in addition to the Prince and Princess, were the Rantzaus, Dr.
Schweninger, of Munich, who was in attendance on the Chancellor, and
Herr von Ohlen, another of the doctor’s patients. The Prince, as I
now observed for the first time, suffered from a slight attack of
jaundice. Schweninger (a man of lively temperament, with dark hair
and beard, who seems to be very much at home here) diagnosed the
Prince’s ailment as chronic catarrh of the stomach, and has been
successful in his treatment. (...) While taking our coffee, which
was served in the Princess’s room, the conversation was at first of
little significance. It turned on Becker’s portrait of the Prince
during the Frankfurt period, and on two groups of his male and female
ancestors, who from their costumes would appear to have flourished
in the time between the death of Luther and the Thirty Years’ War,
and on the portrait of his sporting grandfather with the shot-gun,
which was formerly in Berlin, but has now found a place here too. The
conversation gradually grew more lively and interesting; and the
Chancellor, who had remarked in the _tête-à-tête_ with me at midday
that he would henceforth be careful of what he said in my presence,
had probably forgotten his intention. On my stating, among other
things, that the war of 1870 appeared to have had an excellent effect
upon the national feeling in Saxony, he added, “and still more so in
Bavaria. I once said jestingly to Fabrice[10] that we should live to
see order restored in Saxony one day by Bavarian troops.” Speaking
of Court circles in Berlin, he complained: “Whenever I performed on
the political tight-rope they hit me on the shins, and, if I had only
fallen, how delighted they would have been! Particularly the eternal
feminine (das ewig Weibliche).”
It was only after lunch on Tuesday, the 13th, and again before
dinner, that the work with the Prince was resumed, when Chapter II.,
the remainder of Chapter III., and about half of Chapter IV. were
weeded out, the weeds again proving much less abundant than I had
anticipated. He maintained that in the second chapter I made him
out to be a “hypocrite” in religious matters, an idea which he had
no difficulty in entirely disproving, inasmuch as he justified his
belief in God among other things by a reference to facts which could
only be accounted for by the existence of a Deity.
In the second section he began to dictate to me an account of
his attitude towards the Kulturkampf, which he broke off on our
being called to dinner. Before that he again suddenly renewed his
grumbling at Grunow, I, too, coming in for a small share. He was also
displeased with my long full beard. “My wife asked me,” he said, “if
you were older than I. ‘No,’ I said, ‘I thought you were four or five
years younger.’ But she was right. It’s your beard. It should be cut
shorter. As it is it makes you look fearfully ancient.”
On Wednesday, the 14th, the Chief set to work on the proofs with me
after breakfast. At Chapter IV. he exclaimed: “Look here, you must
have a thoroughly wicked heart. You are delighted every time you hear
and can jot down a disagreeable remark about somebody.” I rejoined:
“I cannot trust myself to give any opinion upon my own heart. But one
thing I do know, it has always been devoted to you. I only hate your
enemies.” He afterwards reflected for a moment, looked at the clock,
and said: “I must now go out to receive Giers, who is coming from
Berlin to discuss important matters with me. We shall introduce you
and Schweninger to him as doctors of medicine, for if he ascertained
that Dr. Busch belonged to another variety he would be afraid that he
was being watched and that it would get into the newspapers. By the
way, you have included him among the Jews in your diplomatic chapter,
and that must be struck out. (I had referred to his name, Giers, as a
russified form of Hirsch.) He may be a Jew, although he asserts that
he is the son of a Finnish officer. But we must not write that, as he
is well disposed, desires peace, and does what he can to secure it.
He is quite indispensable to us.”
The Russian Minister arrived between 2 and 3 P.M. The Chancellor
received him at the station, drove with him to the house, and then
conferred with him until nearly 6 o’clock, when Giers dined with us,
the company remaining together over their coffee until about 9 P.M.
Giers is a man of medium height, and would seem to be well advanced
in the fifties. He has somewhat of a stoop as he walks. His features
are of a slightly Jewish cast, a characteristic which is also evident
in his gestures and movements, there being something in the hands in
particular which recalled our Semites. On this occasion he spoke only
in French.
On Thursday, the 15th, I wrote in my diary: Giers went off again
last night about 10 o’clock, and Schweninger and Ohlen left at
noon to-day. I took lunch with the Prince’s family, Count William
being also present. The Prince, who, by the way, now observes
great moderation in diet and drinks only the lightest wines, read
despatches, and gave Rantzau instructions for replying to them. The
subjects were Bulgarian affairs, and the North Sea and Baltic Canal.
I then retired to my room to work, and afterwards made an excursion
to the Aumühl. As I was about to return I saw the Chief coming
towards me in a carriage. When he recognised me he reached out both
hands towards me from a distance, left the carriage, and walked back
with me to the mill. (I therefore fancy that he cannot have been so
very angry with me.) He described to me a pretty pathway through the
woods on the other side of the streamlet, saying: “I know you are
also a lover of lonely country walks.” Yesterday evening over our
coffee, after Giers had left, he also said: “I always feel happiest
in my top-boots, striding through the heart of the forest, where I
hear nothing but the knocking and hammering of the woodpecker, far
away from your civilisation.”
Again at work with the Chancellor from 4 o’clock onwards. He told me
his wife had said: “The doctor may be very clever and amiable, but
all the same you should be on your guard at table when he is present.
He always sits there with his ears cocked, writes everything down,
and then spreads it abroad.” She herself, however, in her simple way,
forgot to keep on her guard to-day. While seated on her right at
dinner my napkin accidentally dropped, and, lo and behold! her Serene
Highness, the lady of the house, bent down for it before I could
prevent her! I felt that I had been fearfully awkward.
On Friday, the 16th, the Chief dictated to me the conclusion of the
long passage respecting his attitude towards the ecclesiastical
struggle. He then gave me, for insertion in the fourth chapter, the
following statement with regard to Bunsen:--“During the Crimean War,
when he was Minister in London, he reported to Berlin that England
offered us Schleswig-Holstein in return for our joining in the war
against Russia, whilst he stated in London that Prussia would join if
she received the Duchies. Both statements were false, and when the
affair became known, he was dismissed. I had something to say in the
matter. The King exclaimed: ‘Why, he has been my friend for twenty
years, and now he acts in this way!’ Old General Rauch observed:
‘Yes, he has also lied and betrayed your Majesty for twenty years.’
‘One cannot allow that to be said of a friend,’ rejoined the King.”
He then proceeded to other matters, and on my asking whether there
was any subject which I could deal with in the press, he at first
replied in the negative, but then said: “Giers found the Emperor very
frail, and perhaps he will not last much longer. Well, when he dies,
I shall go too. He is a gallant old gentleman, who has always meant
well, and whom I must not desert. But I will make no experiments
with the Crown Prince. I am too old and weak for that. Things will
not go on particularly well, and on the whole I am convinced that
what we have built up since 1866 has no stability.” In the course
of his further remarks he mentioned the Crown Princess, “a Liberal
Englishwoman,” “a follower of Gladstone,” and maintained that she
“has more influence upon her consort than is desirable.” He then
spoke once more of his need of repose and a country life, referring
to Berlin in very disparaging terms, and scarcely allowing it even
to be a handsome city. He insisted that owing to the drainage there
was already a bad smell in every house, and that in a short time,
the place would become utterly intolerable. He said in conclusion:
“I have always longed to get away from large cities and the stink
of civilisation. Every time I return I feel that more and more, and
I have earned my leisure.” I remarked that I could fully understand
that feeling, and also his reluctance to serve the coming King, on
account of his opinions; but surely he would not abandon a work which
was so entirely his own, and retire altogether from the political
stage. He would at least take his seat in the Upper Chamber and be
elected to the Reichstag, where he could offer advice and admonition.
