighty-seven, when he begs me with tears
in his eyes to remain. Nor can I expect him to accustom himself to
others.”
I inquired how he now stood with the Crown Prince, and he replied,
“Latterly he has been very amiable to me, particularly at the
various festivities.” Then returning, without any transition, to the
subject of Parliament and its opposition to himself, he said: “I
have maintained peace for them with a great deal of trouble. After
1870 everybody expected war in a couple of years; but so far it has
not come, and perhaps, indeed, it may never come again. We are now
on a better footing with Russia than we have ever been before, and
with Austria we have concluded an alliance.” I asked him if he was
still negotiating for an improvement of the treaty in a commercial
direction. He rejoined: “I will not tell you that, as you have been
indiscreet enough to let it be known that it was only concluded for
a period of five years. The _Kölnische Zeitung_ has reproduced that
from the _Grenzboten_.”
I: “I beg your pardon, Serene Highness, but the converse was the
case. I could not have said it before the _Kölnische Zeitung_,
because I was not aware of the fact until I read it in that paper.”
He maintained his opinion until I offered to prove to him that he
was in error, by sending him the _Grenzboten_ article. He then went
on to relate: “They (the Austrians) thought they might satisfy their
greed in that way. I imagine that I am doing them a good turn and
making them a present, and then they come with their conditions.
I have rejected them. A commercial treaty is possible in which we
might grant them more favourable terms than to the others, and in
which the tariff would not be raised, indeed perhaps reduced. The
high duties which we have imposed upon Russia and America need not be
applied to Austrian maize and barley. The importation of cattle may
also be allowed, although that is scarcely feasible in view of the
certificates given in Galicia and Hungary, where everything can be
bought and everybody can be bribed. But commercial union and a common
customs frontier are out of the question, for Germany takes plenty
of imported goods, and superior foreign wines are consumed here in
Germany, while even a groschen would be too much for a Slovak or a
Raizen (_i.e._, a Servian of Slavonia or Lower Hungary), who uses
nothing of the kind. Even here there is a great difference between
the Elbe Duchies or the Rhenish provinces and East Prussia or Upper
Silesia.”
He then came once more to speak of the peaceful times in which we are
now living, and said: “You have only to look at the newspapers and
see how empty they are, and how they fish out the ancient sea-serpent
in order to have something to fill their columns. The feuilleton is
spreading more and more, and if anything sensational occurs they rush
at it furiously and write it to death for whole weeks. This low water
in political affairs, this distress in the journalistic world, is the
highest testimonial for a Minister of Foreign Affairs.”
After a moment’s silence he went on: “Then you propose to return to
Leipzig?”
“Yes,” I replied, “since the death of my son, my wife requires
amusement and society, which are not to be had here, but which she
may find in her own native town.”
He: “Well, but surely any one who writes on politics ought to live in
Berlin, where politics are now made.”
I: “But Leipzig is only three hours from here, and during the months
when you are in town I can easily reside here.”
He: “That is not necessary, but you might come every fortnight, or
when anything occurs, and ask me.”
He again complained of the neuralgic pains, at the same time dipping
his finger, as he had already done frequently, in a wine glass
containing some strong-smelling yellow liquid, with which he rubbed
his right cheek bone. “That relieves me for a short time,” he said.
He then continued: “But I am very tired. I have now been engaged in
politics practically since 1847, nearly forty years, and that is
exhausting. At first in Parliament, then at Frankfurt, where I was
very busy, having work thrown upon me from Berlin also.”
I: “That can be seen from Poschinger’s book, which I am now reading
and making extracts from.”
He: “Yes, but he does not say that I also wrote numerous letters to
the King from Frankfurt,[9] and that I came no less than thirteen
times in one year to Berlin to see him.”
I: “It looks almost as if already at Frankfurt you had been
his Minister for Foreign Affairs--at least Manteuffel drew his
inspiration from you in the principal questions.”
He: “Yes, the late King discussed all great questions with me, and
Manteuffel put up with it.”
