contemporaries, requesting opinions on the Russian manifesto. Very
interesting replies were received. Among those who were in favor, many
of them enthusiastically in favor, were Leo Tolstoi, Maurus Jókai, Otto
Ernst, Ernst von Wolzogen, Peter Rosegger, Dr. M. G. Conrad, Cesare
Lombroso, and General Türr. I am going to introduce here, however, only
some of the replies sent by opponents of the peace movement, because it
seems to me most instructive, for understanding the development of
universal ideas and social conditions, to learn the obstacles which had
and still have to be overcome.
Small differences, like the Caroline Islands question, can be settled
by arbitration; greater differences will continue to lead to tests of
power ... perpetual peace is in heaven. There is no heaven on earth.
Friedrich Naumann
Retired Pastor
The history of many thousand years unfortunately argues against the
possibility that war will ever cease.... At all events the Russian
proposal for disarmament is one of the cleverest diplomatic moves of
modern times.
B. von Werner
These are questions of high politics with which I have nothing to do.
In my opinion, so far as our trade is concerned, all interests are
subordinated to one that is paramount, namely, that Germany be
respected and feared, but so far as possible without being hated, in
the world. Therefore the mercantile class has a vital interest in
seeing the safety of the empire assured in the ways understood by
those who are responsible for it.
Ferdinand Laeisz
Chairman of the Hamburg Board of Trade
I cannot assent to the general notion that armies prepared for battle
are unproductive. Armies are a protection to the nations against
attacks.... The idea of disarmament is unfortunate. We should be glad
that slouchy men can be trained in a manly education.
Reinhold Begas, Sculptor
This noble enthusiasm will miscarry, just as in 1890 the International
Assembly of Workingmen did under Emperor William’s auspices. A mighty
state will never, without a struggle, submit to a verdict which
offends its rights or merely its essential desires. A glance at the
map is sufficient: our empire can resist the ever-possible double
attack of France and Russia only by having all its powers in
readiness.
I do not waste time thinking of Utopias. France lays down as a
condition for every debate the return of the imperial lands; we lay
down as our condition the exclusion of every discussion of this
question. I think this is a sufficient answer. The talk of the private
friends of peace is mere nonsense; the Tsar’s advocacy of peace is
perhaps a stimulus to war.
Felix Dahn
Gastein, on the anniversary of Sedan
(September 2, 1870)
The present proposal of Tsarish Russia for disarmament is a fraud.
W. Liebknecht
The stronger the armaments the greater the fear of assuming the
responsibility of starting a war. Disarmament would make wars more
frequent. Reduction of the present force would withdraw a part of the
people from the school of military discipline and very generally
diminish their efficiency.... The vital questions of the nations will
always be settled by war. Germany must always lead the great powers in
its armaments, because it is the only country that has three great
powers as neighbors and may at any time be exposed to the danger of
waging war on three frontiers. With the increasing solidarity of
states, wars will naturally become more and more infrequent. It is a
dream to expect anything more, and not even a beautiful dream; for
with the guaranty of perpetual peace the degeneracy of mankind would
be confirmed.
Dr. Eduard von Hartmann
The reply that most unctuously dripped with wisdom was that furnished by
Herr W. Metzger, the Social-Democratic delegate to the Reichstag from
the third electoral district in Hamburg. He wrote to the editors that
“he did not feel the slightest inclination to waste even a quarter of an
hour on that Russian diplomatic trick.” So the third electoral district
may be at rest—its representative is saving his time for higher
interests than those that are moving the whole civilized world!
Those are the utterances of single individuals. As regards the voice of
the newspapers, I collected a great number of clippings at the time. The
following are typical of the tone of those opposed:
The Tsar’s proposal for disarmament goes against nature and against
civilization. This alone condemns it. Baroness von Suttner, who a few
years ago gave the command _Die Waffen nieder_, and thereby won among
all men a brilliant success, is now indeed experiencing the great
triumph of having the Tsar join in her summons; but there will be only
a short-lived joy in this for Frau von Suttner and all good souls,
for, as we have said, disarmament is contrary to nature and inimical
to civilization, etc.—_Heidelberger Zeitung_, August 30.