He replied: “Yes, but not like the others in perpetual and
uncompromising opposition.” I said, “Then please remember this little
fellow when you want anything done in the press. I shall always be
at your service.” “All right,” he replied, and reached me his hand.
“You can then come to me and arrange my papers. (With a significant
smile.) There is still a great deal of good stuff there.” I begged
leave to remain the following day, as it was such a pleasure to me to
be near him. “Oh, certainly!” he said; “but you must not ask me to
play cards with you or otherwise entertain you.”
I remained over the 17th, made several excursions on foot through
the woods to the east and west, and was present in the evening after
dinner when Lange made his report as to the administration of the
estate. I started for Berlin at noon on the 18th, and returned to
Leipzig on the 19th. There I received in instalments from Rantzau the
bulk of the remaining proofs. The Chief sent two more to Bucher in
Berlin, whence I had to fetch them.
I immediately noted down the following particulars of the
conversation I had with Bucher on this occasion. I praised the
Countess Rantzau as being good-natured and unaffected. “Well,” he
rejoined, “she is cleverer and more prudent than her mother. The
Princess, for instance, is not fortunate in the selection of her
acquaintances. First she had the little hunchback Obernitz. Then
Babette, Meyer was her friend and confidant--an intelligent body,
but.... She was often with her in Berlin and elsewhere, and as the
Princess heard a great deal about political affairs and spoke of them
to others, Babette, while she was with her, certainly overheard many
things and then repeated them to others.... It was afterwards Frau
von Wallenberg’s turn. She was the worst, and she it was who had most
opportunity for eavesdropping and keeping other people informed. You
know that the Prince generally goes through his official papers at
lunch time, and gives instruction to his sons or to Rantzau as to the
answers to be returned. She could hear all that, and take note of
it for Holstein, who has recently developed, owing to his ambition,
into a very dangerous intriguer. He is accustomed to communicate
to Paulchen (Hatzfeldt, the Secretary of State), everything he
ascertains in this and other ways.”
I turned the conversation on Bucher’s share in the negotiations
respecting the candidature of the Prince of Hohenzollern for the
Spanish throne. He gave me a detailed account of this. The first
time he was in Madrid in connection with that affair was in Easter
and then in June, 1870.[11] He gave the following particulars of
his second journey: “It was a rush hither and thither in zigzag,
accident playing a large part in delaying and hindering as well as
in promoting my purpose. Salazar came to me on the Saturday, and
wanted to have the final decision of the Prince by Monday. I replied
that that would not be possible in such a short time, particularly
as I did not know where the Prince was staying at the moment, and
of course he would have to be consulted first. Nor was it an easy
matter for me to get away at the time. He said he knew the Prince
was in Reichenhall, and added, ‘_Selon ce que vous me dites je
renonce_.’ I replied: ‘I assume that you will write a statement of
what has passed between us, which will find its way into the Spanish
archives; and as they will some day be open to historians, I should
not wish to take this responsibility upon myself. I will travel with
you, first to Madrid, (improbable, but so I heard it,) and then
to the Prince of Hohenzollern.’ He said he would take one of his
liegemen with him, a man who would fling himself out of the window
without hesitation if he told him to do so. A curious condition of
things still prevails there, the obedience of feudal vassals, the
devotion of the age of chivalry. Well, we started for Reichenhall,
travelling first in separate compartments so as to avoid notice in
Paris, and afterwards together, as he did not understand German and
his companion spoke only Spanish. On my making inquiries at the
office of the baths, I found that the director was at a neighbouring
village, and the others could give me no information respecting the
Prince. They believed he was not there. I drove out to the village
they mentioned and found that the director had left. On returning
to Reichenhall I proceeded to the police station. As I was going up
the steps I was met by a rather shabbily-dressed man, who stopped
and said he supposed I wanted to go to the police office, but it was
now closed. He, however, belonged to it, and would go back with me.
I told him I was looking for the Prince of Hohenzollern, to whom I
had a communication to make. He replied that the Prince was here, and
lived at such-and-such a place, but under another name. I therefore
proceeded thither with Salazar, but only found the Princess, who told
us that her consort was now with his father at Sigmaringen. We packed
up once more and made off for Sigmaringen, where we found them, and
they agreed. They could, however, decide nothing without the consent
of the King, who was at Ems. We then started for that place, and were
received by the old gentleman, who was very gracious to me and agreed
to what I submitted to him. I then went to Varzin to report to the
Chief. It was a regular zigzag journey with obstacles.” Bucher added
that he had taken shorthand notes of his conversation with Salazar,
which he “still possessed.” At least, so I understood him.
On the whole the Prince in his collaboration with me struck out a
little over seventeen pages out of a total of nearly 900, while he
contributed some twenty-two pages to the two volumes. The first
edition of 10,000 copies was issued at the end of February 1884,
and by the autumn of 1885, 6,500 copies had been disposed of,
although the Liberal press did its worst to run the book down. An
English translation was published by Macmillan in April, and some
months later arrangements were made for an Italian edition. (This
translation, by Brandi, was only published at Milan in the spring of
1888.)
On the 14th of March, 1884, I again took up my residence in
Berlin; and on the 16th I called upon Bucher, to present him
with a handsomely bound copy of my book, _Unser Reichskanzler_.
He had already got it, however, and had read it through without
coming across any inaccuracies. He made three suggestions for some
supplementary material on the issue of a new edition.
According to Bucher, the Chancellor had returned this time from
Friedrichsruh in excellent condition, had already been twice out
riding in the Thiergarten, and once for a walk there. He had drawn
up a memorandum for the Emperor, showing that the home policy of
Gladstone, the extension of the franchise, must lower the position
of the English aristocracy and with it that of the Crown, which was
of course only its head. The Emperor’s minute said that he was much
struck with this statement, and suggested that it should be laid
before the Crown Prince--a suggestion to which the Chief agreed. In
Bucher’s opinion the Chancellor would on certain conditions consent
to remain in office when the Crown Prince came to the throne, but the
latter would not keep his promises, and then Bismarck would retire.
A further communication of Bucher’s was also interesting, namely,
that the “refutation of the absurd attack of the _National Zeitung_”
(on my account of Gablentz’s mission), which was contained in the
_Norddeutsche Allgemeine Zeitung_ was written by the Prince himself.
A few days after this visit to Bucher I wrote to the Imperial
Chancellor, informing him that I was again a resident of Berlin, and
begging him in case there was anything I could do for him in the
press to kindly let me know when I might call upon him to take his
instructions. I received no answer to this letter. My intercourse
with Bucher continued. On the 3rd of July, he sent me a card
informing me of his departure for Laubbach, near Coblenz.
On the 27th of July, I received the following letter which had been
returned owing to an incorrect address and then re-despatched:--
“Kissingen, _June 30th, 1884_.