I mentioned that the extracts which I was making from the documents
contained in Poschinger’s book were intended in the main for the
chapter on “Bismarck and Austria,” in which I proposed to embody
what I had personally gathered in 1870, as, for instance, Prince
Luitpold’s abortive letter to the Emperor Francis Joseph.
He: “Certainly! But as long ago as 1866 I made an attempt to come to
an understanding with them. I suppose I have already told you the
Gablentz story?”
I: “No, but you have told me others from that period, as, for
instance, how the King wanted to annex portions of Saxony, Bavaria
and Bohemia, and how you persuaded him not to do so.”
He: “Well, it occurred in this way. Just after the first shot had
been fired (in reality it must have been about a fortnight before) I
sent Gablentz, the brother of the general, to the Emperor at Vienna
with proposals for peace on a dualistic basis. I instructed him to
point out that we had seven or eight hundred thousand men under arms,
while they also had a great number. It would therefore be better for
us both to come to an agreement, and making a change of front towards
the West, unite our forces in attacking France, recapture Alsace,
and turn Strassburg into a federal fortress. The French were weak as
compared with us. There might be no just cause for war, but we could
plead with the other Powers that France had also acted unjustly in
taking Alsace and Strassburg, whence she had continually menaced
South Germany ever since. If we were to bring these as a gift to the
Germans they would accept our dualism. They, the Austrians, should
rule in the South and have command of the seventh and eighth army
corps, while we should have command of the ninth and tenth and the
federal command in chief in the North.... Dualism is a very ancient
institution, as old as the Ingævones and Istævones, Guelphs and
Ghibellines.”
I observed: “Already under the Othos, indeed as long ago as
Charlemagne with his Franks, and the Saxons.” “High German and Low
German,” I said. “With a Celtic fringe below and a Slavonic fringe
above.”
“Well,” he continued, “Gablentz submitted his proposal to the
Emperor, who seemed not disinclined to entertain it, but declared
he must first hear the views of the Minister for Foreign Affairs,
Mensdorff, you know. He, however, was a weak-minded mediocrity,
unequal to ideas of that calibre, and he said he must first take
counsel with the Ministers. They were in favour of war with us. The
Minister of Finance said he believed they would beat us--and he must
first of all get a war indemnity of five hundred millions out of us,
or a good opportunity for declaring the insolvency of the State.
The Minister of War was not displeased with my suggestion, but in
his opinion we ought to have our own fight out first, and then we
could come to an understanding and fall upon the French together. So
Gablentz returned without having effected his purpose, and a day or
two afterwards the King and myself started for the seat of war.”
I thanked him warmly for this important and startling communication,
and asked him if I might use it in my book. He replied: “Yes, it is
for that purpose that I have related it to you. But not in detail,
merely the main features. Proposal for peace on the dualistic basis,
united attack upon France, and the reconquest of Alsace.”
I then asked once more whether he wished to read the book before it
went to press, and he said: “Yes, in order that you may not include
anything false in my epitaph.”
I: “That would certainly not be done intentionally. You know that I
worship you, and would let myself be cut into a thousand pieces for
you.”
He: “Ah, no; not into so many! It is not necessary.”
I: “Well then, only into two pieces, so that one might see half a
Büschlein (little Busch) fall to the right and half to the left!”
On my then begging him as soon as his health permitted to let Löscher
and Petsch come to take his portrait, he promised to do so, adding:
“If they do not care to come, then the other man can--what’s his
name?”
I: “Brasch, here in the Wilhelmstrasse, at the corner of the
Leipzigerstrasse.”
He: “But I must first keep my word.”
I: “I did not ask you to do anything contrary to it. I only thought
of Brasch because he took a very good photograph of my late son.”
He: “How did the thing happen?” I then related shortly the
circumstances of my son’s death.
He: “That is a sad case, and there are many to share your misfortune,
all who had relatives on board the _Cimbria_.”
I: “But my son was engaged in his profession, in the fulfilment of
his duty, and died bravely and conscientiously for his ship like a
soldier for his flag.”