When the Russian disarmament rescript appeared in August, one of the
severest criticisms made upon it was this: “Prince Bismarck has been
dead twenty-eight days.” This was as much as to say that care had been
taken not to submit this question to European statesmen for discussion
during this great stateman’s lifetime, but they waited until after he
was dead to spring it. We do not question the correctness of this
interpretation, but are of the opinion that if Prince Bismarck had
lived to see the publication of the Russian note he would have used
the full weight of his authority to prevent Germany from relinquishing
at a conference even the very smallest part of its right and duty to
regulate its armament absolutely according to its own
discretion.—_Hamburger Nachrichten_, September 18.
A stranger official document than the Tsar’s peace manifesto, his
summons to disarm and his proposal for a general conference, has never
before thrown official and unofficial Europe into astonishment. The
question rises to the lips, Is this an honest Utopia, or is there
hidden behind it a deep calculation of Russian politics, which, as is
well known, is excelled in slyness by the diplomacy of no other state?
It remains at all events a Utopia, in spite of all the European
“Friends of Peace,” and all the other chatter about international
brotherhood.—_Grenzboten_, Number 37, September 15.
Our officials believed without any kind of real investigation that
they must applaud that manifesto with drums and trumpets, solely for
the reason that it had the mighty Tsar as its originator; and they
kept up this policy of groveling when there was no more possible doubt
that the originator of this manifesto was not the Tsar, but those
international peace enthusiasts of the stamp of Suttner and her
allies, whom hitherto no one has taken seriously. Our Emperor has
found the only correct answer to the Tsar’s proposal; we can wait
until his answer is taken to heart in the quarter for which it is
intended, and then the Utopian idea of an international conference for
disarmament, which is of no earthly use, will disappear finally from
the programme.—_Staatsbürgerzeitung_, September 9.
At the banquet of the Westphalian Provincial Diet, on the eighth of
September, Emperor William said:
“Peace will never be better assured than by a thoroughly drilled army
ready for instant service, such as, in detachments, we at the present
time have had opportunity to admire and to rejoice over. God grant us
that it may be ever within our power to conquer with this always keen
and well-cared-for weapon. Then the Westphalian peasant may go to sleep
in peace.”
LVI
EVENTS AND MEETINGS
The Empress Elisabeth · The last days of my father-in-law · Egidy on the
assassination of the Empress · Session of the delegates in Turin · Egidy
evening in Vienna · Reminiscence of the campaign of 1866 · William T.
Stead in Vienna on his pilgrimage · His portrait · His audience with
Nicholas II · His meeting with Bloch · My interview with Muravieff ·
Conclusion of Spanish-American treaty of peace · Reply of the chairman
of the Spanish Commission to a memorial from Émile Arnaud · Still the
Dreyfus affair · General Türr with King Humbert · Egidy dead · Letter
from his son
The Empress Elisabeth assassinated! An infamous dagger thrust into a
quiet, proud, unworldly, and generous heart. Once again mourning and
terror flashed through the whole civilized world with lightning speed.
More and more it is shown that this civilized world has only _one_ soul.
The memory of this princess, so opulent in sufferings, so endowed with
beauty, will go down in history as a radiant and poetic vision. And that
vision will be haloed with a tragic charm—so shockingly sad though it
is, so hateful the deed that was responsible for it—from the fact that
she did not die in her bed of illness or old age, but fell under the
deadly blow of a fanatic madman, just as she was setting out on a new
voyage into the splendor of nature which she loved so well. Out of the
gray monotony of the commonplace thou standest forth for all time,—a
figure in shining black,—Elisabeth of Austria!
My father-in-law, then seventy-nine years of age, had been for some
time, especially since Lotti’s death, very much shattered in health. He
no longer took his daily walks, often dropped off to sleep, sometimes
began to wander in his speech,—in short, his demise was evidently near
at hand. Nevertheless he had his secretary and faithful attendant—my
husband’s former tutor—read the newspaper to him every day. When the
news of the assassination of the Empress arrived we made haste to warn
Herr Wiesner (that was the secretary’s name, though at home we always
called him “Dominus”) not to read to the old gentleman the passages
regarding the tragedy. Attached with the deepest devotion to the
imperial house, Old Austrian to his finger tips, an enthusiastic admirer
of the beautiful Empress,—the news of her death would have terribly
shocked him, and we desired to spare him that.