“Dear Sir,
“Rarely has a book excited my interest to such a degree as your
_Unser Reichskanzler_, which I have perused whilst taking the waters
here. As it will have produced a like impression upon others a new
edition will soon be required. I therefore consider it my duty to
call your attention to an error which I have also noticed in the
French and English newspapers. The letter of the Minister President
of the 26th of December, 1865, which was made public entirely against
my will and in consequence of a gross indiscretion which has not
yet been quite cleared up, was not addressed to the clergyman,
Roman von André, but to the _Rittergutsbesitzer_, Andrae-Roman.
In addition to this you will allow me to correct a few of the
following observations, as, for instance, that on page 158. I have
always spoken and written to Prince Bismarck not from a clergyman’s
standpoint, but with the consciousness that in matters of faith our
views were identical, and with a feeling of hearty affection for his
powerful individuality, having fully recognised his greatness long
before he became a public character.
“Allow me to add one further remark. The somewhat cool attitude
adopted by Bismarck towards the clergy as such did not originate in
the conflict with the _Kreuzzeitung_. It existed long before that
date, and was closely connected with a similar attitude towards the
Church, and arises from entirely different causes, which I need not
enter into here. That clergymen, or, indeed, laymen, in signing
‘the Declaration’ made themselves sponsors for any of the vile and
malicious calumnies, which--I regret to say--were at that time heaped
upon the great man, I must dispute until that charge has been proved
in some specific case. I speak only of those Conservatives who hold
the same religious belief as Bismarck. I was pained and surprised to
find for the first time in a letter addressed by the Prince to my
friend von Holtz during the General Synod, that he entertained this
view. I immediately put myself in communication with a considerable
number of my co-signatories to the declaration who were present in
Berlin at that time, and _all_ those with whom I spoke on the subject
agreed with me that the public declaration by Bismarck (I have
neither this nor the text of the declaration itself with me at the
present moment)--his declaration, namely, that ‘after the unfortunate
articles in question no _respectable_ person _could_ continue to read
the _Kreuzzeitung_,’ was the sole cause of the counter-declaration,
that we considered ourselves to be respectable persons, although we
continued to read the _Kreuzzeitung_. It does not contain a word of
approval of any ‘vile and malicious calumnies.’ I have never read
nor approved of the _Reichsglocke_. The statements respecting the
death of my relative, Herr von Wedemeyer, are also very hazardous,
and would be difficult to prove. It was at that time decided to send
to the Prince a joint statement, which was to be drawn up by me. At
the desire, however, of a person closely connected with the Prince
this decision was altered, and it was arranged that each should
write separately to him in the sense indicated above. This was done
in a great number of cases. There are, however, different kinds of
Conservatives. The most reliable, if not always the most pliant,
those who hold the same religious belief as the Prince, have always
been and will ever remain on his side.
“With the most profound respect,
“A. Andrae-Roman.”
On the 23rd September I called upon Bucher, who had undergone a
course of massage and hygienic gymnastics at Laubbach, and had been
back in Berlin for about five weeks. He again complained of the
“shocking way in which business was conducted in the Foreign Office”;
and in particular of Hatzfeldt and Holstein. For a long time past
he had given up saluting the latter. He would “like best of all
to leave the place, if that were only possible.” He praised Count
Herbert as “very diligent and not unskilful,” and was of opinion
that the Prince intended to make him Secretary of State at some
future time. Münster, “who is more English than German, and does
very little,” having allowed some question to hang fire, the Chief
sent Herbert to London, where he at once took it into his own hands,
pressed it through, and finally settled it satisfactorily. “Another
person placed in the position of the Ambassador would have resigned
in such circumstances.” I suggested: “Angra Pequena, and the long
delay in answering the Chancellor’s inquiries?” Bucher replied in the
affirmative. He then said: “It will not be pleasant to work under the
young man, but work will be done, and things will not be allowed
to drag on in such a slow and slovenly way. Herbert has also a good
memory, and has been a great deal with his father. He was often
present at interviews with important personages, at which matters
of great moment were discussed that do not appear in the official
documents, and in that way he has had splendid opportunities for
learning.” Bucher agreed with me regarding the meeting at Skiernevice
as a “spectacle intended to show Europe the good understanding which
exists between the three Emperors.” He added, however, that “the
relations between Austria and Russia leave much to be desired in many
respects.” He furthermore confirmed the fact that the Chief, “in view
of the cool and repellent attitude of Gladstone, has for a long time
past been working towards a better understanding with France, and not
without success.” After speaking of the Balkan Peninsula, and hinting
at an understanding respecting it, Bucher said he had a mind to
write something on the despatch of an English Commission to Sarakhs
for the purpose of settling the question of the frontier between
Afghanistan and Russia, but he had not yet been able to collect the
geographical materials. These remarks showed that he had been busy
with this question recently. I offered to publish something of the
kind in the _Grenzboten_, and he promised the necessary materials
from the library of the Foreign Office, and in particular the account
of O’Donovan’s travels. He saw the Prince (who has now returned
to Friedrichsruh) a short time ago; he thinks that the journey to
Skiernevice has done him good, as he is much less stout, feels
thoroughly well and also works hard.
Bucher called at my house at 8.45 A.M. on the following morning with
a collection of newspaper extracts on various subjects for my use.
I had, however, gone out. On my returning the bundle of papers given
to me on the 28th of September he gave me some further particulars
of the way in which Herbert had dealt with the English. On Lord
Granville asking him in the course of the negotiations respecting
Angra Pequena whether we were not contemplating an ultimate expansion
of territory towards the interior (Query, towards the East, in the
direction of Bechuanaland and the Boer Republic), he retorted, not
over politely, that that was “a question of mere curiosity,” and
indeed finally, “a matter that does not concern you.” The Chief
showed him the letter in which that was reported, and was pleased
with his son’s sturdiness. The English have now so far yielded in
the matter that the Ministry has not confirmed the resolution of the
Cape Government to annex the country around Angra Pequena. “Münster,”
he said, “must leave London, but I doubt whether there is any truth
in the report that Herbert has been selected as his successor.”
He afterwards said: “When the Germans, a short time before the
conclusion of the Preliminary Peace at Versailles, sank some English
coal ships on the Lower Seine and the English made a row on the
subject, the Chief asked me, ‘What can we say in reply?’ Well, I
had brought with me some old fogies on the Law of Nations and such
matters. I hunted up what the old writers called the _jus angariæ_,
that is to say, the right to destroy the property of neutrals on
payment of full compensation, and showed it to the Chief. He sent
me with it to Russell, who allowed himself to be convinced by this
‘good authority.’ Shortly afterwards the whole affair with the _jus
angariæ_ appeared in _The Times_. We wrote in the same sense to
London, and the matter was settled. A short time ago, when I had to
look up something in the documents of the war period, I found that
the two papers which I had written in this matter were gone. They had
been removed by our mutual friend Abeken through jealousy of me.”
I reminded him of O’Donovan’s work, but he said that just now the
_Grenzboten_ article would be premature. In this connection he gave
me a short survey of the relations of the English and the Russians in
Afghanistan, which showed that he was fully informed on that subject.
I finally suggested that I should now give a description in the
_Grenzboten_ of the scandalous treatment of Ireland by England, based
upon Lecky’s book, which he promised to get for me from the Foreign
Office library, but which I already had. I wrote the article which
appeared shortly afterwards.
The Prince having returned from Friedrichsruh, I wrote to him (on the
27th of October), requesting him, in case he wished anything said in
the press respecting the Brunswick question or any other topic of
the day, to let me know when I might have the honour of receiving
information as to his intentions in the matter.