He reached me his hand, and said, “Auf Wiedersehen!” I had been with
him fully three-quarters of an hour, and all this time good old
Möller had to wait in the antechamber.
On returning home on the evening of the 3rd of February, I found
lying on my table a letter from Count Bill, in which, at his father’s
request, he enclosed a new photograph of the latter with a full white
beard.
On the 24th of February I wrote to the Chancellor begging to be
allowed to take leave of him personally, as I proposed to start
for Leipzig on the following Thursday. I handed the letter to the
porter at the palace at 11 A.M., and in about an hour and a half I
received an invitation through Sachse to call upon the Prince at
3 o’clock. He was in the room behind his study, which opens on the
garden. He was in an armchair, half sitting, half lying, and had
beside him a small table covered with documents. After he had asked
me how I was, he complained that he still felt very poorly. When
one trouble left him another set in. The neuralgic faceache often
prevented him from sleeping. If he could only go to the country, away
from business, things might improve; but the King would not grant
him leave, and “pestered him with all sorts of unimportant orders,”
&c., as, for instance, with the question as to who should go to St.
Petersburg to attend the coronation. “He thinks,” he continued, “that
if I can manage to keep on my legs I shall live to be old,--and if
not, why then I must die in the fulfilment of my duty.... And here
in the Foreign Office I have no proper assistance. Look at that
pile of documents which I must read through myself!” I said: “Of
course there is not much to be done with Hatzfeldt. He has little
ability, and still less inclination, to work. He only wants to amuse
himself, and to draw a big salary for doing so.” “Yes,” he replied,
“Hatzfeldt does little for his money, and has neither a good memory
nor a taste for business.” He then continued: “The Crown Prince is
also inconsiderate, and torments me with matters of no importance;
and, in addition to that, the people in the Diet are committing all
sorts of blunders. How abusive they have been during the past few
days! But it is the same everywhere with Parliaments and Ministers.”
I remarked: “Quite so, for instance in France.” “It is no better in
England,” he rejoined. “The European is no longer making progress.
There is nothing more to be done with him.” He repeated that he
was sick of politics, and wanted quiet. He then spoke of the
Kulturkampf, observing: “The Pope is really well disposed, but he is
not so powerful and independent as one may think; he is dependent
upon people who will have no peace. For some time it appeared as if
a _modus vivendi_ could be arrived at, but now that is at an end. On
the signs of approaching fine weather Windthorst threatened to strike
and resign the leadership of the Centre party. He wants a stormy sky
for other purposes, for stirring up discontent and strife, and they
on the other hand need him, or think they do. They accordingly became
frightened in Rome, and now they are once more making themselves
unpleasant.” I said: “Catholicism has always been a secondary
consideration for Windthorst. He is, above everything else, the
well-paid advocate of the Guelphs.”
He rejoined: “Ah, he believes in nothing whatever. He has absolutely
no religion.”
He caught sight of an envelope which I had brought with me and laid
on the table beside us containing an enlargement by Brasch of his
photograph by Löscher. He asked: “What have you there?” I answered:
“It usually happens that granting one request brings on another,
and that is the case now. I have had your last portrait enlarged
and mounted, and I would now beg your Serene Highness to write your
name under it as a souvenir. Of course it can be done in pencil.”
“No,” he said, “in ink.” He rang for the attendant and asked for “a
pen to write my signature,” and then wrote under the photograph: “v.
Bismarck, Berlin, 24 February, 1883.”
I thanked him and said: “It is then arranged, Serene Highness, that
I may come here and address myself to you occasionally when anything
of importance arises, particularly when there would seem to be
anything on foot in which you might wish to have some one near you
in whom you could repose special confidence? And as to the book, I
may send you the proofs in a few months? We shall probably not begin
printing before August.” He agreed to all this, and then said: “Well,
good-bye, Busch. Auf Wiedersehen! Enjoy yourself in Leipzig ‘an der
Pleisse.’” He pronounced these words with a true Saxon accent.
