But all fatigues were compensated by the music. The court choir

of Dresden is famous, and for this occasion splendid additions

had been made both to it and to the orchestra; nothing in its way

could be more impressive, and as a climax came the last honors to

the departed King, when, amid the music of an especially

beautiful chorus, the booming of artillery in the neighboring

square, and the tolling of the bells of the city on all sides,

the royal coffin slowly sank into the vaults below.

On the following morning I was received by the new King. He

seemed a man of sound sense, and likely to make a good

constitutional sovereign. Our talk was simply upon the relations

of the two countries, during which I took pains to bespeak for my

countrymen sojourning at Dresden the same kindnesses which the

deceased King had shown them.

During the summer a study of some of the most important

industries at the Dusseldorf Exposition proved useful; but

somewhat later other excursions had a more direct personal

interest; for within a few hours of each other came two

unexpected communications: one from the president of Yale

University, commissioning me to represent my Alma Mater at the

tercentenary of the Bodleian at Oxford; the other from the

University of St. Andrews, inviting me to the installation of Mr.

Andrew Carnegie as lord rector of that institution; and both

these I accepted.

The celebration at Oxford was in every way interesting to me; but

I may say frankly that of all things which gave me pleasure, the

foremost was the speech of presentation, in the Sheldonian

Theatre, when the doctorate of civil law was conferred upon me.

The first feature in this speech, assigning the reasons for

conferring the degree, was a most kindly reference to my part in

establishing the Arbitration Tribunal at the International

Conference of The Hague; and this, of course, was gratifying. But

the second half of the speech touched me more nearly; for it was

a friendly appreciation of my book regarding the historical

relations between science and theology in Christendom. This was a

surprise indeed! Years before, when writing this book, I had said

to myself, "This ends all prospect of friendly recognition of any

work I may ever do, so far as the universities and academies of

the world are concerned. But so be it; what I believe I will

say." And now, suddenly, unexpectedly, came recognition and

commendation in that great and ancient center of religious

thought and sentiment, once so reactionary, where, within my

memory, even a man like Edward Everett was harshly treated for

his inability to accept the shibboleths of orthodoxy.

This reviving of old and beginning of new friendships, with the

hearty hospitality lavished upon us from all sides, left

delightful remembrances. Several times, during the previous fifty

years, I had visited Oxford and been cordially welcomed; but this

greeting surpassed all others.

There was, indeed, one slight mishap. Being called upon to speak

in behalf of the guests at the great dinner in Christ Church

Hall, I endeavored to make a point which I thought new and

perhaps usefully suggestive. Having referred to the increasing

number of international congresses, expositions, conferences,

academic commemorations, anniversaries, and the like, I dwelt

briefly on their agency in generating friendships between men of

influence in different countries, and therefore in maintaining

international good will; and then especially urged, as the pith

and point of my speech, that such agencies had recently been made

potent for peace as never before. In support of this view, I

called attention to the fact that the Peace Conference at The

Hague had not only established an arbitration tribunal for

PREVENTING war, but had gained the adhesion of all nations

concerned to a number of arrangements, such as international

"Commissions of Inquiry," the system of "Seconding Powers," and

the like, for DELAYING war, thus securing time during which

better international feelings could assert themselves, and

reasonable men on either side could work together to bring in the

sober second thought; that thereby the friendships promoted by

these international festivities had been given, as never before,

time to assert themselves as an effective force for peace against

jingo orators, yellow presses, and hot-heads generally; and

finally, in view of this increased efficiency of such gatherings

in promoting peace, I urged that they might well be multiplied on

both sides of the Atlantic, and that as many delegates as

possible should be sent to them.

"A poor thing, but mine own." Alas! next day, in the press, I was

reported as simply uttering the truism that such gatherings

increase the peaceful feeling of nations; and so the main point

of my little speech was lost. But it was a slight matter, and of

all my visits to Oxford, this will remain in my memory as the

most delightful.[7]

[7] The full speech has since been published in the "Yale Alumni

Weekly."

The visit to St. Andrews was also happy. After the principal of

the university had conferred the doctorate of laws upon several

of the guests, including Mr. Choate, the American ambassador at

London, and myself, Mr. Carnegie gave his rectorial address. It

was decidedly original, its main feature being an argument in

behalf of a friendly union of the United States and Great Britain

in their political and commercial policy, and for a similar union

between the Continental European nations for the protection of

their industries and for the promotion of universal peace, with a

summons to the German Emperor to put himself at the head of the

latter. It was prepared with skill and delivered with force. Very

amusing were the attempts of the great body of students to throw

the speaker off his guard by comments, questions, and chaff. I

learned later that, more than once, orators has thus been

entrapped or entangled, and that on one occasion an address had

been completely wrecked by such interruptions; but Mr. Carnegie's

Scotch-Yankee wit carried him through triumphantly: he met all

these efforts with equanimity and good humor, and soon had the

audience completely on his side.

Returning to Berlin, there came preparations for closing my

connection with the embassy. I had long before decided that on my

seventieth birthday I would cease to hold any official position

whatever. Pursuant to that resolution, my resignation had been

sent to the President, with the statement that it must be

considered final. In return came the kindest possible letters

from him and from the Secretary of State; both of them

attributing a value to my services much beyond anything I would

dare claim.

On my birthday came a new outburst of kindness. From all parts of

Europe and America arrived letters and telegrams, while from the

Americans in various parts of Germany--especially from the Berlin

colony--came a superbly engrossed address, and with it a

succession of kindly visitors representing all ranks in Berlin

society. One or two of these testimonials I may be pardoned for

especially mentioning. Some time after the letter from President

Roosevelt above mentioned, there had come from him a second

epistle, containing a sealed envelop on which were inscribed the

words: "To be opened on your seventieth birthday." Being duly

opened on the morning of that day, it was found to be even more

heartily appreciative than his former letter, and the same was

found to be true of a second letter by the Secretary of State,

Mr. Hay; so that I add these to the treasures to be handed down

to my grandchildren.

Shortly afterward came a letter from the chancellor of the

empire, most kindly appreciative. It will be placed, with those

above referred to, at the close of this chapter.

Especially noteworthy also was the farewell dinner given me at

the Kaiserhof by the German-American Association. Never had I

seen so many Germans eminent in politics, diplomacy, literature,

science, art, education, and commerce assembled on any single

occasion. Hearty speeches were made by the minister of the

interior, Count Posadowsky, who presided, and by Professor

Harnack of the university, who had been selected to present the

congratulations of my entertainers. I replied at length, and as

in previous speeches during my career, both as minister and

ambassador, I had endeavored to present to my countrymen at home

and abroad the claims of Germany upon American good will, I now

endeavored to reveal to the great body of thinking Germans some

of the deeper characteristics and qualities of the American

people; my purpose being in this, as in previous speeches, to

bring about a better understanding between the two nations.

The Emperor being absent in England, my departure from Berlin was

delayed somewhat beyond the time I had fixed; but on the 27th of

November came my final day in office. In the morning my wife and

myself were received in special audience by both the sovereigns,

who afterward welcomed us at their table. Both showed unaffected

cordiality. The Emperor discussed with me various interesting

questions in a most friendly spirit, and, on my taking leave,

placed in my hands what is known as the "Great Gold Medal for Art

and Science," saying that he did this at the request of his

advisers in those fields, and adding assurances of his own which

greatly increased the value of the gift. Later in the day came a

superb vase from the royal manufactory of porcelain, bearing his

portrait and cipher, as a token of personal good will.

On the same evening was the American Thanksgiving dinner, with

farewells to and from the American colony, and during the

following days farewell gatherings at the houses of the dean of

the ambassadors, the secretary of state for foreign affairs, and

the chancellor of the empire; finally, on the evening of December

5, with hearty good-byes at the station from a great concourse of

my diplomatic colleagues and other old friends, we left Berlin.

Our first settlement was at a pretty villa at Alassio, on the

Italian Riviera; and here, in March, 1903, looking over my

garden, a mass of bloom, shaded by palms and orange-trees in full

bearing, and upon the Mediterranean beyond, I settled down to

record these recollections of my life--making excursions now and

then into interesting parts of Italy.

As to these later journeys, one, being out of the beaten track,

may be worth mentioning. It was an excursion in the islands of

Elba and Corsica. Though anything but a devotee of Napoleon, I

could not but be interested in that little empire of his on the

Italian coast, and especially in the town house, country-seat,

and garden where he planned the return to Europe which led to the

final catastrophe.

More interesting still was the visit to Corsica and, especially,

to Ajaccio. There the traveler stands before the altar where

Napoleon's father and mother were married, at the font where he

was baptized, in the rooms where he was born, played with his

brothers during his boyhood, and developed various scoundrelisms

during his young manhood: the furniture and surroundings being as

they were when he knew them.

Just around the corner from the house in which the Bonapartes

lived was the more stately residence of the more aristocratic

family of Pozzo di Borgo. It interested me as the nest in which

was reared that early playmate and rival of Napoleon, who

afterward became his most virulent, persistent, and successful

enemy, who pursued him through his whole career as a hound

pursues a wolf, and who at last aided most effectively in

bringing him down.

After exhausting the attractions of Ajaccio, we drove up a broad,

well-paved avenue, gradually rising and curving until, at a

distance of six or seven miles, it ended at the country-seat of

this same family of Pozzo di Borgo, far up among the mountains.

There, on a plateau commanding an amazing view, and in the midst

of a superb park, we found the rural retreat of the family; but,

to our surprise, not a castle, not a villa, not like any other

building for a similar purpose in Italy or anywhere else in the

world, but a Parisian town house, recently erected in the style

of the Valois period, with Mansard roof. As we approached it, I

was struck by architectural details even more at variance with

the surroundings than was the general style of the building: all

its exterior decoration presenting the features of a pavilion

from the old Tuileries at Paris; and in the garden hard by we

found battered and blackened fragments of pilasters, shown by the

emblems and ciphers upon them to have come from that part of the

Tuileries once inhabited by Napoleon. The family being absent, we

were allowed to roam through the house, and there found the

statues, paintings, tapestries, books, and papers of Napoleon's

arch-enemy, the great Pozzo di Borgo himself, all of them more or

less connected with the great struggle. There, too, in the

library were collected the decorations bestowed upon him by all

the sovereigns of Europe for his successful zeal in hunting down

the common enemy--"the Corsican Ogre." The palace, inside and

out, is a monument to the most famous of Corsican vendettas.