This letter also remained unanswered. It would therefore appear that
the Chancellor will have no further intercourse with me, having
apparently taken offence at something or other. His will be done! And
so we bring the diary to a close.
SUPPLEMENTARY.
Bucher frequently mentioned to me that South African affairs were
also of importance to us. On my expressing my readiness to deal with
the subject in the _Grenzboten_, he promised me material for the
purpose, and twice I reminded him of his promise.
On the 3rd of November, 1884, he wrote me: “I cannot yet spare the
documents on South Africa, as they may be required for use any
day. You will doubtless have noticed this from the articles in the
_Norddeutsche Allgemeine Zeitung_. Besides, this is not the right
moment. You must first know what the Boers have to say in reply to
the accusations of the English.
“In the meantime another article would be desirable in No. 47 on
the debate in _The Times_ of the 1st instant. I have done some of
the preparatory work for you in this matter, and send you herewith
for perusal a bundle of papers in which you will find a variety of
material. The subject of Protection in England must, it is true, be
dealt with very cautiously, as it is in our interest that England
should maintain her present tariff, and we must bear that in mind.
“It is absurd to believe that the tariff question is governed by
any absolute principle which applies to all peoples and all times.
Every nation must know or must learn from experience what is best
for itself. We therefore do not dream of teaching the English,
although they are so generously anxious to teach us, and although
the change from the system of natural forces (by which, since 1815,
the preceding generation of Prussian statesmen raised the country
to prosperity) to the free-trade doctrines that have been accepted
by the official world and the majority of the legislative bodies
since 1850, must be ascribed in great part to English writers, and
German journalists paid by England. Now of the complaints that are
being raised in England, one has an obvious application to the
condition of affairs in Germany, namely, that which relates to
foreign competition in agricultural produce and cattle breeding. Then
you can deal with the arguments of the other side that a return to
Protection is impossible in England, recognising at the same time
that there are sound reasons for this contention. Conclusion: we also
can suggest no remedy; probably this extraordinary state of affairs
must be a consequence of the peculiar development of England--on the
Continent the Thirty Years’ War, the Spanish War of Succession and
the Napoleonic Wars (1870 was also a ‘wonderful year for England’
in consequence of our war). The peoples of the Continent rend each
other to pieces in wars and revolutions. England, which, with the
exception of the unimportant French landing in Ireland, has seen no
enemy on her soil since 1066, is ‘making money’ and helping herself
to the best colonies. If, as there is every reason to believe, we are
now on the eve of a long era of peace in Europe, those conditions
will no longer exist under which the wealth of England has, as
Gladstone says, increased by leaps and bounds.” I wrote this article
immediately, on the lines laid down by Bucher, and basing it on his
material. It appeared in No. 47 of the _Grenzboten_.
On the 16th of November Bucher again sent me material for an attack
upon England. This I worked up into an article entitled “England and
the Cholera,” which was published in No. 49 of the _Grenzboten_.
This article argued that England had destroyed hand weaving in the
East Indies by its customs legislation of 1817, thus depriving large
numbers of people of their livelihood. This, together with the bad
harvests, resulted in famine, which in turn weakened the population
and made it less capable of resisting the cholera which arose through
malaria, heat and overcrowding at the places of pilgrimage, and which
accordingly assumed an epidemic form! England was also responsible
for the extension of the scourge to West Africa and Europe, as, in
order not to disturb her trade and shipping, she exercised no proper
supervision.
On the 24th of November I again called upon Bucher to remind him
of the promised documents from the Foreign Office respecting the
struggle between the English and the Boers. He said that just now in
particular it was impossible to spare them, or at least those of a
later date than 1879, as the Chief and Hatzfeldt might want them for
reference any day. He would, however, send me the earlier papers,
though he really ought not to let any of them leave his hands. He is
of opinion that England is afraid of a war with the Dutch element in
South Africa, and that Warren would certainly not be able to recruit
his volunteers except among the English settlers there. He then said:
“Just keep a sharp look-out on the news from Afghanistan. Something
will happen there soon.” I said: “I suppose the English expedition
which left Quetta to take part in the settlement of the frontier
has arrived?” He replied: “No, it has only got as far as Herat. But
General Lumsden, who has gone by way of Teheran, is already on the
frontier, and has discovered that an important point, Puli Khatun
(the women’s bridge--the men ride through the stream beside it) a
place as to which a decision had yet to be arrived at, was already
in the possession of the Russians. The _Daily News_, the organ of
the Government, is surprised at this, and complains of the action
of the Russians. The Chief will probably have something on the
subject written for the _Grenzboten_. Of course it cannot go into the
_Norddeutsche_.”
I then asked if there was any truth in the report that Busch, who, by
the way, is married to a Jewess, would shortly leave and be given a
Legation. Bucher replied in the affirmative.
I: “Herbert will then be his successor?”
He: “Yes, certainly.”
I: “In that case Hatzfeldt’s position will be rather shaky.”
He: “Certainly, he will then be superfluous, and that is doubtless
the Chief’s intention. Herbert will then read through the despatches
with him at breakfast, and the Chief will explain what is to be done
with them, so that Herbert will bring everything ready prepared for
us to deal with.”
On the 28th of November Bucher’s servant brought me three thick
bundles of Foreign Office documents on the Transvaal question. I made
extracts from these, and returned them to him personally five days
later. They consisted of English blue books, and of despatches from
Münster, Count Herbert Bismarck, Alvensleben at the Hague, and the
German Consul in Cape Town. They extended over the periods from the
16th July, 1881, to the 31st of March, 1882; from the 1st of April,
1882, to November of the same year; and from December, 1882, to the
15th of March, 1884. These I worked up into three articles, under the
title of “England and the Boers,” which appeared in the first three
numbers of the _Grenzboten_ for the year 1885. These were followed
immediately afterwards by an article on “Santa Lucia Bay,” in No.
4, which concluded with a statement by Bucher; and one on “England
and Russia in Asia,” which was also suggested by him, and for which
he had sent me extracts from the English newspapers, together with
O’Donovan’s book on Merv. The latter article appeared in No. 6 of
the _Grenzboten_. Together with the documents there was also a very
violent appeal (in English, and printed on red paper) to the nations
of Europe to help the Boers, on which Bucher had written, “You may
keep this.”
(Here follow some letters exchanged between Dr. Busch and Herr
A. Andrae-Roman, which led to the interview of the 18th of
February.--The Translator.)