On the 13th of May I came from Leipzig to Berlin, and reported
myself to the Chancellor by letter.... On the 15th Sachse sent me
word that the Chancellor expected me at 3 o’clock. I presented
myself punctually at the time appointed, and had to wait while the
Chancellor had a short interview with Rottenburg.... The latter
referred to Colonel Vogt’s _Grenzboten_ article on Thibaudin, and
mentioned that the Imperial Chancellor had remarked that it was no
business of ours to point out to the French that their army was in
bad hands. Count Rantzau also came across to shake hands with me. The
Chief’s youngest grandchild, Heinrich, some five months old, was also
in the antechamber, and he also gave me his little hand to shake.
I was then with the Prince from 3.5 to 4 P.M. He was in plain
clothes, and sat at his ordinary double writing-table. He did not
look ill, but complained as usual of his neuralgia. He said: “It
now extends over the whole body, the chest and abdomen, and I can
no longer exert myself to think or work for any length of time--two
hours at the outside; then I must give up, or drink champagne or
something of that kind to keep myself going for a while longer. I
ought to get out of harness altogether, but the Emperor will not
consent to this, and even when I go to the country, business and
worry now follow at my heels.” I asked: “Worry with the gentlemen in
Parliament?” “Ah, no,” he replied; “I no longer read their speeches
and brawling. It is the Ministers. Scholz is all right, as also
Bötticher and Maybach, although the latter is somewhat blunt,--but
the others, and particularly those in the Foreign Office!” I said:
“But surely Bucher and Busch are able and diligent.” “That is so,”
he rejoined; “but Bucher is cross-tempered and soured, and Busch is
sinking under his load of work. I was mistaken in Hatzfeldt. He is
very good for negotiating with the King and the Crown Prince, but he
thinks only of his own interest, and would like to be my successor;
but he has no sense of duty and no love of work.” I added: “One or
at most two hours’ work in the day, as formerly--and then to play
a game of croquet or lawn tennis with Mrs. or Madame So-and-so.”
“Yes,” he said, “that’s his way. Like Lucca. _Unser Paulchen ist sehr
faulchen_ (Our little Paul is very lazy). His Excellency Herr von
Keudell also wanted to become Imperial Chancellor one day, and absurd
as the notion was, he worked it through his friends in the press,
who had to praise him up to the skies and represent him as your
intimate adviser. But I always regarded him as quite insignificant
in politics, and in addition to that he could never do any work. He
found a difficulty in managing the most ordinary affairs. I was often
obliged to do things for him, and once at Versailles Taglioni, the
deciphering clerk, finished off no less than thirty documents for him
with which he was in arrears. It is true that he was very clever in
looking after his own interests.”
He: “Yes, and he also knew how to get himself a rich wife, and
to take advantage of the position which he acquired through the
friendship of my wife and his own musical talent. Moreover, he knew
how to impress people with his importance--through his silence. But
there was nothing behind it. He is stupid, empty and incapable. He
was unable even to manage the Pay Department properly.”
I: “On going to Constantinople it is said that he left a deficit of
80,000 thalers.”
The Chief then spoke of Hohenlohe, and appeared to think more highly
of him than he did of Hatzfeldt. He also referred to Radowitz and
afterwards to Radowitz’s father, alleging that the “Jesuitic attitude
of the latter was responsible for Olmütz.” “You know what sort of
a man the late King was,” he continued. “For years, during which
something might have been done, Radowitz kept him occupied with all
sorts of tailoring and ornamental matters, with mediæval questions
of costumes, uniforms and coats of arms. He acted as Keeper of the
Wardrobe to his fancies: whether such and such counts were or were
not received, and the Knights of St. John, and the Wetterau bench of
Counts, and the absurd question whether Saxony and Hanover should
retain the right to appoint envoys,--as if a barber could not have
intrigued successfully against our policy so long as they had the
power. He amused the King with such trifles as these until it was too
late.”