My two winters at Alassio after leaving Berlin, though filled

with deferred work, were restful. During a visit to America in

1903, I joined my class at Yale in celebrating its fiftieth

anniversary, giving there a public address entitled "A Patriotic

Investment." The main purpose of this address was to promote the

establishment of Professorships of Comparative Legislation in our

leading universities. I could not think then, and cannot think

now, of any endowment likely to be more speedily and happily

fruitful in good to the whole country. In the spring of 1904 I

returned to my old house on the grounds of Cornell University,

and there, with my family, old associates, and new friends about

me, have devoted myself to various matters long delayed, and

especially to writing sundry articles in the "Atlantic Monthly,"

the "Century Magazine," and various other periodicals, and to the

discharge of my duties as a Trustee of Cornell and as a Regent of

the Smithsonian Institution and a Trustee of the Carnegie

Institution at Washington. It is, of course, the last of my life,

but I count myself happy in living to see so much of good

accomplished and so much promise of good in every worthy field of

human effort throughout our country and indeed throughout the

world.

Following are the letters referred to in this chapter.

FROM THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES.

WHITE HOUSE,

WASHINGTON.

OYSTER BAY, NEW YORK,

August 5, 1902.

MY DEAR AMBASSADOR WHITE:

It is with real regret that I accept your resignation, for I

speak what is merely a self-evident truth when I say that we

shall have to look with some apprehension to what your successor

does, whoever that successor may be, lest he fall short of the

standard you have set.

It is a very great thing for a man to be able to feel, as you

will feel when on your seventieth birthday you prepare to leave

the Embassy, that you have been able to serve your country as it

has been served by but a very limited number of people in your

generation. You have done much for it in word and in deed. You

have adhered to a lofty ideal and yet have been absolutely

practical and, therefore, efficient, so that you are a perpetual

example to young men how to avoid alike the Scylla of

indifference and the Charybdis of efficiency for the wrong....

With regards and warm respect and admiration,

Faithfully yours,

(Signed) THEODORE ROOSEVELT.

HON. ANDREW D. WHITE,

Ambassador to Germany,

Berlin, Germany.

WHITE HOUSE,

WASHINGTON.

OYSTER BAY, NEW YORK,

September 15, 1902

MY DEAR MR. AMBASSADOR:

Will you read the inclosed on your seventieth birthday? I have

sealed it so you can break the seal then.

Faithfully yours,

(Signed) THEODORE ROOSEVELT.

HON. ANDREW D. WHITE,

U. S. Ambassador,

Berlin, Germany.

WHITE HOUSE,

WASHINGTON.

OYSTER BAY,

September 15, 1902.

MY DEAR MR. AMBASSADOR:

On the day you open this you will be seventy years old. I cannot

forbear writing you a line to express the obligation which all

the American people are under to you. As a diplomat you have come

in that class whose foremost exponents are Benjamin Franklin and

Charles Francis Adams, and which numbers also in its ranks men

like Morris, Livingston, and Pinckney. As a politician, as a

publicist, and as a college president you have served your

country as only a limited number of men are able to serve it. You

have taught by precept, and you have taught by practice. We are

all of us better because you have lived and worked, and I send

you now not merely my warmest well-wishes and congratulations,

but thanks from all our people for all that you have done for us

in the past. Faithfully yours,

(Signed) THEODORE ROOSEVELT.

HON. ANDREW D. WHITE,

U. S. Ambassador,

Berlin, Germany.

FROM THE SECRETARY OF STATE.

NEWBURY, N. H.,

August 3, 1902.

DEAR MR. WHITE:

I have received your very kind letter of the 21st July, which is

the first intimation I have had of your intention to resign your

post of ambassador to Germany. I am sorry to hear the country is

to lose your services in the place you have filled with such

distinguished ability and dignity. It is a great thing to say--as

it is simple truth to say it--that you have, during your

residence in Berlin, increased the respect felt for America not

only in Germany but in all Europe. You have thus rendered a great

public service,--independent of all the details of your valuable

work. The man is indeed fortunate who can go through a long

career without blame, and how much more fortunate if he adds

great achievement to blamelessness. You have the singular

felicity of having been always a fighting man, and having gone

through life without a wound.

I congratulate you most on your physical and mental ability to

enjoy the rest you have chosen and earned....

My wife joins me in cordial regards to Mrs. White, and I am

always,

Faithfully yours,

(Signed) JOHN HAY.

DEPARTMENT OF STATE,

WASHINGTON,

November 7, 1902.

DEAR MR. WHITE:

I cannot let the day pass without sending you a word of cordial

congratulation on the beginning of what I hope will be the most

delightful part of your life. Browning long ago sang, "The best

is yet to be," and, certainly, if world-wide fame troops of

friends, a consciousness of well-spent years, and a great career

filled with righteous achievement are constituents of happiness,

you have everything that the heart of man could wish.

Yours faithfully,

(Signed) JOHN HAY.

His Excellency ANDREW D. WHITE, etc., etc., etc.

FROM THE CHANCELLOR OF THE GERMAN EMPIRE.

Wilhelm Str. 77.

MY DEAR AMBASSADOR:

On the occasion of this memorable day, I beg to send you my best

wishes. May God grant you perfect health and happiness. Be

assured that I always shall remember the excellent relations

which have joined us during so many years, and accept the

assurance of the highest esteem and respect of your most

affectionate

BULOW.

7 Nov. 1902.

CHAPTER XLIV

MY RECOLLECTIONS OF WILLIAM II--1879-1903

At various times since my leaving the Berlin Embassy various

friends have said to me, "Why not give us something definite

regarding the German Emperor?" And on my pleading sundry

difficulties and objections, some of my advisers have recalled

many excellent precedents, both American and foreign, and others

have cited the dictum, "The man I don't like is the man I don't

know."

The latter argument has some force with me. Much ill feeling

between the United States and Germany has had its root in

misunderstandings; and, as one of the things nearest my heart

since my student days has been a closer moral and intellectual

relation between the two countries, there is, perhaps, a reason

for throwing into these misunderstandings some light from my own

experience.

My first recollections of the present Emperor date from the

beginning of my stay as minister at Berlin, in 1879. The official

presentations to the Emperor and Empress of that period having

been made, there came in regular order those to the crown prince

and princess, and on my way to them there fell into my hands a

newspaper account of the unveiling of the monument to the eminent

painter Cornelius, at Dusseldorf, the main personage in the

ceremony being the young Prince William, then a student at Bonn.

His speech was given at some length, and it impressed me. There

was a certain reality of conviction and aspiration in it which

seemed to me so radically different from the perfunctory

utterances usual on such occasions that, at the close of the

official interview with his father and mother, I alluded to it.

Their response touched me. There came at once a kindly smile upon

the father's face, and a glad sparkle into the mother's eyes:

pleasing was it to hear her, while showing satisfaction and

pride, speak of her anxiety before the good news came, and of the

embarrassments in the way of her son at his first public address

on an occasion of such importance; no less pleasing was it to

note the father's happy acquiescence: there was in it all a

revelation of simple home feeling and of wholesome home ties

which clearly indicated something different from the family

relations in sundry royal houses depicted by court chroniclers.

Not long afterward the young prince appeared at some of the court

festivities, and I had many opportunities to observe him. He

seemed sprightly, with a certain exuberance of manner in meeting

his friends which was not unpleasing; but it was noticeable that

his hearty salutations were by no means confined to men and women

of his own age; he was respectful to old men, and that is always

a good sign; it could be easily seen, too, that while he

especially sought the celebrities of the Franco-Prussian War, he

took pains to show respect to men eminent in science, literature,

and art. There seemed a healthy, hearty life in him well

befitting a young man of his position and prospects: very

different was he from the heir to the throne in another country,

whom I had occasion to observe at similar functions, and who

seemed to regard the whole human race with indifference.

Making the usual visits in Berlin society, I found that people

qualified to judge had a good opinion of his abilities; and not

infrequent were prophecies that the young man would some day

really accomplish something.

My first opportunity to converse with him came at his marriage,

when a special reception was given by him and his bride to the

diplomatic corps. He spoke at considerable length on American

topics--on railways, steamers, public works, on Americans whom he

had met, and of the things he most wished to see on our side the

water; altogether he seemed to be broad-minded, alert, with a

quick sense of humor, and yet with a certain solidity of judgment

beneath it all.

After my departure from Berlin there flitted over to America

conflicting accounts of him, and during the short reign of his

father there was considerable growth of myth and legend to his

disadvantage. Any attempt to distil the truth from it all would

be futile; suffice it that both in Germany and Great Britain

careful statements by excellent authorities on both sides have

convinced me that in all that trying crisis the young man's

course was dictated by a manly sense of duty.

The first thing after his accession which really struck me as a

revelation of his character was his dismissal of Bismarck. By

vast numbers of people this was thought the act of an exultant

young ruler eager to escape all restraint, and this opinion was

considerably promoted in English-speaking countries by an

ephemeral cause: Tenniel's cartoon in "Punch" entitled "Dropping

the Pilot." As most people who read this will remember, the iron

chancellor was therein represented as an old, weatherbeaten

pilot, in storm-coat and sou'wester, plodding heavily down the

gangway at the side of a great ship; while far above him, leaning

over the bulwarks, was the young Emperor, jaunty, with a

satisfied smirk, and wearing his crown. There was in that little

drawing a spark of genius, and it sped far; probably no other

cartoon in "Punch" ever produced so deep an effect, save,

possibly, that which appeared during the Crimean War with the

legend "General February turned Traitor"; it went everywhere,

appealing to deep sentiment in human hearts.