On the morning of the 18th of February I called upon Andrae, who was
staying with Knak, the pastor of the Bohemian Lutheran community, at
his residence, No. 29 Wilhelmstrasse. He introduced the pastor to
me as his son-in-law. My visit lasted from 8.45 to 10 A.M. Andrae
is a tall stately man, with a white full beard, apparently well on
in the sixties. From his accent a Hanoverian, he himself said that
he came from East Friesland. He first repeated that, owing to the
unfortunate experience he had had he must be cautious in what he
said, and that he doubted whether we could understand each other,
as from my book I appeared to have a different religious standpoint
to his. With regard to the first point, he referred to Bismarck’s
letter to him, published by Hesekiel, of which he said: “I really
do not know how it came to be published. I read and showed it to
some intimate friends, but I never allowed it to go out of my own
hands. But it impresses itself strongly on the memory, so that a
Schleswig-Holstein ecclesiastic of high rank actually knew it by
heart. It was moreover printed, not in the first place by Hesekiel,
but by a democratic newspaper.” He likewise referred to Diest-Daber,
who also went very thoroughly into things, and immediately noted down
everything he ascertained; describing him as “clever and in reality
honourable.” He had attacked Bismarck owing to a communication from
Moritz von Blankenburg, which was based upon a misunderstanding. I
endeavoured to dissipate Andrae’s mistrust, observing that anything
he might now tell me on the subject in question was not intended
for immediate use in the press, and should not be published at all
without his permission, at least certainly not before Bismarck’s
death. I was only collecting for history, which would ultimately
claim its rights. As to the difference of our religious views, I told
him that I had studied theology, and had adopted theosophical ideas,
and in this connection mentioned Jacob Böhmen. Andrae was intimately
acquainted with Bismarck many years ago, had visited him at
Frankfurt-on-the-Main, and afterwards on several occasions in Berlin.
He added: “Indeed I may go so far as to say that I was for a long
time on terms of close friendship with him. Formerly he listened with
pleasure and with great patience to the views of others. Of course
whether he was guided by them was a different matter. Probably that
is now no longer the case, which would be natural enough with one who
has achieved such great things--and at the same time has had so much
good fortune.” He then went on to speak with the greatest admiration
of Bismarck’s extraordinary political genius, was convinced that he
was a “sincere Christian,” and assured me that he “made no secret of
the fact even as long since as the Frankfurt period. But then, and
even before that time, he showed coolness towards the clergy and the
Church.”
I: “I beg your pardon, but how do you mean that? What do you
understand by the Church? The entire Christian community, the
faithful, the community of saints; or the institution with certain
observances and means of salvation, sacraments, public forms of
divine service, sermons, &c.?”
He replied that the latter conception was what he had in mind. He
then continued: “It is an old story with him, and connected with
the manner of his conversion. At that time the clergy in Pomerania
were not what they are at the present day. The majority of them were
Rationalists, and when the change took place it did not originate
with them, but with a few laymen, like Below, (not Below-Hohendorf,
as I interrupted him to suggest,) Senfft-Pilsach, and Thadden. They
came forward to a certain extent as preachers, and as the clergy held
and preached rationalistic views, often in opposition to them--in
sectarian opposition. Blankenburg, and Bismarck’s father-in-law
in Reinfeld, an excellent old gentleman, were also of the number.
Their views somewhat approached those of Gichtel. Others inclined
to the old Lutheran doctrines. (Therefore not to those of the
Moravian Brethren, as I had supposed.) Bismarck came under their
influence and joined them. Hence his coolness towards the clergy and
the Church. (Gichtel’s ‘Gott in uns,’ and Bismarck’s ‘Nicht durch
Predigermund sich erbauen’--‘Seek not edification from the mouth of
the preacher.’) It was not due to the clerical signatures at foot of
the Declaration.”
He then went on to say that Bismarck misunderstood “the Declaration.”
According to him, Holtz wrote to the Prince that he regretted
having had a hand in it. Bismarck was greatly pleased at this,
and wrote Holtz a long letter expressing his satisfaction.
Andrae disapproved of the step taken by his friend Holtz, “as an
individual demonstration,” and suggested that the signers of “the
Declaration” should send a joint explanation of its real meaning
to the Chancellor, and reject the false construction put upon it,
namely, that they wished to express their approval of the articles in
the _Kreuzzeitung_. They wanted to adopt this course, but Bismarck
informed them, through Limburg Stirum, that he did not wish them to
do so, and would prefer that they should write to him separately. In
that way the idea of a collective explanation was dropped. Andrae is
of opinion that the intercourse between Moritz von Blankenburg and
the Prince still continues, although they only see each other on rare
occasions. “There was never an absolute breach between them, as their
wives continued to meet as they still do.”
We then spoke about the Kulturkampf, and Andrae expressed his
surprise that Bismarck should have entered upon it, as he must have
known that a struggle with a spiritual power had no prospect of
success. His action was doubtless determined by the creation of the
Centre party. I defended him on the lines of the statement dictated
to me at Friedrichsruh.
The conversation then turned upon the relations between the Chief
and the Emperor. Andrae said of the latter: “His merit lies in the
creation of the new army, and in the fact that he recognised the
right men and held firmly to them.” He added the following anecdote:
“A Minister who could no longer endure his position by the side of
Bismarck tendered his resignation to the Emperor. The latter urged
him to remain. ‘We must all learn to be patient,’ he said. The
Minister nevertheless resigned. The Emperor, on the other hand, did
not part with Bismarck, considering it his duty to retain him.” I
observed: “It was a case of necessity; it would have been impossible
to get on without him.” Andrae replied: “Yes, but the Emperor’s merit
was in recognising that fact.”
Andrae then talked a great deal about Hanover, saying that the
clergy there “were willing to yield obedience to the authorities
who had power over them.” He proceeded: “Before the war of 1866,
we, the Conservatives, were divided into two parties--Gerlach and
Marquart, and, on the other hand, those who considered a war with
Austria inevitable. Ultimately an effort was made to bring about
an understanding, and we invited Gerlach to attend a meeting,
accompanied by a few others of his way of thinking, in order that
he should not be alone. He agreed and came, when he made the
following prophecy: ‘There are only two possible results: either we
are defeated, and then it is all over with us, and there will be a
partition of Prussia; or we are victorious, and then we must have a
Liberal _régime_, as that is the only way in which, unification of
Germany under Prussia can be brought about.’ And so it has come to
pass. Bismarck demanded an indemnity, and then for many years worked
in harmony with the Liberals, so far as that was possible.”
As I was leaving Andrae promised to give me further information later
on in case I asked for it. “But not in writing. I frequently come to
Berlin, and shall be glad to meet you again.”
I continued in regular communication with Bucher during the year
1885. I visited him on New Year’s Day; called at his house on the
11th of February to return O’Donovan’s _Oasis of Merv_, but could
not see him, as he lay ill in bed; a few days later we had a short
talk on the Lucia Bay question; and again on the 25th of February I
had a long conversation with him at his lodgings. At first we spoke
about the Chief, whose health, he said, was now thoroughly restored.
He was “quite young and rosy,” and was “working fearfully hard.”
The conversation then turned on Hatzfeldt, who “got sick with fear
at the thought that he might have to take part in the West African
Conference, and that the Chief might appoint him to represent the
Foreign Office in the Reichstag, and so took a holiday.... There is
really nothing the matter with him, but he has managed to obtain
a long leave of absence. As Herbert is now there, it is a question
whether he will return any more. And we shall not miss him, either.
Business will be done as well, or better, in his absence. He would
certainly have been removed from his post as Secretary of State
before this if they only knew where to put him.” I said: “Keudell is
probably not disposed to give up his sinecure in Rome to him.” Bucher
replied: “Keudell really takes things too easy. We thought he would
send in a report on the Italian expedition to the Red Sea, and he,
in fact, promised one. But what was it when it came? A description
of the ball recently given by him, how he danced a quadrille with
the Queen, how the knights of the Order of the Annunziata danced
_vis-à-vis_ to him, and other fine and important matters of the kind,
all in the fullest detail. The Princess is to blame for this. The
other members of the family, including the Chief, have long since
been convinced of his incapacity. At the beginning, during the first
few months, I myself thought there was something in him. He played
the part of the mysterious, reticent thinker, occasionally speaking
very well, and with far-reaching and brilliant ideas. But one soon
recognised that they were not his own, but were borrowed from the
Chief.”