Only a few days after this event he died in My Own’s arms. At five
o’clock one morning we were summoned to his bedside. The nurse thought
that he was dying, but he soon rallied and lay peacefully. About nine
o’clock—meantime the doctor had been called and all the members of the
family stood about the bed—he sat up and took my husband’s hand.
“Artur,” he said, “you know I have always been an industrious worker—I
must write a few letters to-day; ... there the Dominus stands waiting
for me to dictate—but, Artur, I should like to rest to-day—I may, may I
not?—just a little sleep—yes?”
My Own laid him gently back on the pillow. “Dear father—sleep!”
The old man thrust his arm under the pillow and turned his face to one
side. With a satisfied sigh he closed his eyes, and after a few minutes
he fell asleep—in the sleep that knows no waking.
Egidy wrote me as follows regarding the Empress Elisabeth’s death:
... The most affecting word that has been spoken about your Empress’s
death is that from her own husband’s mouth: “It is incomprehensible
how a man could lay his hand on this woman, who in all her life had
never harmed any one and had done nothing but good.”
A touching truth is to be found in this thought, and at the same time,
also, the earnest call to think the thought again. Possibly the
innocent woman had to die this sudden death in order that deep sorrow
might come upon the best of all peoples, in order that all might mourn
with the bereaved husband and Emperor, and also in order that we might
repeat that lamentation in our thought, and comprehend, should the
grief-stricken Emperor in humble realization come to the following
resolution:
“Henceforth men who have never done any one any harm shall cease
mercilessly thrusting the deadly steel into one another’s hearts.
Henceforth I will not allow men whose lives are confided to my
protection to march to fields of battle; no longer will I train to war
the nations that are under my scepter. The labor of the remaining
years that Providence shall vouchsafe me belongs to internal and
external preparation for the warless epoch.”
Egidy still further elaborated this idea in the October number of his
_Versöhnung_ (“Reconciliation”).
The plans for the meetings to be held in Lisbon in the year 1898 fell
through. The Iberian peninsula seemed little fitted to arrange for peace
congresses as long as the Spanish-American War was in progress; so this
year the two Bernese councils met for consultation in different places,
having for their object the decision of what attitude to take regarding
the Russian circular. The Interparliamentary Union met in Brussels, the
International Peace Bureau in Turin, where a World’s Exposition was
being held.
We went to Turin, My Own and I, in spite of our bereavement, starting a
fortnight after the old baron had been laid away in the family tomb at
Höflein.
A letter which I wrote to a friend tells of our visit to the capital of
Piedmont:
Turin, Grand Hôtel d’Europe,
September 28, 1898
The committee which has been assembled here concluded its labors
to-day. The manifesto of the Emperor of Russia naturally formed the
basis and suggested the direction of the proceedings.
On Sunday, the twenty-fifth, the Turin “Peace Days” began with the
centennial jubilee of the Piedmontese statesman, Count Federigo
Sclopis. In the vast Aula of the Royal University the festival
committee and a great audience were assembled. The hall was packed.
General Türr conducted me to the front row and introduced me to the
Mayor of Turin, Baron Casano, the governor, Marchese Guiccioli,—I
could not help thinking of Byron, who loved a Guiccioli whom I used to
know in Paris,—and the Minister, Count Ferraris. We sat in front of
the desk. The cards of invitation bore the names of twenty-four
eminent men as patrons of the festival; among them were Biancheri,
President of the Chamber, Minister Vigliani, the presidents of the
Roman and Bernese Courts of Cassation, the rector of the University,
the president of the Academy of Sciences, and others.
Lawyer Luzatti was the first to take the platform, and he gave us a
biographical sketch of Federigo Sclopis. He eulogized his services,
and particularized as most glorious the part he played as chairman of
the Alabama Court of Arbitration. Then the vice president of the Roman
Senate, who is also chairman of the Roman Peace Society, spoke, and he
was followed by our Frédéric Passy. He had been in his youth a friend
of Sclopis’s, and was therefore able to tell much that was fresh and
interesting about the life of the great man.