And yet, to me--admiring Bismarck as the greatest German since

Luther, but reflecting upon the vast interests involved--this act

was a proof that the young monarch was a stronger man than any

one had supposed him to be. Certainly this dismissal must have

caused him much regret; all his previous life had shown that he

admired Bismarck--almost adored him. It gave evidence of a deep

purpose and a strong will. Louis XIV had gained great credit

after the death of Mazarin by declaring his intention of ruling

alone--of taking into his own hands the vast work begun by

Richelieu; but that was the merest nothing compared to this. This

was, apparently, as if Louis XIII, immediately after the triumphs

of Richelieu, had dismissed him and declared his purpose of

henceforth being his own prime minister. The young Emperor had

found himself at the parting of the ways, and had deliberately

chosen the right path, and this in spite of almost universal

outcries at home and abroad. The OLD Emperor William could let

Bismarck have his way to any extent: when his chancellor sulked

he could drive to the palace in the Wilhelmstrasse, pat his old

servant on the back, chaff him, scold him, laugh at him, and set

him going again, and no one thought less of the old monarch on

that account. But for the YOUNG Emperor William to do this would

be fatal; it would class him at once among the rois

fatneants--the mere figureheads--"the solemnly constituted

impostors," and in this lay not merely dangers to the young

monarch, but to his dynasty and to the empire.

His recognition of this fact was, and is, to me a proof that the

favorable judgments of him which I had heard expressed in Berlin

were well founded.

But this decision did much to render him unpopular in the United

States, and various other reports which flitted over increased

the unfavorable feeling. There came reports of his speeches to

young recruits, in which, to put it mildly, there was preached a

very high theory of the royal and imperial prerogative, and a

very exacting theory of the duty of the subject. Little account

was taken by distant observers of the fundamental facts in the

case; namely, that Germany, being a nation with no natural

frontiers, with hostile military nations on all sides, and with

serious intestine tendencies to anarchy, must, if she is to live,

have the best possible military organization and a central power

strong to curb all the forces of the empire, and quick to hurl

them. Moreover, these speeches, which seemed so absurd to the

average American, hardly astonished any one who had lived long in

Germany, and especially in Prussia. The doctrines laid down by

the young monarch to the recruits were, after all, only what they

had heard a thousand times from pulpit and school desk, and are a

logical result of Prussian history and geography. Something, too,

must be allowed to a young man gifted, energetic, suddenly

brought into so responsible a position, looking into and beyond

his empire, seeing hostile nations north, south, east, and west,

with elements of unreason fermenting within its own borders, and

feeling that the only reliance of his country is in the good

right arms of its people, in their power of striking heavily and

quickly, and in unquestioning obedience to authority.

In the history of American opinion at this time there was one

comical episode. The strongholds of opinion among us friendly to

Germany have been, for the last sixty years, our universities and

colleges, in so many of which are professors and tutors who,

having studied in Germany, have brought back a certain love for

the German fatherland. To them there came in those days a curious

tractate by a little-known German professor--one of the most

curious satires in human history. To all appearance it was simply

a biographical study of the young Roman emperor Caligula. It

displayed the advantages he had derived from a brave and pious

imperial ancestry, and especially from his devout and gifted

father; it showed his natural gifts and acquired graces, his

versatility, his growing restlessness, his manifold ambitions,

his contempt of wise counsel, the dismissal of his most eminent

minister, his carelessness of thoughtful opinion, his meddling in

anything and everything, his displays in the theater and in the

temples of the gods, his growth--until the world recognized him

simply as a beast of prey, a monster. The whole narrative was so

managed that the young prince who had just come to the German

throne seemed the exact counterpart of the youthful Roman

monarch--down to the cruel stage of his career; THAT was left to

anticipation. The parallels and resemblances between the two were

arranged with consummate skill, and whenever there was a passage

which seemed to present an exact chronicle of some well-known

saying or doing of the modern ruler there would follow an

asterisk with a reference to a passage in Tacitus or Suetonius or

Dion Cassius or other eminent authority exactly warranting the

statement. This piece of historical jugglery ran speedily through

thirty editions, while from all parts of Germany came refutations

and counter-refutations by scores, all tending to increase its

notoriety. Making a short tour through Germany at that period,

and stopping in a bookseller's shop at Munich to get a copy of

this treatise, I was shown a pile of pamphlets which it had

called out, at least a foot high. Comically enough, its author

could not be held responsible for it, since the name of the young

Emperor William was never mentioned; all it claimed to give or

did give was the life of Caligula, and certainly there was no

crime in writing a condemnatory history of him or any other

imperial miscreant who died nearly two thousand years ago. In the

American colleges and universities this tractate doubtless made

good friends of Germany uneasy, and it even shocked some

excellent men who knew much of Roman history and little of

mankind; but gradually common sense resumed its sway. As men

began to think they began to realize that the modern German

Empire resembles in no particular that debased and corrupt mass

with which the imperial Roman wretches had to do, and that the

new German sovereign, in all his characteristics and tendencies

is radically a different being from any one of the crazy beasts

of prey who held the imperial power during the decline of Rome.

Sundry epigrams had also come over to us; among others, the

characterization of the three German Emperors: the first William

as "Der greise Kaiser," the Emperor Frederick as "Der weise

Kaiser," and the second William as "Der Reise Kaiser"; and there

were unpleasant murmurs regarding sundry trials for petty

treason. But at the same time there was evident, in the midst of

American jokes at the young Emperor's expense, a growing feeling

that there was something in him; that, at any rate, he was not a

fat-witted, Jesuit-ridden, mistress-led monarch of the old

Bourbon or Hapsburg sort; that he had "go" in him--some fine

impulses, evidently; and here and there a quotation from a speech

showed insight into the conditions of the present world and

aspiration for its betterment.

In another chapter I have given a general sketch of the

conversation at my first presentation to him as ambassador; it

strengthened in my mind the impression already formed,--that he

was not a monarch of the old pattern. The talk was not

conventional; he was evidently fond of discoursing upon

architecture, sculpture, and music, but not less gifted in

discussing current political questions, and in various

conversations afterward this fact was observable. Conventional

talk was reduced to a minimum; the slightest hint was enough to

start a line of remark worth listening to.

Opportunities for conversation were many. Besides the usual

"functions" of various sorts, there were interviews by special

appointment, and in these the young monarch was neither backward

in presenting his ideas nor slow in developing them. The range of

subjects which interested him seemed unlimited, but there were

some which he evidently preferred: of these were all things

relating to ships and shipping, and one of the first subjects

which came up in conversations between us was the books of

Captain Mahan, which he discussed very intelligently, awarding

great praise to their author, and saying that he required all his

naval officers to read them.

Another subject in order was art in all its developments. During

the first years of my stay he was erecting the thirty-two

historical groups on the Avenue of Victory in the Thiergarten,

near my house. My walks took me frequently by them, and they

interested me, not merely by their execution, but by their

historical purpose, commemorating as they do the services of his

predecessors, and of the strongest men who made their reigns

significant during nearly a thousand years. He was always ready

to discuss these works at length, whether from the artistic,

historical, or educational point of view. Not only to me, but to

my wife he insisted on their value as a means of arousing

intelligent patriotism in children and youth. He dwelt with pride

on the large number of gifted sculptors in his realm, and his

comments on their work were worth listening to. He himself has

artistic gifts which in his earlier days were shown by at least

one specimen of his work as a painter in the Berlin Annual

Exhibition; and in the window of a silversmith's shop on the

Linden I once saw a prize cup for a yacht contest showing much

skill in invention and beauty in form, while near it hung the

pencil drawing for it in his own hand.

His knowledge of music and love for it have been referred to

elsewhere in these chapters. Noteworthy was it that his feeling

was not at all for music of a thin, showy sort; he seemed to be

touched by none of the prevailing fashions, but to cherish a

profound love for the really great things in music. This was

often shown, as, for example, at the concert at Potsdam to which

he invited President and Mrs. Harrison, and in his comments upon

the pieces then executed. But the most striking evidence of it

was the music in the Royal Chapel. It has been given me to hear

more than once the best music of the Sistine Pauline, and Lateran

choirs at Rome, of the three great choirs at St. Petersburg, of

the chorus at Bayreuth, and of other well-known assemblages under

high musical direction; but the cathedral choir at Berlin, in its

best efforts, surpassed any of these, and the music, both

instrumental and choral, which reverberates under the dome of the

imperial chapel at the great anniversaries there celebrated is

nowhere excelled. For operatic music of the usual sort he seemed

to care little. If a gala opera was to be given, the chances were

that he would order the performance of some piece of more

historical than musical interest. Hence, doubtless, it was that

during my whole stay the opera at Dresden surpassed decidedly

that at Berlin, while in the higher realms of music Berlin

remained unequaled.

Dramatic art is another field in which he takes an enlightened

interest: he has great reason for doing so, both as a statesman

and as a man.

As a result of observation and reflection during a long life

which has touched public men and measures in wide variety, I

would desire for my country three things above all others, to

supplement our existing American civilization: from Great Britain

her administration of criminal justice; from Germany her theater;

and from any European country, save Russia, Spain, and Turkey,

its government of cities.

As to the second of these desired contributions, ten years in

Germany at various periods during an epoch covering now nearly

half a century have convinced me that her theater, next after her

religious inheritance, gives the best stimulus and sustenance to

the better aspirations of her people. Through it, and above all

by Schiller, the Kantian ethics have been brought into the

thinking of the average man and woman; and not only Schiller, but

Lessing, Goethe, Gutzkow, and a long line of others have given an

atmosphere in which ennobling ideals bloom for the German youth,

during season after season, as if in the regular course of

nature. The dramatic presentation, even in the smallest towns,

is, as a rule, good; the theater and its surroundings are, in the

main, free from the abuses and miseries of the stage in

English-speaking lands, and, above all, from that all-pervading

lubricity and pornographic stench which have made the French

theater of the last half of the nineteenth century a main cause

in the decadence of the French people. In most German towns of

importance one finds the drama a part of the daily life of its

citizens--ennobling in its higher ranges, and in its influence

clean and wholesome.

It may be added that in no city of any English-speaking country

is Shakspere presented so fully, so well, and to such large and

appreciative audiences as in Berlin. All this, and more, the

Emperor knows, and he acts upon his knowledge. Interesting was it

at various times to see him sitting with his older children at

the theater, evidently awakening their interest in dramatic

masterpieces; and among these occasions there come back to me,

especially, the evenings when he thus sat, evidently discussing

with them the thought and action in Shakspere's "Julius Caesar"

and "Coriolanus," as presented on the stage before us. I could

well imagine his comments on the venom of demagogues, on the

despotism of mobs, on the weaknesses of strong men, and on the

need, in great emergencies, of a central purpose and firm

control. His view of the true character and mission of the

theater he has given at various times, and one of his talks with

the actors in the Royal Theater, shortly after my arrival, may be

noted as typical. In it occur passages like the following: "When

I came into the government, ten years ago, . . . I was convinced

that this theater, under the guidance of the monarch, should,

like the school and the university, have as its mission the

development of the rising generation, the promotion of the

highest intellectual good in our German fatherland, and the

ennobling of our people in mind and character.... I beg of you

that you continue to stand by me, each in his own way and place,

serving the spirit of idealism, and waging war against

materialism and all un-German corruptions of the stage."