The inhuman pair of us then rejoiced at England’s misfortunes in the
Soudan, and I expressed a hope that Wolseley’s head would soon arrive
in Cairo, nicely pickled and packed. This led the conversation to
Central Asia. Bucher was of opinion that although the Russians would
not now occupy Herat, they would take up such a position that at
the next opportunity they could annex it as they had done Merv. He
then referred to the intention of the English to disband the native
contingents of the Indian Princes, amounting in all to 300,000 men
and 1,200 field guns, and to the “demonstrative review of the Rajah
of Scinde.” I then mentioned the rising of the blacks at Kitteh
against their English friends, and he said: “They are threatened by a
conflict with the French in Burmah.” In reply to my question: “Have
we given up South Africa, or is the Lucia Bay affair still open?” he
said that the matter was still under consideration. (...)
At 1.30 P.M. on the 30th of March a Chancery attendant brought me the
following pencil note from Bucher:--
“His Highness would like to have an article which appeared in the
_Daily Telegraph_ of the 15th of January (or a few days earlier)
dealing with the question of the different aspect things would assume
if an English Princess were Empress of Germany. Perhaps you have this
number?
“Yours, Bʀ.”
Unfortunately I had not kept the number, as I told Bucher in a note
which I sent back by the same messenger. This doubtless explains the
Chief’s recent speech in answer to Richter’s allusion to the dynastic
connection between England and ourselves.
On the morning of the 19th of April paid Bucher another visit. He
wished me to draw a comparison between the bellicose attitude of
_The Times_, and that which it observed previous to the outbreak of
the Crimean War, particulars of which were to be found in Kinglake’s
_Invasion of the Crimea_, Vol. III., p. 31. He believes that it is
now inspired by Lord Dufferin. There can be no question of war, as
England has not the necessary means at present, and Russia has for
the moment no idea of seizing Herat, or even the mountain line
beyond it. In the Afghan campaign of 1839 the English required
for a force of 38,000 men no less than 100,000 camp followers and
innumerable pack animals. Nothing of this kind is now ready. It was
said that 20,000 men passed in review before Abdurrahman and Lord
Dufferin at Rawal Pindi, but in reality they had only 11,000 men
there altogether. The commissariat department was badly managed.
Graham’s troops at Suakim had only one pair of boots each, and when
an Irish regiment knelt down at mass one could see that the soles
were all torn and were patched with pieces of the tin cans which
had contained their preserved meats. The soldiers they have at home
are for the most part too young to be employed in the tropics. The
English would require four months to get from Quetta to Herat. The
Russians could reach it much sooner. The ideas as to the prospects
of the two parties which Münster had been hoaxed into believing were
mere nonsense. Bucher put all these facts together for the Prince,
who submitted them to the Emperor in the shape of a direct report.
“The Crown Prince’s people,” said Bucher, “are very cross and very
angry with the Chief because he will not act as mediator in St.
Petersburg and help England out of her embarrassment, and because
he opposes her schemes at Constantinople. The English have offered
the Turks the occupation of Egypt in return for permission to pass
through the Dardanelles and the Bosphorus. The Sultan was, however,
informed from Berlin and Vienna that we too had a word to say in the
matter, and our officers in Stamboul would take care that the passage
was stopped by torpedoes.”
On the 20th, Bucher sent me the third volume of Kinglake’s book, and
I wrote the article desired by him, which appeared in No. 18 of
_Grenzboten_, under the title “Prospects of Peace and _The Times_.”
On the 22nd of April I called upon Secretary of State von Thile,
whom I had met on the way home a few nights before, when I announced
my visit. He was very friendly and communicative, and we conversed
together from 11 to 1 o’clock. (...)
Thile gave me the following particulars of the agreement with Russia
in 1863: “Bismarck risked a great deal thereby. We might have got
ourselves into a war with France, who would have begun by attacking
us. Napoleon was furious, because he had heard nothing beforehand.
Goltz wrote that he might be pacified if the treaty were communicated
to him. This was done. Bismarck sent the treaty to Goltz, with
instructions to read it to the Emperor alone. Even the Ministers were
to know nothing of it. Napoleon was astounded at its contents, and
exclaimed, ‘Why, this is worse than I had anticipated!’ It had no
further consequences however.”
On Sunday, the 31st of May, I found in the _Daily Telegraph_ of the
29th a leading article on the Emperor’s indisposition, in which the
alteration in the policy of Prussia which would result from the
approaching change in the occupation of the throne was regarded as
full of hope for England. It was asserted among other things that
Prince Bismarck would no longer exercise the influence which he now
did upon the Sovereign. I immediately called upon Bucher with the
paper, which I handed to him in order that he might communicate the
article to the Chief. He cast a glance at the principal passages
underlined by me, and promised to cut out the article and send it to
the Chancellor without delay, mentioning at the same time that I had
brought it. He would doubtless deal with it in some way--probably
get me to write an article on the subject in the _Grenzboten_. But he
was going to leave Berlin on Tuesday (the 2nd of June). Bucher went
on to say that it would really seem as if the Emperor were not at all
well just now. I asked him what was the meaning of Lord Rosebery’s
visit. He replied: “It is in the main as the newspapers represent
it. He has been instructed to find out what the Chief’s views are on
various questions. No negotiations have taken place. I was invited
by the Prince to dine with them one day, and the conversation turned
on indifferent matters, such as dogs, &c. Rosebery said nothing on
the main question, namely, Afghanistan. It was the Chief who first
turned the conversation on to it.” I suggested: “But the present
understanding will doubtless be merely provisional?” He: “I believe
the matter will come up again in about five years, when the railways
are finished. The Russians expect to have the line from Kisil-Arwat
to Askabad ready by 1886, and it will then be carried on to Merv and
to the Oxus in the direction of Samarcand. The English are building
their line from the Indus to Candahar, by a détour _viâ_ Pishin, and
not through the Bolan Pass, which is the shortest route, but where
it would run for twelve (German) miles through defiles which the
natives would be able to block by simply rolling rocks down. But on
the Pishin route also they will meet with great difficulties, and
will not be ready for a long time.... Rosebery’s visit was brought
about by Herbert, who, by the way, has not shown particular skill in
the recent African negotiations. He can be very offensive at times,
which is useful, but he has not sufficiently mastered these colonial
questions. He does not understand, for instance, that colonies
require a coast if they are to prosper, and so he made concessions
which we are now trying to alter. He allows himself to be won over
too easily. Rosebery had been particularly successful in that, and
has quite mesmerised him.”
Speaking of the Emperor once more, he said: “His death will be a bad
thing for us. Rottenburg believes that the Chief will not retain
office under the new Emperor, and in that case it is not impossible
that Keudell may become Chancellor. He is in high favour at the Crown
Prince’s. They stay with him in Rome, and people believe him far more
capable than he really is. He has provided for that in the press; as,
for instance, through Meding, at considerable cost to his own or the
Embassy funds.” (...)
At 12 o’clock (I had called on Bucher with the _Daily Telegraph_
article at 9 A.M.) a servant from the Chancellor’s palace came to
my lodgings to inquire whether I could call upon the Prince at 3
o’clock. At a quarter past 3 I was shown into the Chancellor’s study,
and did not leave until ten minutes past 4.