The meeting was over at noon. The rest of the day was devoted to
social intercourse and the Exposition. Such visitors as had any taste
for art were here afforded more delights than are often found in
displays of this kind, for the galleries of sculpture and painting are
better filled than usual, and in a great edifice, built like a
coliseum, an orchestra of two hundred artists gave wonderful concerts.
But if I prove unable to tell much about the Exposition in general,
who will blame a member of the Congress for that? Here old friends are
discovered and new and congenial acquaintances are made, and this fact
serves to promote serious conversation; so the Exposition park, with
its many pavilions, is neglected; you sit down with your comrades
round a café table and talk of the things that are in your heart. The
manifesto first of all, but also everything else that is going on in
the world; among other things, the Dreyfus affair, which just at this
moment every one has more or less in mind. A delegate from Paris,
Gaston Moch, who himself had been a cavalry officer and had served in
the same corps with the exile, has much interesting information to
give. Even as early as 1894 he had looked behind the scenes in the
affair and had realized that the Jewish officer would not be endured
on the general staff. A peculiar thing was also told us: In the summer
of 1894, and thus before the charge was brought against Dreyfus, _Le
Journal_ published a novel as a feuilleton, in which a plot for the
extermination of an unpopular comrade was devised and carried out: the
smuggling into the intelligence bureau of a forged document and the
like,—a whole chain of intrigues such as was actually adopted against
the innocent man, just as if Paty, Henry, and the rest had taken the
novel as a pattern to go by.
On Monday, the twenty-sixth, the delegates met for their first session
in the Palazzo Carignan. The splendor of the Italian princely palaces
is well known. The hall where we met is of sheer gold; the wall
coverings are of gold, the doors and window shutters heavily gilded;
adjoining, and also glittering with gold, is the historic chamber in
which Victor Emmanuel was born.
As the president of the Bureau was obliged to go to Brussels to attend
the session of the Interparliamentary Directorate, the chairmanship of
our meetings was intrusted to the lawyer Luzatti. Though many letters
of greeting arrived, I will cite only the Italian Prime Minister’s:
“Our country—on the ground of the principles that have inspired its
regeneration, on the ground of its ideals of civilization as well as
of its political interests—our country must desire that in
international questions juristic reason may win the day over the
appeal to force.
E. Visconti-Venosta”
The first subject for discussion is expressed clearly in the text of the
resolution that was passed:
“The Meeting is of the opinion that the societies throughout their
spheres of activity should organize demonstrations of every kind, in the
form of petitions and meetings designed to promote a favorable result of
the Tsar’s rescript; it invites the societies to communicate the effects
of these demonstrations to the International Bureau in Bern, which will
give them the greatest possible publicity.”
The English delegates were able to report that in their country numerous
demonstrations in this direction had already taken place. Political
leaders in Parliament had joined in the movement, among them Sir William
Harcourt, Morley, the Marquis of Ripon, Earl Crewe, Bryce, Sir John
Lubbock, Sir Wilfrid Lawson, Spencer Watson, and others; also many
bishops, and the three English cardinals, Vaughan, Loyne, and Gibbons.
The Congress of the Trade Unions, which had until recently held aloof,
voted unanimously and enthusiastically as follows:
“This Congress of organized laborers, representing the industrial
classes of Great Britain and Ireland, greets the Tsar’s message with
satisfaction and calls upon the government to employ all legitimate
means to promote its success, since militarism is a great enemy to labor
and a cruel burden for the slaving millions.”
This attitude of the English workingmen—be this observed in
parenthesis—is at all events more beneficial than that of the socialists
of other lands, who are distrustful of the Russian Emperor’s views, and
who say, “Peace and disarmament, yes—but _we_ want to bring it about, we
alone, and in our own way.” But what is destined to benefit all mankind
must be done by all; it cannot be the work of a class and against other
classes.
Élie Ducommun gave a report on the events of the year, which he claimed
would have marked it as one of the most unfortunate and discouraging for
the movement, had it not ended with the Russian Emperor’s proposal of
official investigation of means for bringing about assured peace and the
reduction of armaments. Moreover, to the assets of the year were to be
reckoned the agreement of France and England on the Niger question, the
arbitration between France and Brazil, and, finally, the conclusion of a
permanent arbitration treaty between Italy and the Argentine Republic.