After various utterances showing his steady purpose in the same

direction, there came out, in one of the later years of my stay,

sundry remarks of his showing a new phase of the same thought, as

follows: "The theater should not only be an important factor in

education and in the promotion of morals, but it should also

present incarnations of elegance, of beauty, of the highest

conceptions of art; it should not discourage us with sad pictures

of the past, with bitter awakenings from illusions, but be

purified, elevated, strengthened for presenting the ideal. . . .

Our ordinary life gives us every day the most mournful realities,

and the modern authors whose pleasure it is to bring these before

us upon the stage have accepted an unhealthy mission and

accomplish a discouraging work."

In his desire to see the theater aid in developing German ideals

and in enriching German life, he has promoted presentations of

the great episodes and personages in German history. Some of

these, by Wildenbruch and Lauff, permeated with veins of true

poetry, are attractive and ennobling. Of course not all were

entirely successful. I recall one which glorified especially a

great epoch in the history of the house of Hohenzollern, the

comical effect of which on one of my diplomatic colleagues I have

mentioned elsewhere; but this, so far as my experience goes, was

an exception.

There seems much reason for the Emperor's strenuous endeavors in

this field. The German theater still remains more wholesome than

that of any other country, but I feel bound to say that, since my

earlier acquaintance with it, from 1854 to 1856 and from 1879 to

1881, there has come some deterioration, and this is especially

shown in various dramas which have been held up as triumphs. In

these, an inoculation from the French drama seems to have

resulted in destruction of the nobler characteristics of the

German stage. One detects the cant of Dumas, fils, but not his

genius; and, when this cant is mingled with German pessimism, it

becomes at times unspeakably repulsive. The zeal for this new

drama seems to me a fad, and rather a slimy fad. With all my

heart I wish the Emperor success in his effort to keep the German

stage upon the higher planes.

Another subject which came up from time to time was that of

archaelogical investigation. Once, in connection with some talk

on German railway enterprises in Asia Minor, I touched upon his

great opportunities to make his reign illustrious by services to

science in that region. He entered into the subject heartily; it

was at once evident that he was awake to its possibilities, and

he soon showed me much more than I knew before of what had been

done and was doing, but pointed out special difficulties in

approaching, at present, some most attractive fields of

investigation.

Interesting also were his views on education, and more than once

the conversation touched this ground. As to his own academic

training, there is ample testimony that he appreciated the main

classical authors whom he read in the gymnasium at Cassel; but it

was refreshing to hear and to read various utterances of his

against gerund-grinding and pedantry. He recognizes the fact that

the worst enemies of classical instruction in Germany, as,

indeed, elsewhere, have been they of its own household, and he

has stated this view as vigorously as did Sydney Smith in England

and Francis Wayland in America. Whenever he dwelt on this subject

the views which he presented at such length to the Educational

Commission were wont to come out with force and piquancy.

On one occasion our discussion turned upon physical education,

and especially upon the value to students of boating. As an old

Yale boating man, a member of the first crew which ever sent a

challenge to Harvard, and one who had occasion in the

administration of an American university to consider this form of

exercise from various standpoints, I may say that his view of its

merits and his way of promoting it seemed to me thoroughly

sensible.

From time to time some mention from me of city improvements

observed during my daily walks led to an interesting discussion.

The city of Berlin is wonderfully well governed, and exhibits all

those triumphs of modern municipal skill and devotion which are

so conspicuously absent, as a rule, from our American cities.

While his capital preserves its self-governing powers, it is

clear that he purposes to have his full say as to everything

within his jurisdiction. There were various examples of this, and

one of them especially interested me: the renovation of the

Thiergarten. This great park, virtually a gift of the

Hohenzollern monarchs, which once lay upon the borders of the

city, but is now in the very heart of it, had gradually fallen

far short of what it should have been. Even during my earlier

stays in Berlin it was understood that some of his predecessors,

and especially his father, had desired to change its corpse-like

and swampy character and give it more of the features of a

stately park, but that popular opposition to any such change had

always shown itself too bitter and uncompromising. This seemed a

great pity, for while there were some fine trees, a great

majority of them were so crowded together that there was no

chance of broad, free growth either for trees or for shrubbery.

There was nothing of that exquisitely beautiful play, upon

expanses of green turf, of light and shade through wide-expanded

boughs and broad masses of foliage, which gives such delight in

any of the finer English or American parks. Down to about half a

dozen years since it had apparently been thought best not to

interfere, and even when attention was called to the dark, swampy

characteristics of much of the Thiergarten, the answer was that

it was best to humor the Berliners; but about the beginning of my

recent stay the young Emperor intervened with decision and force,

his work was thorough, and as my windows looked out over one

corner of this field of his operations, their progress interested

me, and they were alluded to from time to time in our

conversations. Interesting was it to note that his energy was

all-sufficient; the Berliners seemed to regard his activity as

Arabs regard a sand-storm,--as predestined and irresistible,--and

the universal verdict now justifies his course, both on sanitary

and artistic grounds.

The same thing may be said, on the whole, of the influence he has

exerted on the great adornments of his capital city. The position

and character of various monuments on which he has impressed his

ideas, and the laying out and decoration of sundry streets and

parks, do credit not merely to his artistic sense, but to his

foresight.

This prompt yet wise intervention, actuated by a public spirit

not only strong but intelligent, is seen, in various other parts

of the empire, in the preservation and restoration of its

architectural glories. When he announced to me at Potsdam his

intention to present specimens representative of German

architecture and sculpture to the Germanic Museum at Harvard, he

showed, in enumerating and discussing the restorations at

Marienburg and Naumburg, the bas-reliefs at Halberstadt, the

masks and statues of Andreas Schluter at Berlin, and the

Renaissance and rococo work at Lubeck and Danzig, a knowledge and

appreciation worthy of a trained architect and archaeologist.

As to his feeling for literature, his addresses on various

occasions show amply that he has read to good purpose, not only

in the best authors of his own, but of other countries. While

there is not the slightest tinge of pedantry in his speeches or

talk, there crop out in them evidences of a curious breadth and

universality in his reading. His line of reading for amusement

was touched when, at the close of an hour of serious official

business, an illustration of mine from Rudyard Kipling led him to

recall many of that author's most striking situations, into which

he entered with great zest; and at various other times he cited

sayings of Mark Twain which he seemed especially to enjoy. Here

it may be mentioned that one may note the same breadth in his

love for art; for not only does he rejoice in the higher

achievements of architecture, sculpture, and painting, but he

takes pleasure in lighter work, and an American may note that he

is greatly interested in the popular illustrations of Gibson.

I once asked some of the leading people nearest him how he found

time to observe so wide a range, and received answer that it was

as much a marvel to them as to me; he himself once told me that

he found much time for reading during his hunting excursions.

Nor does he make excursions into various fields of knowledge by

books alone. Any noteworthy discovery or gain in any leading

field of thought or effort attracts his attention at once, and

must be presented to him by some one who ranks among its foremost

exponents.

But here it should be especially noted that, active and original

as the Emperor is, he is not, and never has been, caught by FADS

either in art, science, literature, or in any other field of

human activity. The great artists who cannot draw or paint, and

who, therefore, despise those who can and are glorified by those

who cannot; the great composers who can give us neither harmony

nor melody, and therefore have a fanatical following among those

who labor under like disabilities; the great writers who are

unable to attain strength, lucidity, or beauty, and therefore

secure praise for profundity and occult wisdom,--none of these

influence him. In these, as in other things, the Hohenzollern

sanity asserts itself. He recognizes the fact that normal and

healthy progress is by an evolution of the better out of the

good, and that the true function of genius in every field is to

promote some phase of this evolution either by aiding to create a

better environment, or by getting sight of higher ideals.

As to his manner, it is in ordinary intercourse simple, natural,

kindly, and direct, and on great public occasions dignified

without the slightest approach to pomposity. I have known scores

of our excellent fellow-citizens in little offices who were

infinitely more assuming. It was once said of a certain United

States senator that "one must climb a ladder to speak with him";

no one would dream of making any assertion of this sort regarding

the present ruler of the Prussian Kingdom and German Empire.

But it would be unjust to suppose that minor gifts and

acquirements form the whole of his character; they are but a part

of its garb. He is certainly developing the characteristics of a

successful ruler of men and the solid qualities of a statesman.

It was my fortune, from time to time, to hear him discuss at some

length current political questions; and his views were presented

with knowledge, clearness, and force. There was nothing at all

flighty in any of his statements or arguments. There is evidently

in him a large fund of that Hohenzollern common sense which has

so often happily modified German, and even European, politics. He

recognizes, of course, as his ancestors generally have done, that

his is a military monarchy, and that Germany is and must remain a

besieged camp; hence his close attention to the army and navy.

Every one of our embassy military attaches expressed to me his

surprise at the efficiency of his inspections of troops, of his

discrimination between things essential and not essential, and of

his insight into current military questions. Even more striking

testimony was given to me by our naval attaches as to his minute

knowledge not only of his own navy, but of the navies of other

powers, and especially as to the capabilities of various classes

of ships and, indeed, of individual vessels. One thoroughly

capable of judging told me that he doubted whether there was any

admiral in our service who knew more about every American ship of

any importance than does the Kaiser. It has been said that his

devotion to the German navy is a whim. That view can hardly

command respect among those who have noted his labor for years

upon its development, and his utterances regarding its connection

with the future of his empire. As a simple matter of fact, he

recognizes the triumphs of German commercial enterprises, and

sees in them a guarantee for the extension of German power and

for a glory more permanent than any likely to be obtained by

military operations in these times. When any candid American

studies what has been done, or, rather, what has NOT been done,

in his own country, with its immense seacoast and its many

harbors on two oceans, to build up a great merchant navy, and

compares it with what has been accomplished during the last fifty

years by the steady, earnest, honest enterprise of Germany, with

merely its little strip of coast on a northern inland sea, and

with only the Hanseatic ports as a basis, he may well have

searchings of heart. The "Shipping Trust" seems to be the main

outcome of our activity, and lines of the finest steamers running

to all parts of the world the outcome of theirs. There is a

history here which we may well ponder; the young Emperor has not

only thought but acted upon it.