He was dressed in black with a military stock, and, as usual, sat
at his writing-table. He first quieted Tiras, who sprang out and
wanted to fly at me, shook hands with his accustomed friendliness,
and after I had taken a seat opposite him, asked me how I was,
observing: “You still look exactly the same, not a bit changed.”
He mentioned that during the time he had not seen me he had been
overloaded with work. “Even to-day I have been sitting here since
8 o’clock in the morning,” he continued; “and it is the same from
week’s end to week’s end. The only break is at lunch time, and,
as you know, I also work then, reading despatches and telegrams
and giving instructions, &c. I must do almost everything myself.
Hatzfeldt is an excellent ambassador, and he is also very good here
at receiving the diplomatists,--clever and intelligent, but ailing
and incapable of serious continuous work, impatient of routine, and
in addition to that he is frivolous and has a poor memory. Busch is
no longer of any use either, and must get out of harness. Bojanowski
is ruined, and his Councillors are intriguing against him. My son
is not yet sufficiently trained, and has much to learn.” I said:
“But Busch was an excellent worker and knew the business!” “Yes,” he
replied, “but that is no longer the case. The clock will no longer
work. Latterly he has been constantly unwell.... Herbert is getting
on very well in many things, but he must yet, as the French say,
_faire ses caravanes_, or, as it is better expressed in English, ‘sow
his wild oats.’ _Faire ses caravanes_, you know, originally meant to
join one of the campaigns against the infidels, in which one had to
take part before becoming a knight of Malta. It therefore signifies
to get through one’s blundering as a beginner and to grow wise by
experience.”
He then took up the _Daily Telegraph_ article which Bucher had pasted
on a sheet of paper and enclosed in a letter, which also lay on the
table. He said: “You have sent me this. I thank you for it.”
I: “I thought it would interest you, particularly one passage, as
Bucher asked me a few weeks ago for a leader of the same kind for
you, as he knows I receive the paper. I had not kept that number, but
I afterwards came across it elsewhere, and the article was translated
for the Emperor. I therefore thought you would be glad to see this
one immediately.”
He: “Yes, and it is of interest. But it would hardly do to write
anything against or upon it just now. It would have to be done very
cautiously, and at the present moment in particular it would not
look at all well. The old gentleman is in a very critical state, and
you know it seems to me almost like the case of a woman whose husband
is dangerously ill, and who talks to people about what she will do
afterwards; or, more correctly, as if my wife were dying and I were
to say how I should act after her death, and whether I should marry
again or not. We must wait until the hour has come for a decision
to be taken. It appears that the Crown Prince wishes to retain me,
but I must carefully consider whether I ought to remain with him.
There are many arguments against it, and many also in favour of it;
but at present I am more disposed to go and have no share in his
experiments. But I might look at it as Götz von Berlichingen did
when he joined the peasants--it will not be so bad; and if I remain
many things can be prevented or rendered less harmful. But what
if I were then not to have a free hand?--to have colleagues like
Forckenbeck and George Bunsen, and ceaseless worries with them; while
latterly the old gentleman allowed me to do what I thought proper,
and even to select Ministers and replace them by others? Besides,
there is the co-regency of the Crown Princess, who influences and
completely governs him. Yet what will the result be if I leave them
to themselves? The entire position of the Empire depends upon the
confidence which I have acquired abroad. In France, for instance,
where their attitude is based exclusively upon the faith they place
in my word. The King of the Belgians said recently that a written and
signed contract would do less to put his mind at ease than a verbal
assurance from me that such and such a course would be followed. It
is the same with Russia, where the Emperor trusts entirely to me.
I still remember at the Danzig meeting how he conversed with me for
a long time in his cabin and listened to my opinion. The Emperor
(William) was not over pleased at his taking no notice of the parade
and the various celebrations; but he left us alone all the same. And
the Empress--the Danish Princess--said to me: ‘Our whole confidence
rests upon you. We know that you tell the plain truth, and perform
what you promise.’... Of course I could retire and see how they
got on without me, and then when they called me back after their
experiment had failed, I could bring things back into the old course.
It would then have been proved that affairs could not be conducted
in that way. He doubtless would not venture upon such experiments if
he had not got me in reserve. It was just the same with the new era
when the King gave Liberalism a trial, because he had me to turn to
eventually. But I am an old man, over seventy, and for twenty-nine
years I have exhausted my strength in the service of the State, and
can no longer do what I once did. I can no longer accompany the King
wherever he goes--on journeys, shooting parties and to watering
places. I can no longer ride to manœuvres and parades, so as to
prevent his being alone with others, and to take immediate measures
against the intrigues and influence of opponents. If I were to
persist in that sort of work my illness would return, and I should
soon be dead.”
He drew out from among the books on his right a letter from Dr.
Schweninger, who had written to him that he had escaped a dangerous
illness through regular diet and the greatest possible abstinence
from mental exertion; but that if a recurrence of it were to be
averted he must continue to follow the same course. He then said:
“The Crown Princess is an Englishwoman. That is always the case
with us. When our Princesses marry abroad they doff the Prussian,
and identify themselves with their new country,--as for example the
Queen of Bavaria, who ultimately went so far as to become a Catholic;
and the lady in Darmstadt (it is obvious that this was a slip of
the tongue, and that he meant Karlsruhe), as well as the consort of
the Emperor Nicholas. Here, however, they bring their nationality
with them, and retain it, preserving their foreign interests....
Our policy must not necessarily be anti-English, but if it were to
be English it might prove to be very much against our interest, as
we have always to reckon with the Continental Powers.” He further
observed that the Crown Prince would be influenced in his liking for
England by consideration for Queen Victoria, and (here he mimicked
the act of counting money) her generosity. He has but a slight
knowledge of State affairs, and little interest in them, and he
lacks courage. I reminded the Chief that he, too, had had to infuse
courage into his father on the railway journey from Jueterbogk to
Berlin during the period of conflict. He then related that incident
once more, and added: “He said that I should first come to the
scaffold--at that time I was called the Prussian Strafford; but I
replied: ‘What finer death could a man have than to die for his King
and his right?’”
He then came to speak of the Emperor’s illness, for which--as he
asserted--“the women were to blame, with their desire to give
themselves importance. He was already ill, hoarse, when they talked
him over into driving with them to church. And then the Grand
Duchess wants to play the loving daughter before people, and so she
accompanies him when he, like every one who works a great deal, would
prefer to drive out alone; and at the same time she argues with him,
even when the wind is in their faces, so that he catches cold if
he answers her. It was only his daughter’s persuasion that induced
him to go to Hatzfeldt’s dinner. He ought not to have done that.
(Probably according to Lauer’s opinion.) As he sits at work, Augusta
sticks her head into the room and asks in a caressing voice, ‘Do I
disturb you?’ When he, always gallant in his treatment of ladies,
and particularly of Princesses, replies ‘No,’ she comes in and pours
out all sorts of insignificant gossip to him, and scarcely has she
at last gone away than she is back again knocking at the door with
her, ‘I am again disturbing you’; and so she again wastes his time
chattering. Now that he is ill--you know what his complaint is--she
is a real embarrassment and plague to him. She sits there with him,
and when he wants to be left alone he does not venture to tell her,
so that in the end he gets quite red from pain and restraint; and
she notices it. That is not love, however, but pure play-acting,
conventional care and affection. There is nothing natural about
her--everything is artificial, inwardly as well as outwardly.”