The assembly sent a congratulatory dispatch to the Italian government on
this treaty,—the first of its kind and likely to prove of the greatest
blessing as an example to be followed.[26]
On the other hand, apprehension was felt regarding the danger that
threatens on the part of Argentina, which is on the point of declaring
war against Chile. It was suggested that a trustworthy person might be
sent in the name of the Peace Bureau to Argentina and Chile to urge both
their presidents to submit the unsettled controversy to a court of
arbitration. Perhaps they would turn a deaf ear to our delegate, but
more probably a word spoken in the name of two hundred societies,
representing both the New World and the Old, would turn the scale in
their deliberations. Dr. Evans Darby suggested, on the other hand, that,
as the outbreak of hostilities was already imminent and the delegate
would assuredly arrive too late, a cablegram should be dispatched
instead.
Accordingly two dispatches were sent on that very same day in the name
of the Turin assembly, one to Valparaiso, the other to Buenos Aires,
earnestly urging the two governments to avoid a war, which, just at this
present moment, would be a lamentable setback to the approaching
conference summoned by the Russian Emperor.[27]
The cable dispatches cost nine hundred francs. Prodigal Friends of
Peace! when one thinks how penurious the war boards are!
On the evening of the twenty-ninth the general public of Turin were
invited to listen to addresses in the Circolo filologico. There was not
a vacant place in the vast auditorium. General Türr made the first
speech and cited passages from Garibaldi’s appeal to the governments.
Then I followed with a reading of my short story, _Es müssen doch schöne
Erinnerungen sein_, translated into Italian for this occasion, under the
title _Bei ricordi_ (“Beautiful Recollections”), by the poet F. Fontana.
Then Émile Arnaud, Professor Ludwig Stein of Bern University, Novikof,
and others spoke.
The audience was in such a high pitch of enthusiasm and sympathy at the
end that I mustered courage, amid the storm of applause, to mount the
platform again and make a brief appeal that the listeners should not
reward our words with mere clapping of hands,—we were not artists hungry
for approbation, we were plain champions of a holy cause,—but rather
should join our organization; they might come up and sign their names.
This invitation was accepted, and by reason of the addresses that
evening the membership list of the Turin Peace Union was increased by
many and influential names.
This Union has also a special section in the Exposition building. The
autograph entries in the book that is there are very interesting. Even
Arabic and Chinese signatures are among them; also dialogues: some one
wrote in French, “I do not believe in it”; some one else wrote
underneath, “I pity you with all my heart.” Tolstoi’s son wrote in the
register, _Quale è lo scopo della guerra? L’assassinio_—(“What is the
object of war? Massacre!”).
Our first care after our return to Austria was to organize a meeting to
agitate in behalf of the Russian circular. Lieutenant Colonel von Egidy
came at my request to address this meeting, which took place in the
Ronacher ballroom on the eighteenth of October. It was the first time he
had ever spoken in Vienna. Although our Viennese did not fully realize
how distinguished he was, they were in a high degree curious about the
famous man who had once been an officer of the empire. It was
universally known that he had been compelled to leave the military
service on account of his convictions as expressed in his pamphlet
_Ernste Gedanken_ (“Serious Thoughts”).
An acquaintance, Count X., whom I had invited to hear the address, wrote
me:
I have never read a line by Egidy. But I cannot share your opinion
regarding him, for in the first place I cannot endure the Prussians;
secondly, if a soldier has done anything so unseemly(!) that he can no
longer serve, I am compelled to reject what he says, even were he as
wise as Aristotle.
Well, now, there are figures in history who have done such unseemly
things that they have been compelled not only to doff their uniforms but
also to empty the cup of hemlock or die at the stake or on the cross;
these would probably have been subjected to a still severer criticism at
the hands of my friend the count.
An hour beforehand the doors of the hall were thrown open, and the
throng which had long been waiting rushed in. The great room was soon
packed; people stood in the gallery behind the last seats. Entrance was
free, “every one invited,”—such was Egidy’s wish.