He then came to speak of Lady Bloomfield’s Memoirs, the Tauchnitz
edition of which he brought in from the next room, and asked me to
review it in the _Grenzboten_. He said I should find “the genuine
English arrogance in the lady,” who was “much pleased at the
opposition of the Crown Princess (the present Empress Augusta);
and full of the profoundest aversion to everything Prussian and
German.” In 1866 she “had been anti-Prussian to the backbone,” and
had “libelled our officers as the French did in 1870 with their story
of the clock.” In this connection he referred to the merino goats
which the Prussians were alleged to have driven away with them from
Bohemia. This led him to speak of the Crown Princess and her “English
self-conceit,” whereupon I reminded him of the story of the silver
plate of the English shopkeepers and of the Prussian nobility which
he then repeated to me as before. On my remarking that the Queen, her
mother, was also unfriendly to us Germans, and had always sided with
the Belgian-Coburg clique, &c., he denied that this was the case, and
said that, on the contrary, she had “on the whole been favourable to
us.”
He then continued: “I wish you would some time or other refute
the charge that I have acted inconsistently in the struggle with
the Curia, and that I have changed my opinions and aims in the
ecclesiastical question, and in others. That is the sort of criticism
which can only proceed from some one who has never occupied the
position of a leading Minister. Whoever has held such a post for any
considerable time can never absolutely unalterably maintain and carry
out his original opinions. He finds himself in presence of situations
that are not always the same--of life and growth--in connection
with which he must take one course one day, and then perhaps on the
next another. I could not always run straight ahead like a cannon
ball. (Doubtless a reminiscence of Schiller, ‘Piccolomini,’ I., 4.)
Had I done so I should have knocked my head against a wall. When
the situation changed I was obliged to alter my plans. Such changes
in the situation were, moreover, chiefly due to the fickleness of
parties, and, therefore, if any one is to blame they are. Their
action, on the other hand, was in great part influenced by their
envy. That is the national vice of the Germans. They cannot bear to
see any one hold a high and leading position for any length of time.
One of the most important changes was produced by the formation of
the Catholic party, the founders of which might at the beginning
have been expected to support the Government. Savigny, you know. It,
however, weakened my position. The entire struggle with the Centre
party would have taken another form, and have had a different issue,
if I could have fought it out at the head of the Conservatives.
I had risen from their ranks, but if I was to do justice to the
requirements of the time it was impossible for me to continue in
agreement with them on all points. This, and the long-suppressed
hatred and envy of old comrades of my own class and faith, which very
soon broke out, drove me over to the Liberal side. An understanding
had to be come to with the latter if the Empire was to strike firm
root, and so I was obliged to come to an agreement with the strongest
party, a thing which I had tried in vain to do in 1866, when it
was also desirable. It was particularly necessary in those years
when Germany was threatened with a Triple Alliance like that of
the Kaunitz period. The latest achievement of German diplomacy is
to have prevented the formation of such a coalition against us for
thirteen years. The Government was forced to appear at the head of
the Liberals, at the head of the majority, in order to avert this
coalition. The Conservatives fell away from me on that account.
I would remind you of the Inspection of Schools Bill, and of the
attitude of the _Kreuzzeitung_, and of the libels published in the
_Reichsglocke_. And just as the situation was thus altered at that
time, so it was again changed in 1878, through the defection of the
Liberals. Here, too, it was envy and self-importance, and the desire
to rule. I was no longer supported, or only in a lukewarm fashion.
They were not sorry to see me weakened by the opposition of the
Centre party, so that I should be forced to negotiate with them. The
Progressists combined with the Centre against me. The Secessionists
acted in very much the same way. From this time forward the National
Liberals were silent in the struggle with Rome. They were pleased
at the embarrassments to which it gave rise, and wished to have a
weaker Government in order that they might appear stronger. When
the Government had to strike the Liberals out of its reckoning, it
naturally followed that I had to slacken my opposition to Rome. I
cannot speak any longer now, or the faceache will return.”
He then rose, but continued to speak of his illness for a while as he
walked up and down, describing it as very painful, “like shingles.”
I further asked if I might in a few months send him the proofs of
my book. “What book?” he said. I answered: “That which your Serene
Highness has already twice promised me to read through.” He then
thought for a moment, and promised once more to do so, whereupon I
took my leave, with wishes for his speedy recovery. He said he had no
longer any hope, and only expected to grow worse. (...)