The conversation then turned upon Brunswick, and I said: “Surely we
shall soon have that now? It will shortly be Prussian?” He replied in
the negative, saying: “It must remain independent, because without
the two votes of the Duchy the Federal Council would no longer be of
the slightest importance--Prussia would always have a safe majority.
The Brunswickers, too, are anxious to retain their independence. In
order to maintain the present balance of voting power in the Federal
Council, I have always rejected the overtures of the small fry such
as Waldeck, &c., that wanted to be absorbed in Prussia. Things can be
managed as they are, and we must give the larger States no reason to
mistrust us. _Their_ confidence also is part of my policy, and during
recent years they have always trusted me.”
He was silent for a while and looked at me. I rose to go, and thanked
him for this day’s invitation and the confidence in me which it
manifested, adding that I was all the more pleased as I had been
under the impression that he had been angry with me for my last book,
and that I should not see him again. He clapped me on the shoulder
in a friendly way and said: “No, Büschchen, everything remains as of
old between us two. It is true that you contributed to my illness
with your book, as it gave me a great deal of work.” I replied that
nothing of the kind should occur again, and gave him my hand upon it.
On Tuesday, the 2nd of June, I went to Bucher to tell him that I had
been with the Chief, and to read him my notes of the interview. He
already knew that I had been called to see him. In connection with
what I told him respecting the Chancellor’s resignation or retention
of office under the future Sovereign, he said: “He has also given
the French to understand ... that possibly the next Emperor may not
continue his policy, so that in future it would be well for them in
Egyptian affairs to keep their demands and actions within such limits
as they thought they could, if left to themselves alone, assert and
maintain against the English.” (...)
Bucher smiled at the apprehension which I now expressed that the
Chief had been offended at my book. That, he said, was a mistake.
With regard to the Prince’s remark that it had given him a great
deal of work (he doubtless alluded chiefly to the revising of the
proofs) Bucher observed: “Yes, I have had a good deal to write on the
subject to Reuss, for Andrassy complained of various passages. But
what he imagined he had read was not in the book at all; he had read
it superficially, and we convinced him of that fact.” Finally Bucher
thanked me for the account of my interview with the Chancellor, which
he described as very interesting.
During the first half of June I made an excursion on foot from
Dresden to North Bohemia, to Lausitz, then back to Dresden, and from
there to Moritzburg and Meissen, in order to finally rid myself of a
determination of blood to the head which had seriously troubled me
all the winter. After my return to Berlin, I called upon Bucher on
the 16th June to ask him, in the first place, what attitude should
be adopted in the press towards the new Ministry in England. I
observed that Gladstone had defended English interests although in
an unskilful and feeble way, and that Salisbury would not suit our
purposes any better, indeed, perhaps less, because they would be
more energetic. He replied that Salisbury is blunt in manner, as he
had himself experienced when he was in Berlin. He might, however,
for the moment be more welcome to the Chief than Gladstone, who
had been seeking a _rapprochement_ with Russia in favour of which
there seemed to be a party in that country. Salisbury, on the other
hand, had spoken too strongly against Russia to leave much prospect
of an understanding at the present time between the Tories and
St. Petersburg. True, one could not say what might happen in this
respect later on, and the new English Ministry would also seek an
understanding with France.
He then mentioned Count Herbert’s second mission to London, which
had not turned out so well as the first one respecting Angra Pequena
and the Fiji Islands, in which he had taken up a very strong
position with good results. The second mission should have appeared,
as far as the public was concerned, merely a visit to Rosebery,
with whom Herbert stayed. Its object, however, was to negotiate
respecting Lucia Bay and the Benue district; and Herbert, who was not
sufficiently well acquainted with the maps, &c., conceded too much to
Rosebery, who was very sharp, so that the result was disadvantageous
to us. We lost Lucia Bay. The English Minister argued that they could
not abandon it to us, as it was impossible to allow the Cape Colony
to be hemmed in on both sides. On the Benue, however, they have
annexed a large piece of land, well situated for their purposes.
Bucher then complained of the “gross ineptitude” displayed by
Gerhard Rohlfs in his mission to Zanzibar. “He got it,” he said,
“through the ‘paidocracy,’ as Busch calls it,--through the influence
of the Chancellor’s sons upon their father, and he has spoilt
everything. Contrary to the regulations, which require an examination
to be passed first, he was appointed Consul-General without any
examination, although he is not particularly well informed.... The
trap had been very cleverly prepared for Sultan Burgasch. He has a
sister who is married to a German, a Hamburg merchant named Reute,
and lives now in Germany. Burgasch had robbed her of her inheritance,
and this was to be the starting point of the scheme. She was to go
out to Zanzibar and press her claim, and an accident might possibly
occur to the lady,--her brother might have her strangled. In the
meantime Rohlfs was also to go out, quite quietly, by way of the Red
Sea, and not on board a man-of-war. He, however, induced the Chief
to let him travel _viâ_ London and the Cape; and at Cape Town he
talked imprudently about his mission and position to some officers
of Warren’s expedition (to Bechuanaland), so that the English got
wind of the matter, and were able to take their measures accordingly
(this was under Gladstone’s Government, through their Consul, Kirk).
And in Zanzibar itself he committed one blunder after another. When
this came to the knowledge of the Chief he said in his own family
circle that he would recall him. Paul Lindau, who constantly haunts
the Chancellerie, got it into the newspapers, whereupon a _démenti_
was issued. Later on, however, the Prince returned to his former
intention, as Rohlfs proved quite useless.”... Bucher further related
that Herbert had “provided himself with a deputy Under-Secretary of
State in the person of Darenthall, who was to act for himself when he
was absent. Darenthall is an admirer of Keudell, with whom he spent
nine years in Rome, where there is nothing to do, as everything is
sent there ready prepared. He cannot have gained much experience of
the world there, while others sent to various posts became acquainted
with different countries and conditions of life. He did not, however,
turn out badly as Consul-General in Egypt. When he comes to the
office I shall take a long leave of absence in order not to lose the
last trace of my self-respect.... Bill, who will shortly get married
and who is going to Hanau, has also picked out a successor, von
Rheinbaben. It is true that he belongs to the old nobility, but he is
quite incapable,”--a statement in support of which Bucher produced
sundry evidence. Finally we rejoiced that the Emperor was quite well
again, and Bucher added: “Yes, and in very good humour, as may be
seen from the remarks which he makes on the matters submitted to
him.” (...)
On the 16th of October Bucher called at my lodgings to inform me
that on Hatzfeldt’s departure as Ambassador for London, Herbert
Bismarck is to be appointed Secretary of State, and that the latter
has selected Holstein as Under-Secretary. The Chief had some one
else in view, apparently Berghen, but Herbert would probably be able
to carry out his views with regard to Holstein. He had already made
up the differences between the latter and the Princess. In these
circumstances he, Bucher, meant to retire. He had already asked
the Prince on several occasions to arrange for his retirement on
the score of ill-health. Although the Chief had, through Herbert,
declined to do this, and only granted him a six months’ leave of
absence, he would probably on the conclusion of that period renew his
request. He intends to leave on the 1st of November, and to spend his
holiday on the Lake of Geneva. On parting he said: “Adieu! I must now
return to the treadmill.”