As to yet broader work, the crucial test of a ruler is his

ability to select MEN, to stand by them when he has selected

them, and to decide wisely how far the plans which he has thought

out, and they have thought out, can be fused into a policy worthy

of his country. Judged by this test, the young monarch would seem

worthy of his position; the men he has called to the various

ministries are remarkably fit for their places, several of them

showing very high capacity, and some of them genius.

As to his relation to the legislative bodies, it is sometimes

claimed that he has lost much by his too early and open

proclamation of his decisions, intentions, and wishes; and it can

hardly be denied that something must be pardoned to the ardor of

his patriotic desire to develop the empire in all its activities;

but, after all due allowance has been made, there remains

undeniable evidence of his statesmanlike ability to impress his

views upon the national and state legislatures. A leading member

of one of the parliamentary groups, very frequently in opposition

to government measures, said to me: "After all, it is impossible

for us to resist him; he knows Germany so well, and his heart is

so thoroughly in his proposals, that he is sure to gain his

points sooner or later."

An essential element of strength in this respect is his

acquaintance with men and things in every part of his empire.

Evidences of this were frequent in his public letters and

telegrams to cities, towns, groups, and individuals. Nor was it

"meddling and muddling." If any fine thing was done in any part

of the empire, he seemed the first to take notice of it. Typical

of his breadth of view were the cases of various ship captains

and others who showed heroism in remote parts of the world, his

telegram of hearty approval being usually the first thing they

received on coming within reach of it, and substantial evidence

of his gratitude meeting them later.

On the other hand, as to his faculty for minute observation and

prompt action upon it: a captain of one of the great liners

between Hamburg and New York told me that when his ship was ready

to sail the Emperor came on board, looked it over, and after

approving various arrangements said dryly, "Captain, I should

think you were too old a sailor to let people give square corners

to your tables." The captain quietly acted upon this hint; and

when, many months later, the Kaiser revisited the ship, he said,

"Well, captain, I am glad to see that you have rounded the

corners of your tables."

He is certainly a working man. The record of each of his days at

Berlin or Potsdam, as given in the press, shows that every hour,

from dawn to long after dusk, brings its duties--duties demanding

wide observation, close study, concentration of thought, and

decision. Nor is his attention bounded by German interests. He is

a keen student of the world at large. At various interviews there

was ample evidence of his close observation of the present

President of the United States, and of appreciation of his doings

and qualities; so, too, when the struggle for decent government

in New York was going on, he showed an intelligent interest in

Mr. Seth Low; and in various other American matters there was

recognition of the value of any important stroke of good work

done by our countrymen.

As to his view of international questions, two of the

opportunities above referred to especially occur to me here.

The first of these was during the troubles in Crete between the

Greeks and the Turks. As I talked one evening with one of my

colleagues who represented a power especially interested in the

matter, the Emperor came up and at once entered into the

discussion. He stated the position of various powers in relation

to it, and suggested a line of conduct. There was straightforward

good sense in his whole contention, a refreshing absence of

conventionalities, and a very clear insight into the realities of

the question, with a shrewd forecast of the result. More

interesting to me was another conversation, in the spring of

1899. As the time drew near for the sessions of the Peace

Conference at The Hague, I was making preparations for leaving

Berlin to take up my duty in that body, when one morning there

appeared at the embassy a special messenger from the Emperor

requesting me to come to the palace. My reception was hearty, and

he plunged at once into the general subject by remarking, "What

the conference will most need is good common sense; and I have

sent Count Munster, my ambassador at Paris, because he has lots

of it." With this preface, he went very fully into the questions

likely to come before the conference, speaking regarding the

attitude of the United States and the various powers of Europe

and Asia with a frankness, fullness, and pungency which at times

rather startled me. On the relations between the United States,

Germany, and Great Britain he was especially full. Very

suggestive also were his remarks regarding questions in the far

East, and especially on the part likely to be played by Japan and

China--the interests of various powers in these questions being

presented in various aspects, some of them decidedly original and

suggestive. While there were points on which we could hardly

agree, there were some suggestions which proved to be of especial

value, and to one of them is due the fact that on most questions

the German delegates at The Hague stood by the Americans, and

that on the most important question of all they finally, after a

wide divergence from our view, made common cause with Great

Britain and the United States. I regret that the time has not

come when it is permissible to give his conversation in detail;

it treated a multitude of current topics, and even burning

questions, with statesmanlike breadth, and at the same time with

the shrewdness of a man of the world. There were in it sundry

personal touches which interested me; among others, a statement

regarding Cecil Rhodes, the South African magnate, and a

reference to sundry doings and sayings of his own which had been

misrepresented, especially in England. One point in this was

especially curious. He said, "Some people find fault with me for

traveling so much; but this is part of my business: I try to know

my empire and my people, to see for myself what they need and

what is going on, what is doing and who are doing it. It is my

duty also to know men and countries outside the empire. I am not

like ----," naming a sovereign well known in history, "who never

stirred out of the house if he could help it, and so let men and

things go on as they pleased."

This union of breadth and minuteness in his view of his empire

and of the world is, perhaps, his most striking characteristic.

It may be safely said that, at any given moment, he knows

directly, or will shortly know, the person and work of every man

in his empire who is really taking the lead in anything worthy of

special study or close attention. The German court is considered

very exclusive, but one constantly saw at its assemblages men

noted in worthy fields from every part of Germany and, indeed, of

Europe. Herein is a great difference between the German and

Russian courts. If, during my official life at St. Petersburg, I

wished to make the acquaintance of a man noted in science,

literature, or art, he must be found at professorial gatherings

across the Neva. He rarely, if ever, appeared in the throng of

military and civil officials at the Winter Palace. But at Berlin

such men took an honored place at the court among those whom the

ruler sought out and was glad to converse with.

As to the world outside the empire, I doubt whether any other

sovereign equals him in personal acquaintance with leaders in

every field of worthy activity. It was interesting from time to

time to look over the official lists of his guests at breakfast,

or luncheon, or dinner, or supper, or at military exercises, or

at the theater; for they usually embraced men noted in civil,

ecclesiastical, or military affairs, in literature, science, art,

commerce, or industry from every nation. One class was

conspicuous by its absence at all such gatherings, large or

small; namely, the MERELY rich. Rich men there were, but they

were always men who had done something of marked value to their

country or to mankind; for the mere "fatty tumors" of the

financial world he evidently cared nothing.

A special characteristic in the German ruler is independence of

thought. This quality should not be confounded, as it often is,

with mere offhand decision based upon prejudices or whimsies. One

example, which I have given elsewhere, may be here referred to as

showing that his rapid judgments are based upon clear insight:

his OWN insight, and not that of others. On my giving him news of

the destruction of the Maine at Havana, he at once asked me

whether the explosion was from the outside; and from first to

last, against the opinions of his admirals and captains, insisted

that it must have been so.

He is certainly, in the opinion of all who know him,

impulsive--indeed, a very large proportion of his acts which

strike the attention of the world seem the result of impulse;

but, as a rule, it will be found that beneath these impulses is a

calm judgment. Even when this seems not to be the case, they are

likely to appeal all the more strongly to humanity at large.

Typical was his impulsive proposal to make up to the Regent of

Bavaria the art appropriation denied by sundry unpatriotic

bigots. Its immediate result was a temporary triumph for the

common enemy, but it certainly drew to the Emperor the hearts of

an immense number of people, not only inside, but outside his

empire; and, in the long run, it will doubtless be found to have

wrought powerfully for right reason. As an example of an

utterance of his which to many might seem to be the result of a

momentary impulse, but which reveals sober contemplation of

problems looming large before the United States as well as

Germany, I might cite a remark made last year to an American

eminent in public affairs. He said, "You in America may do what

you please, but I will not suffer capitalists in Germany to suck

the life out of the working-men and then fling them like squeezed

lemon-skins into the gutter."

Any one who runs through the printed volume of his speeches will

see that he is fertile in ideas on many subjects, and knows how

to impress them upon his audiences. His voice and manner are

good, and at times there are evidences of deep feeling, showing

the man beneath the garb of the sovereign. This was especially

the case in his speech at the coming of age of his son. The

audience was noteworthy, there being present the Austrian

Emperor, members of all the great ruling houses of Europe the

foremost men in contemporary German history, and the diplomatic

representatives of foreign powers--an audience representing wide

differences in points of view and in lines of thought, yet no one

of them could fail to be impressed by sundry references to the

significance of the occasion.

Even the most rapid sketch of the Emperor would be inadequate

without some reference to his religious views. It is curious to

note that while Frederick the Great is one of the gods of his

idolatry, the two monarchs are separated by a whole orb of

thought in their religious theories and feelings. While a

philosophical observer may see in this the result of careful

training in view of the evident interests of the monarchy in

these days, he must none the less acknowledge the reality and

depth of those feelings in the present sovereign. No one who has

observed his conduct and utterances, and especially no one who

has read his sermon and prayer on the deck of one of his

war-ships just at the beginning of the Chinese war, can doubt

that there is in his thinking a genuine substratum of religious

feeling. It is true that at times one is reminded of the remark

made to an American ecclesiastic by an eminent German theological

professor regarding that tough old monarch, Frederick William I;

namely, that while he was deeply religious, his religion was "of

an Old Testament type." Of course, the religion of the present

Emperor is of a type vastly higher than that of his ancestor,

whose harshness to the youth who afterward became the great

Frederick has been depicted in the "Memoirs" of the Margravine of

Bayreuth; but there remains clearly in the religion of the

present Emperor a certain "Old Testament" character--a feeling of

direct reliance upon the Almighty, a consciousness of his own

part in guiding a chosen people, and a readiness, if need be, to

smite the Philistines. One phase of this feeling appears in the

music at the great anniversaries, when the leading men of the

empire are brought together beneath the dome of the Palace

Church. The anthems executed by the bands and choirs, and the

great chorals sung by the congregation, breathe anything but the

spirit of the Sermon on the Mount; they seem rather to echo the

grim old battle-hymns of the Thirty Years' War and the war in the

Netherlands.