On the 11th of July, after the Chancellor had left Berlin for
Friedrichsruh, Grunow sent him the first sheets of my book, _Unser
Reichskanzler_, to read through before they were sent to press. On
the 16th of July, Count Bill returned me these proofs, with the
following lines:--
“Friedrichsruh, 16/7, 1883.
“Dear Sir,
“I enclose the proofs herewith. All that has been struck
out is a passage in a private conversation. It would be better
to omit altogether expressions of a similar character made in
conversations of a confidential nature. (Of course, here and in
what follows it is not the writer, but the Chancellor who speaks.)
Many things may be said that are not suitable for publication; among
these are animadversions upon Imperial institutions, such as the
Constitution, for example.
“With much esteem,
“Count W. Bismarck.”
The portion struck out appeared in the third sheet, (page 31, in
the first volume of the work as afterwards printed, following the
words “einmal zu Grunde gehen,”) and ran: “Then it will be Bang! and
snap goes the German Constitution. There might be a repetition of
Schwarzenberg’s saying, ‘This arrangement has not stood the test.’”
The Prince has also corrected an oversight (Vol. I., p. 12, line 24),
striking out the syllable “_un_,” where I had written “_unmöglich_”
by mistake--evidence of the care with which he had read it through.
On the 18th of July, Count Bill returned more proofs which were
accompanied with the following letter:--
“Dear Sir,
“Although my father cannot act as collaborator but must
confine himself to a more negative part, suggesting to you the
suppression of incorrect or unsuitable passages, he nevertheless
requests you to replace the portion within brackets on page 6, by the
enclosed, as the latter is more in harmony with the facts.
“With much esteem,
“Count W. Bismarck.”
The enclosure here referred to was dictated to Count Bill, and
appears in the book _Unser Reichskanzler_, Vol. I., pp. 54 and 55.
On the 20th of July further proofs, up to the end of the first
chapter, arrived from Friedrichsruh. These again included alterations
that had been dictated to Count Bill by his father.
When the Prince shortly afterwards proceeded to Kissingen, Grunow
continued to send him the proofs, as he had received no orders to the
contrary. They were not returned, and the printers had therefore to
stop work. I, however, received the following long letter from the
Chancellor, which was written by an amanuensis on official foolscap,
like a State document, the two sheets being tied together with silk
thread in the Imperial colours.
“Kissingen, _August 3rd, 1883_.
“Dear Sir,
“You probably have no adequate conception of the state of my health
and of my need of rest or you would doubtless not be the only person
who begrudges me the latter, while the Emperor and the Empire and
all their officials respect it. Possibly you have also no notion of
the difficulties of the work which you expect me to do. On former
occasions of a similar kind I have corrected all errors of fact which
had arisen through mistakes on your part or on that of others. Now,
however, you wish to submit to the public with regard to my way of
thinking and my inner man inferences drawn from observations made
by yourself and others, which in great part are actually incorrect.
(He had then in his hands Chapters II. and III., and a considerable
portion of Chapter IV.) It is, therefore, not surprising that your
conclusions do not correspond with the facts, so that if you were to
publish them I should be forced to controvert and refute them. There
are a number of gross errors of fact, and confusions of jest and
earnest, in the expressions and incidents upon which you base your
view of my supposed way of thinking. You assume that in everything
that I have ever said in your presence for the entertainment of my
guests at table, or in my own home, or in what you have gathered from
the unreliable accounts of third persons, I have invariably given
serious expression to my inmost feelings with the conscientiousness
of a witness giving evidence on oath before a Court.
“In view of the pedantry with which you utilise scattered fragments
of conversation, a man in my position would be obliged never to
depart for a moment from a formal mode of expressing himself or step
down from his official stilts. Everything you say in particular
respecting my attitude towards Christianity and the question of
the Jews is not only monstrously indiscreet, but thoroughly false.
(Everything?) The jokes about my superstition have already appeared
in print, and in so far as there is any truth in them are just mere
jokes or consideration for the feelings of other people. I will make
one of a dinner party of thirteen as often as you like, and am ready
to undertake the most important and delicate business on a Friday.
“At the present moment I am particularly interested in setting public
opinion right as to my share in the Catholic question. What you give
on the subject is incomplete and superficial, and as soon as my
health has improved I should like to supply you with better material.
For that purpose it would be necessary that I should see you
personally as soon as I have finished my cure. If I were to correct
this and other points by correspondence I should have to myself
rewrite your book. But I must be left absolutely in peace for the
duration of my Kissingen cure, and cannot occupy myself editorially
with such difficult and delicate questions as those you touch upon.
“I would suggest to you to recast your book altogether, as in its
present form I do not believe it will be favourably received. The
work is far too lengthy, and, in particular, it contains too much
material published long since by yourself and others. What is new in
it is in part of little interest, while other portions are incorrect,
so that I should be obliged publicly to dispute their accuracy.
“I shall be very pleased to read the further proofs in order to form
an idea of the whole. When I have done that, I can afterwards give
you my opinion in Berlin or Friedrichsruh, but while I remain here I
must decline every description of critical or editorial work.
“(Signed) v. Bismarck.”
In reply to this communication, I excused myself for having sent the
proofs, through my ignorance of his absolute need of rest, and by
recalling the fact that, in 1878, I had been permitted to send him
such proofs to Kissingen and Gastein. The printing was then postponed
for about eight weeks, until the beginning of October. On the 5th
of that month I wrote to Friedrichsruh to ask whether it was now
agreeable to him to receive me for the purpose of the interview which
he had mentioned as desirable in his letter of the 3rd of August.
On the 6th of October Count Herbert wrote that his father would be
glad to see me as soon as he had read the proofs sent to him in the
summer. Owing to his journey and the state of his health he had not
been able to do so up to the present.
The work remained at a standstill for four weeks more. This was
very disagreeable to Grunow, who repeatedly requested me to press
the matter at Friedrichsruh. I declined to do so, as _I_ could
wait. He then wished to write to the Prince himself, describing
his embarrassment. I tried to dissuade him, but as he nevertheless
repeated the suggestion, I told him he might do so at his own risk,
and also gave him a few ideas for his letter. Next day he told me
that he had written. On the 9th of November I received the following
letter from Friedrichsruh:--
“Friedrichsruh, _November 8th, 1883_.
“Dear Sir,
“The Imperial Chancellor has received a letter dated the 5th
instant from Johannes Grunow, publisher, of Leipzig, in which he
urges despatch in the supervision of the proofs of your work. The
letter contains the following sentence:--
“‘The manuscript was ready and in my hands eight weeks ago, and I
do not know what excuses to make without prejudice to the truth
unless I can communicate to those who are pressing me the real cause
of the delay. This has not been done up to the present, but if the
delay should continue for any length of time it will, to my great
regret, be scarcely possible to avoid it, unless I receive some other
explanation.’
“It is obvious that the Imperial Chancellor cannot continue a
correspondence with a person who even now threatens him with
disclosures. On the contrary, he is disposed to leave this gentleman
to publish your work, if he should think proper so to do, reserving
to himself the right of criticising it afterwards. Before he comes
to any decision on this point, however, he desires to discuss
the matter with you verbally, and requests you to visit him at
Friedrichsruh, bringing with you your copy of the proofs of your work.
“I beg of you to be good enough to let me know shortly beforehand the
day and hour of your arrival.
“I am, honoured Sir, with profound esteem,
“Your most obedient,
“F. Rantzau.”