And yet it must be said that there goes with this a remarkable

feeling of justice to his subjects of other confessions than his

own, and a still more remarkable breadth of view as regards the

relations of modern science to what is generally held as orthodox

theology. The fearlessness with which he recently summoned

Professor Delitzsch to unfold to him and to his family and court

the newly revealed relations of Assyrian research to biblical

study, which gave such alarm in highly orthodox circles, and his

fairness in estimating these researches, certainly revealed

breadth of mind as well as trust in what he considered the

fundamental verities of religion.

A good example of the curious union, in his mind, of religious

feeling, tolerance, and shrewd policy is shown in various

dealings with his Roman Catholic subjects.

Of course he is not ignorant that his very existence as King of

Prussia and German Emperor is a thorn in the side of the Roman

Curia; he knows, as every thinking German knows, that, with the

possible exception of the British monarchy, no other is so hated

by the Vatican monsignori as his own. He is perfectly aware of

the part taken in that quarter against his country and dynasty at

all times, and especially during the recent wars; and yet all

this seems not to influence him in the slightest as regards

justice to his Roman Catholic subjects. He does indeed, resist

the return of the Jesuits into the empire,--his keen insight

forbids him to imitate the policy of Frederick the Great in this

respect,--but his dealings with the Roman Catholic Church at

large show not merely wisdom but kindliness. If he felt bound to

resist, and did successfully resist, the efforts of Cardinal

Rampolla to undermine German rule and influence in Alsace and

Lorraine, there was a quiet fairness and justice in his action

which showed a vast deal of tolerant wisdom. His visits to the

old Abbey of Laach, his former relations with its young abbot,

his settlement of a vexed question by the transfer of the abbot

to the bishopric of Metz, his bringing of a loyal German into

episcopal power at Strasburg, his recent treatment of the prince

bishop of Breslau and the archbishop of Cologne, all show a wise

breadth of view. Perhaps one of the brightest diplomatic strokes

in his career was his dealing with a Vatican question during his

journey in the East. For years there had been growing up in world

politics the theory that France, no matter how she may deal with

monks and nuns and ultramontane efforts within her own immediate

boundaries, is their protector in all the world beside, and

especially in the Holy Land. The relation of this theory to the

Crimean War, fifty years ago, is one of the curious things of

history, and from that day to this it has seemed to be hardening

more and more into a fixed policy--even into something like a

doctrine of international law. Interesting was it, then, to see

the Emperor, on his visit to the Sultan, knock the ground from

under the feet of all this doctrine by securing for the Roman

Catholic interest at Jerusalem what the French had never been

able to obtain--the piece of ground at the Holy City, so long

coveted by pious Catholics, whereon, according to tradition, once

stood the lodging of the Virgin Mary. This the Emperor quietly

obtained of the Sultan, and, after assisting at the dedication of

a Lutheran church at Jerusalem, he telegraphed to the Pope and to

other representatives of the older church that he had made a gift

of this sacred site to those who had so long and so ardently

desired it.

Considerable criticism has been made on the score of his evident

appreciation of his position, and his theory of his relation to

it; but when his point of view is cited, one perhaps appreciates

it more justly. I have already shown this point of view in the

account of the part taken by him at the two-hundredth anniversary

of the Royal Academy, and of his remark, afterward, contrasting

his theory of monarchy with that of Dom Pedro of Brazil. Jocose

as was the manner of it, it throws light upon his idea of his

duty in the state. While a constitutional monarch, he is not so

in the British sense. British constitutional monarchy is made

possible by the "silver streak"; but around the German Empire, as

every German feels in his heart, is no "silver streak." This fact

should be constantly borne in mind by those who care really to

understand the conditions of national existence on the continent

of Europe. Herein lies the answer to one charge that has been so

often made against the German Emperor--of undue solicitude

regarding his official and personal position, as shown in sundry

petty treason trials. The simple fact is that German public

opinion, embodied in German law, has arrived at the conclusion

that it is not best to allow the head of the state to be the

sport of every crank or blackguard who can wield a pen or pencil.

The American view, which allowed Lincoln, Garfield, and McKinley

to be attacked in all the moods and tenses of vituperation, and

to be artistically portrayed as tyrants, drunkards, clowns,

beasts of prey, and reptiles, has not yet been received into

German modes of thought. Luther said that he "would not suffer

any man to treat the Gospel as a sow treats a sack of oats"; and

that seems to be the feeling inherent in the German mind

regarding the treatment of those who represent the majesty of the

nation.

And here a word regarding the relation of Kaiser and people. In

one of the letters to John Adams written by Thomas Jefferson as

they both were approaching the close of life, the founder of

American democracy declared that he had foreseen the failure of

French popular rule, and had therefore favored in France,

democrat though he was, a constitutional monarchy. Had Jefferson

lived in our time, he would doubtless have arrived at a similar

conclusion regarding Germany, for he would have taken account of

the difference between a country like ours, with no long period

of history which had given to dominant political ideas a

religious character,--a country stretching from ocean to ocean,

with no neighbors to make us afraid,--and a country like

Germany, with an ancient historic head, with no natural

frontiers, and beset on every side by enemies; and Jefferson

would doubtless have taken account also of the fact that, were

the matter submitted to popular vote, the present sovereign, with

his present powers, would be the choice of an overwhelming

majority of the German people. The German imperial system, like

our own American republican system, is the result of an evolution

during many generations--an evolution which has produced the

present government, decided its character, fixed its form,

allotted its powers, and decided on the men at the head of it;

and this fact an American, no matter how devoted to republicanism

and democracy in his own country, may well acknowledge to be as

fixed in the political as in the physical world.

Of course some very bitter charges have been made against him as

regards Germany, the main one being that he does not love

parliamentary government and has, at various times, infringed

upon the constitution of the empire.

As to loving parliamentary government, he would probably say that

he cannot regard a system as final which, while attaching to the

front of the chariot of progress a full team to pull it forward,

attaches another team to the rear to pull it backward. But

whatever his theory, he has in practice done his best to promote

the efficiency of parliamentary government, and to increase

respect for it in his kingdom of Prussia, by naming as life

members of the Senate sundry men of the highest character and of

immense value in the discussion of the most important questions.

Two of these, appointed during my stay, I knew and admired. The

first, Professor Gustav Schmoller, formerly rector of the

University of Berlin, is one of the leading economists of the

world, who has shown genius in studying and exhibiting the

practical needs of the German people, and in discerning the best

solutions of similar problems throughout the world--profound,

eloquent, conciliatory, sure to be of immense value as a senator.

The second, Professor Slaby, director of the great technical

institution of Germany at Charlottenburg, is one of the leading

authorities of the world on everything that pertains to the

applications of electricity, a great administrator, a wise

counselor on questions pertaining to the German educational

system. Neither of these men orates, but both are admirable

speakers, and are sure to be of incalculable value. I name them

simply as types: others were appointed, equally distinguished in

other fields. If, then, the Emperor is blamed for not liking

parliamentary and party government, it is only fair to say that

he has taken the surest way to give it strength and credit.

As to the alleged violations of the German constitution, the

same, in a far higher degree, were charged against Kaiser William

I and Bismarck,--and these charges were true,--but it is also

true that thereby those men saved and built up their country. As

a matter of fact, the intuitive sense as well as the reflective

powers of Germans seem to show them that the real dangers to

their country come from a very different quarter--from men who

promote hatreds of race, class, and religion within the empire,

and historic international hatreds without it.

So, too, various charges have been made against the Emperor as

regards the United States. From time to time there came, during

my stay, statements in sundry American newspapers, some

belligerent, some lacrymose, regarding his attitude toward our

country. It seemed to be taken for granted by many good people

during our Spanish War that the Emperor was personally against

us. It is not unlikely that he may have felt sympathy for that

forlorn, widowed Queen Regent of Spain, making so desperate a

struggle to save the kingdom for her young son; if so, he but

shared a feeling common to a very large part of humanity, for

certainly there have been few more pathetic situations; but that

he really cared anything for the success of Spain is exceedingly

doubtful. The Hohenzollern common sense in him must have been for

years vexed at the folly and fatuity of Spanish policy. He

probably inherits the feeling of his father, who, when visiting

the late Spanish monarch some years before his death, showed a

most kindly personal feeling toward Spain and its ruler, and an

intense interest in various phases of art developed in the

Spanish peninsula; but, in his diary, let fall remarks which show

his feeling toward the whole existing Spanish system. One of

these I recall especially. Passing a noted Spanish town, he

remarks: "Here are ten churches, twenty monasteries, and not a

single school." No Hohenzollern is likely to waste much sympathy

on a nation which brings on its fate by preferring monasticism to

education; and never during the Spanish War did he or his

government, to my knowledge, show the slightest leaning toward

our enemies. Certain it is that when sundry hysterical publicists

and meddlesome statesmen of the Continent proposed measures

against what they thought the dangerous encroachments of our

Republic, he quietly, but resolutely and effectually, put his

foot upon them.

Another complaint sometimes heard in America really amounts to

this: that the Emperor is pushing German interests in all parts

of the world, and is not giving himself much trouble about the

interests of other countries. There is truth in this, but the

complainants evidently never stop to consider that every thinking

man in every nation would despise him were it otherwise.

Yet another grievance, a little time since, was that, apparently

with his approval, his ships of war handled sundry Venezuelans

with decided roughness. This was true enough and ought to warm

every honest man's heart.

The main facts in the case were these: a petty equatorial

"republic," after a long series of revolutions,--one hundred and

four in seventy years, Lord Lansdowne tells us,--was enjoying

peace and the beginnings of prosperity. Thanks to the United

States, it had received from an international tribunal the

territory to which it was entitled, was free from disturbance at

home or annoyance abroad, and was under a regular government

sanctioned by its people. Suddenly, an individual started another

so-called "revolution." He was the champion of no reform,

principle, or idea; he simply represented the greed of himself

and a pack of confederates whose ideal was that of a gang of

burglars. With their aid he killed, plundered, or terrorized

until he got control of the government--or, rather, became

himself the government. Under the name of a "republic" he erected

a despotism and usurped powers such as no Russian autocrat would

dare claim. Like the men of his sort who so often afflict

republics in the equatorial regions of South America, he had no

hesitation in confiscating the property and taking the lives, not

only of such of his fellow-citizens as he thought dangerous to

himself, but also of those whom he thought likely to become so.