I thereupon announced that I should arrive at Friedrichsruh on the
12th of November. I started on the 11th, and, travelling _viâ_
Berlin, reached Friedrichsruh shortly after 12 o’clock on the
following day. I was met at the station by a servant, who accompanied
me to the Prince’s house and showed me to my room. Shortly afterwards
I was called downstairs, where I had a friendly reception from the
Chancellor and his wife. We then took lunch, Rantzau being also
present, and immediately afterwards the Prince went with me into his
study in order to discuss the matter that had brought me hither. He
first gave expression to his indignation at Grunow’s letter, in which
connection I also came in for my share. Among other things which he
said was: “You have turned me into a bookseller’s hack; I am to be
exploited like a Christmas speculation, and harnessed to his cart,
the impudent fellow! He should have known nothing whatever of my
assistance!” I explained to him that I had to inform Grunow owing to
the possibility of a considerable delay in the return of my proofs,
that I had previously mentioned this to him, the Chancellor, and that
he had agreed, and that the same course had been adopted in the case
of the first book. In his excitement he appeared to have overlooked
what I had said, as he went on as follows: “That must remain
between ourselves. I can trust you. You may write to me. But he!
What right has a bookseller got to correspond with me, to warn and
threaten me?” I tried in vain to appease him, endeavouring to show
that the passage quoted by Rantzau when read in connection with the
remainder of the letter was perhaps not a threat, but only a strong
and not particularly felicitous expression of Grunow’s difficulty and
embarrassment. The latter was a man of straightforward character,
who knew how to keep his own counsel, and who was incapable of
wishing to bring pressure of a threatening character to bear upon
the Chancellor, for whom he entertained the highest regard. He then
rang for Rantzau, and asked him to bring Grunow’s letter, which he
handed to me to read. I could not see that it contained anything
more than a cry of distress on the part of the publisher, who had
promised the booksellers that a certain book would appear at a
fixed date, and who feared he could not keep his word nor find any
sufficient excuse to give them. I was as little affected by this
embarrassment as I was by any loss which Grunow might suffer in case
the book was not published at Christmas. I could have waited for a
long time, and even if that were not the case it would never have
occurred to me to press him. He said: “You acted in a perfectly
proper way when the matter was postponed, and I had not expected
anything different from you. But all the same that remains a threat
on his part, and a piece of presumption, and I hesitated whether I
should not decline to have anything further to do with the book, and
afterwards publicly contradict erroneous passages in it. But then I
thought of you, although I altogether object to having books written
about me and to people trading with me and my affairs. Poschinger
has done so, and sold my despatches and letters, forgetting even to
send me any remuneration.” (Sometimes his humour does not desert him
even in his anger.) “Besides, this new book is not so good as the
preceding one. It does not contain much that is new, and what it does
is false. You are not such a good observer as you were; you have
grown older; and you want to divine and picture my inner man from
fragmentary observations, which were mainly misconceptions. You draw
conclusions from occasional utterances which you jotted down under
the table-cloth. According to you I am always in deadly earnest, as
if I were on oath, &c.”
I abstained from urging what could be said on the other side, and
his excitement gradually subsided. Taking some of the proofs he sat
down at his writing-table and invited me to take a place opposite,
in order that I might note down his corrections and additions. He
was rather impatient over it, said my hearing was not so good as
formerly, and complained that I did not take down dictation as
rapidly as his sons, and so on. On this occasion we went through
the greater part of the third chapter, and he had very much less to
object to and alter than I had apprehended from his letter of the
3rd of August. By far the greater part of these pages he turned over
without any remarks. With respect to the others he made observations
that had no reference to the book, as for instance: “Thadden, a
narrow-minded fellow, who has no brains.” After about three-quarters
of an hour he stood up and said: “I must now get some fresh air.”
He strode up and down the room, however, for a while, as before,
and began again to vent his anger at the presumption and threats of
“this bookseller who wanted to harness me to his Christmas cart.”
Ultimately, however, he quieted down, grew more friendly, and showed
me over the apartments, including his bedroom. In one of the first of
these was hung a portrait in oils of a Roman prelate of high rank. In
reply to my inquiry he informed me that it was Cardinal Hohenlohe.
He then went out for a walk or drive, while I proceeded to my
room and wrote out his observations and the corrections which he
had dictated to me. This room, which contains pictures of Grant,
Washington and Hamilton, looks out on the park. After 3 P.M. I paid a
visit to the Head Forester, Lange, with whom I took a drive.