He made the public treasury his own, and doubtless prepared the

way, as so many other patriots of his sort in such "republics"

have done, for retirement into a palace at Paris, with ample

funds for enjoying the pleasures of that capital, after he, like

so many others, shall have been, in turn, kicked out of his

country by some new bandit stronger than he.

So far so good. If the citizens of Venezuela like or permit that

sort of thing, outside nations have no call to interfere; but

this petty despot, having robbed, maltreated, and even murdered

citizens of his own country, proceeded to maltreat and rob

citizens of other countries and, among them, those of the German

Empire. He was at first asked in diplomatic fashion to desist and

to make amends, but for such appeals he simply showed contempt.

His purpose was evidently to plunder all German subjects within

his reach, and to cheat all German creditors beyond his reach. At

this the German Government, as every government in similar

circumstances is bound to do, demanded redress and sent ships to

enforce the demand. This was perfectly legitimate; but

immediately there arose in the United States an outcry against a

"violation of the Monroe Doctrine." As a matter of fact, the

Monroe Doctrine was no more concerned in the matter than was the

doctrine of the Perseverance of the Saints; but there was enough

to start an outcry against Germany, and so it began to spread.

The Germans were careful to observe the best precedents in

international law, yet every step they took was exhibited in

sundry American papers as a menace to the United States. There

was no more menace to the United States than to the planet

Saturn. The conduct of the German Government was in the interest

of the United States as well as of every other decent government.

Finally, the soldiers in a Venezuelan fort wantonly fired upon a

German war vessel--whereupon the commander of the ship, acting

entirely in accordance, not only with international law, but with

natural right, defended himself, and knocked the fort about the

ears of those who occupied it, thus giving the creatures who

directed them a lesson which ought to rejoice every thinking

American. At this the storm on paper against Germany, both in

America and Great Britain, broke out with renewed violence, and

there was more talk about dangers to the Monroe Doctrine. As one

who, at The Hague Conference, was able to do something for

recognition of the Monroe Doctrine by European powers, and who,

as a member of the Venezuelan Commission, did what was possible

to secure justice to Venezuela, I take this opportunity to

express the opinion that the time has come for plain speaking in

this matter. Even with those of us who believe in the Monroe

Doctrine there begins to arise a question as to which are nearest

the interests and the hearts of Americans,--the sort of "dumb

driven cattle" who allow themselves to be governed by such men as

now control Venezuela, or the people of Germany and other

civilized parts of Europe, as well as those of the better South

American republics, like Chile, the Argentine Republic, Brazil,

and others, whose interests, aspirations, ideals, and feelings

are so much more closely akin to our own.

Occasionally, too, there have arisen plaintive declarations that

the Emperor does not love the United States or admire its

institutions. As to that I never saw or heard of anything showing

dislike to our country; but, after all, he is a free man, and

there is nothing in international law or international comity

requiring him to love the United States; it is sufficient that he

respects what is respectable in our government and people, and we

may fairly allow to him his opinion on sundry noxious and

nauseous developments among us which we hope may prove temporary.

As to admiring our institutions, he is probably not fascinated by

our lax administration of criminal justice, which leaves at large

more unpunished criminals, and especially murderers, than are to

be found in any other part of the civilized world, save,

possibly, some districts of lower Italy and Sicily. He probably

does not admire Tammany Hall or the Philadelphia Ring, and has

his own opinion of cities which submit to such tyranny; quite

likely he has not been favorably impressed by the reckless waste

and sordid jobbery recently revealed at St. Louis and

Minneapolis; it is exceedingly doubtful whether he admires some

of the speeches on national affairs made for the "Buncombe

district" and the galleries; but that he admires and respects the

men in the United States who do things worth doing, and say

things worth saying; that he takes a deep interest in those

features of our policy, or achievements of our people, which are

to our credit; that he enjoys the best of our literature; that he

respects every true American soldier and sailor, every American

statesman or scholar or writer or worker of any sort who really

accomplishes anything for our country, is certain.

To sum up his position in contemporary history: As the German

nation is the result of an evolution of individual and national

character in obedience to resistless inner forces and to its

environment, so out of the medley of imperial and royal

Hohenstaufens, Hapsburgs, Wittelsbachs, Wettins, Guelphs, and the

like, have arisen, as by a survival of the fittest, the

Hohenzollerns. These have given to the world various strong

types, and especially such as the Great Elector, Frederick II,

and William I. Mainly under them and under men trained or

selected by them, Germany, from a great confused mass of warriors

and thinkers and workers, militant at cross-purposes, wearing

themselves out in vain struggles, and preyed upon by malevolent

neighbors, has become a great power in arms, in art, in science,

in literature; a fortress of high thought; a guardian of

civilization; the natural ally of every nation which seeks the

better development of humanity. And the young monarch who is now

at its head--original, yet studious of the great men and deeds of

the past; brave, yet conciliatory; never allowing the mail-clad

fist to become unnerved, but none the less devoted to the

conquests of peace; standing firmly on realities, but with a

steady vision of ideals--seems likely to add a new name to the

list of those who, as leaders of Germany, have advanced the

world.

CHAPTER XLV

AS PRESIDENT OF THE AMERICAN DELEGATION AT THE PEACE CONFERENCE

OF THE HAGUE: I--1899

On the 24th of August, 1898, the Russian Government proposed, in

the name of the Emperor Nicholas II, a conference which should

seek to arrest the constantly increasing development of armaments

and thus contribute to a durable peace; and on the 11th of

January, 1899, his minister of foreign affairs, Count Mouravieff,

having received favorable answers to this proposal, sent forth a

circular indicating the Russian view as to subjects of

discussion. As to the place of meeting, there were obvious

reasons why it should not be the capital of one of the greater

powers. As to Switzerland, the number of anarchists and nihilists

who had taken refuge there, and the murder of the Empress of

Austria by one of them shortly before, at Geneva, in broad

daylight, had thrown discredit over the ability of the Swiss

Government to guarantee safety to the conference; the Russian

Government therefore proposed that its sessions be held at The

Hague, and this being agreed to, the opening was fixed for the

18th of May.

From the first there was a misunderstanding throughout the world

as to what the Emperor Nicholas really proposed. Far and near it

was taken for granted that he desired a general disarmament, and

this legend spread rapidly. As a matter of fact, this was neither

his proposal nor his purpose; the measures he suggested being

designed "to put an end to the constantly increasing development

of armaments."

At the outset I was skeptical as to the whole matter. What I had

seen of the Emperor Nicholas during my stay in Russia had not

encouraged me to expect that he would have the breadth of view or

the strength of purpose to carry out the vast reforms which

thinking men hoped for. I recalled our conversation at my

reception as minister, when, to my amazement, he showed himself

entirely ignorant of the starving condition of the peasantry

throughout large districts in the very heart of the empire.[8]

That he was a kindly man, wishing in a languid way the good of

his country, could not be doubted; but the indifference to

everything about him evident in all his actions, his lack of

force even in the simplest efforts for the improvement of his

people, and, above all, his yielding to the worst elements in his

treatment of the Baltic provinces and Finland, did not encourage

me to believe that he would lead a movement against the enormous

power of the military party in his vast empire. On this account,

when the American newspapers prophesied that I was to be one of

the delegates, my feelings were strongly against accepting any

such post. But in due time the tender of it came in a way very

different from anything I had anticipated: President McKinley

cabled a personal request that I accept a position on the

delegation, and private letters from very dear friends, in whose

good judgment I had confidence, gave excellent reasons for my

doing so. At the same time came the names of my colleagues, and

this led me to feel that the delegation was to be placed on a

higher plane than I had expected. In the order named by the

President, they were as follows: Andrew D. White; Seth Low,

President of Columbia University; Stanford Newel, Minister at The

Hague; Captain Mahan, of the United States navy; Captain Crozier,

of the army; and the Hon. Frederick W. Holls as secretary. In

view of all this, I accepted.

[8] See account of this conversation in "My Mission to Russia,"

Chapter XXXIII, pp. 9-10.

Soon came evidences of an interest in the conference more earnest

and wide-spread than anything I had dreamed. Books, documents,

letters, wise and unwise, thoughtful and crankish, shrewd and

childish, poured in upon me; in all classes of society there

seemed fermenting a mixture of hope and doubt; even the German

Emperor apparently felt it, for shortly there came an invitation

to the palace, and on my arrival I found that the subject

uppermost in his mind was the approaching conference. Of our

conversation, as well as of some other interviews at this period,

I speak elsewhere.

On the 16th of May I left Berlin, and arrived late in the evening

at The Hague. As every day's doings were entered in my diary, it

seems best to give an account of this part of my life in the

shape of extracts from it.

May 17, 1899.

This morning, on going out of our hotel, the Oude Doelen, I found

that since my former visit, thirty-five years ago, there had been

little apparent change. It is the same old town, quiet,

picturesque, full of historical monuments and art treasures. This

hotel and the neighboring streets had been decorated with the

flags of various nations, including our own, and crowds were

assembled under our windows and in the public places. The hotel

is in one of the most attractive parts of the city

architecturally and historically, and is itself interesting from

both points of view. It has been a hostelry ever since the middle

ages, and over the main entrance a tablet indicates rebuilding in

1625. Connected with it by interior passages are a number of

buildings which were once private residences, and one of the

largest and best of these has been engaged for us. Fortunately

the present Secretary of State, John Hay, has been in the

diplomatic service; and when I wrote him, some weeks ago, on the

importance of proper quarters being secured for us, he entered

heartily into the matter, giving full powers to the minister here

to do whatever was necessary, subject to my approval. The result

is that we are quite as well provided for as any other delegation

at the conference.

In the afternoon our delegation met at the house of the American

minister and was duly organized. Although named by the President

first in the list of delegates, I preferred to leave the matter

of the chairmanship entirely to my associates, and they now

unanimously elected me as their President.

The instructions from the State Department were then read. These

were, in effect, as follows:

The first article of the Russian proposals, relating to the

non-augmentation of land and sea forces, is so inapplicable to

the United States at present that it is deemed advisable to leave

the initiative, upon this subject, to the representatives of

those powers to which it may properly apply.

As regards the articles relating to the non-employment of new

firearms, explosives, and other destructive agencies, the

restricted use of the existing instruments of destruction, and

the prohibition of certain contrivances employed in naval

warfare, it seems to the department that they are lacking in

practicability and that the discussion of these articles would

probably provoke divergency rather than unanimity of view. The

secretary goes on to say that "it is doubtful if wars will be

diminished by rendering them less destructive, for it is the

plain lesson of history that the periods of peace have been

longer protracted as the cost and destructiveness of war have

increased. The expediency of restraining the inventive genius of

our people in the direction of devising means of defense is by no

means clear, and, considering the temptations to which men and

nations may be exposed in a time of conflict, it is doubtful if

an international agreement of this nature would prove effective."

As to the fifth, sixth, and seventh articles, aiming, in the

interest of humanity, to succor those who by the chance of battle

have been rendered helpless, to alleviate their sufferings, and

to insure the safety of those whose mission is purely one of

peace and beneficence, we are instructed that any practicable

proposals should receive our earnest support.

On the eighth article, which proposes the wider extension of

"good offices, mediation, and arbitration," the secretary dwells

with much force, and finally says: "The proposal of the

conference promises to offer an opportunity thus far unequaled in

the history of the world for initiating a series of negotiations

that may lead to important practical results." The delegation is

therefore enjoined to propose, at an opportune moment, a plan for

an International Tribunal of Arbitration which is annexed to the

instructions, and to use their influence in the conference to

procure the adoption of its substance.

And, finally, we are instructed to propose to the conference the

principle of extending to strictly private property at sea the

immunity from destruction or capture by belligerent powers

analogous to that which such property already enjoys on land, and

to endeavor to have this principle incorporated in the permanent

law of civilized nations. A well-drawn historical resume of the

relations of the United States to the question of arbitration

thus far is added, and a historical summary of the action of the

United States, hitherto, regarding the exemption of private

property at sea from seizure during war.

The document of most immediate importance is the plan furnished

us for international arbitration. Its main features are as

follows:

First, a tribunal "composed of judges chosen, on account of their

personal integrity and learning in international law, by a

majority of the members of the highest court now existing in each

of the adhering states, one from each sovereign state

participating in the treaty, who shall hold office until their

successors are appointed by the same body."

Secondly, the tribunal to meet for organization not later than

six months after the treaty shall have been ratified by nine

powers; to organize itself as a permanent court, with such

officers as may be found necessary, and to fix its own place of

session and rules of procedure.

The third article provides that "the contracting nations will

mutually agree to submit to the international tribunal all

questions of disagreement between them, excepting such as may

relate to or involve their political independence or territorial

integrity."

The fifth article runs as follows: "A bench of judges for each

particular case shall consist of not fewer than three nor more

than seven, as may be deemed expedient, appointed by the

unanimous consent of the tribunal, and shall not include any

member who is either a native, subject, or citizen of the state

whose interests are in litigation in the case."

The sixth article provides that the general expenses of the

tribunal be divided equally among the adherent powers; but that

those arising from each particular case be provided for as may be

directed by the tribunal; also that non-adherent states may bring

their cases before it, on condition of the mutual agreement that

the state against which judgment shall be found shall pay, in

addition to the judgment, the expenses of the adjudication.

The seventh article makes provision for an appeal, within three

months after the notification of the decision, upon presentation

of evidence that the judgment contains a substantial error of

fact or law.

The eighth and final article provides that the treaty shall

become operative when nine sovereign states, whereof at least six

shall have taken part in the conference of The Hague, shall have

ratified its provisions.

It turns out that ours is the only delegation which has anything

like a full and carefully adjusted plan for a court of

arbitration. The English delegation, though evidently exceedingly

desirous that a system of arbitration be adopted, has come

without anything definitely drawn. The Russians have a scheme;

but, so far as can be learned, there is no provision in it for a

permanent court.

In the evening there was a general assemblage of the members of

the conference at a reception given by Jonkheer van Karnebeek,

formerly Dutch minister of foreign affairs, and now first

delegate from the Netherlands to the conference. It was very

brilliant, and I made many interesting acquaintances; but,

probably, since the world began, never has so large a body come

together in a spirit of more hopeless skepticism as to any good

result. Though no one gives loud utterance to this feeling, it is

none the less deep. Of course, among all these delegates

acquainted with public men and measures in Europe, there is

considerable distrust of the intentions of Russia; and,

naturally, the weakness of the Russian Emperor is well

understood, though all are reticent regarding it. The only open

utterances are those attributed to one or two of the older

European diplomatists, who lament being sent on an errand which

they fear is to be fruitless. One of these is said to have

bewailed this mission as a sad ending to his public services, and

to have declared that as he had led a long life of devotion to

his country and to its sovereign, his family might well look upon

his career as honorable; but that now he is probably doomed to

crown it with an open failure.

May 18.

At two o'clock in the afternoon the conference held its open

session at the "House in the Wood." The building is most

interesting, presenting as it does the art and general ideas of

two hundred and fifty years ago; it is full of historical

associations, and the groves and gardens about it are delightful.

The walls and dome of the great central hall are covered with

immense paintings in the style of Rubens, mainly by his pupils;

and, of these, one over the front entrance represents Peace

descending from heaven, bearing various symbols and, apparently,

entering the hall. To this M. de Beaufort, our honorary

president, the Netherlands minister of foreign affairs, made a

graceful allusion in his opening speech, expressing the hope that

Peace, having entered the hall, would go forth bearing blessings

to the world. Another representation, which covers one immense

wall, is a glorification of various princes of Orange: it is in

full front of me, as I sit, the Peace fresco being visible at my

left, and a lovely view of the gardens, and of the water beyond,

through the windows at my right.

The "House in the Wood" was built early in the seventeenth

century by a princess of the house of Orange, the grandmother of

William III of England. The central hall under the dome, above

referred to, is now filled up with seats and desks, covered with

green cloth, very neat and practical, and mainly arranged like

those in an English college chapel. Good fortune has given me one

of the two best seats in the house; it being directly in front of

the secretaries, who are arranged in a semicircle just below the

desk of the president; at my left are the other members of our

delegation, and facing me, across the central aisle, is Count

Munster, at the head of the German delegation. This piece of good

luck comes from the fact that we are seated in the alphabetical

order of our countries, beginning with Allemagne, continuing with

Amerique, and so on down the alphabet.

The other large rooms on the main floor are exceedingly handsome,

with superb Japanese and Chinese hangings, wrought about the

middle of the last century to fit the spaces they occupy; on all

sides are the most perfect specimens of Japanese and Chinese

bronzes, ivory carvings, lacquer-work, and the like: these rooms

are given up to the committees into which the whole body is

divided. Up-stairs is a dining-hall in which the Dutch Government

serves, every working-day, a most bounteous lunch to us all, and

at this there is much opportunity for informal discussion. Near

the main hall is a sumptuous saloon, hung round with interesting

portraits, one of them being an admirable likeness of Motley the

historian, who was a great favorite of the late Queen, and

frequently her guest in this palace.

Our first session was very interesting; the speech by the

honorary president, M. de Beaufort, above referred to, was in

every way admirable, and that by the president, M. de Staal,

thoroughly good. The latter is the Russian ambassador to London;

I had already met him in St. Petersburg, and found him

interesting and agreeable. He is, no doubt, one of the foremost

diplomatists of this epoch; but he is evidently without much

knowledge of parliamentary procedure. Congratulatory telegrams

were received from the Emperor of Russia and the Queen of the

Netherlands and duly answered.

May 19.

At eleven in the morning, in one of the large rooms of the hotel,

the presidents of delegations met to decide on a plan of

organization and work; and, sitting among them, I first began to

have some hopes of a good result. Still, at the outset, the

prospect was much beclouded. Though a very considerable number of

the foremost statesmen in Europe were present, our deliberations

appeared, for a time, a hopeless chaos: the unfamiliarity of our

president, Baron de Staal, with parliamentary usages seemed

likely to become embarrassing; but sundry statesmen, more

experienced in such matters, began drawing together, and were

soon elaborating a scheme to be presented to the entire

conference. It divided all the subjects named in the Mouravieff

circular among three great committees, the most important being

that on "Arbitration." The choice of representatives on these

from our delegation was made, and an ex-officio membership of all

three falls to me.

In the course of the day I met and talked with various

interesting men, among them Count Nigra, formerly Cavour's

private secretary and ambassador at the court of Napoleon III,

where he accomplished so much for Italian unity; Sir Julian

Pauncefote, the British ambassador at Washington; and M.

Bernaert, president of the Belgian Chamber. In the evening, at a

reception given by the minister of foreign affairs, M. de

Beaufort, I made further acquaintances and had instructive

conversations.

In addition to the strict duties of the conference, there is, of

course, a mass of social business, with no end of visits, calls,

and special meetings, to say nothing of social functions, on a

large scale, at the houses of sundry ministers and officials; but

these, of course, have their practical uses.

The Dutch Government is showing itself princely in various ways,

making every provision for our comfort and enjoyment.

In general, I am considerably encouraged. The skeptical feeling

with which we came together seems now passing away; the recent

speech of the Emperor William at Wiesbaden has aroused new hopes

of a fairly good chance for arbitration, and it looks as if the

promise made me just before I left Berlin by Baron von Bulow,

that the German delegation should cooperate thoroughly with our

own, is to be redeemed. That delegation assures us that it is

instructed to stand by us as far as possible on all the principal

questions. It forms a really fine body, its head being Count

Munster, whom I have already found very agreeable at Berlin and

Paris, and its main authority in the law of nations being

Professor Zorn, of the University of Konigsberg; but, curiously

enough, as if by a whim, the next man on its list is Professor

Baron von Stengel of Munich, who has written a book AGAINST

arbitration; and next to him comes Colonel Schwartzhoff, said to

be a man of remarkable ability in military matters, but strongly

prejudiced against the Russian proposals.

As to arbitration, we cannot make it compulsory, as so many very

good people wish; it is clear that no power here would agree to

that; but even to provide regular machinery for arbitration,

constantly in the sight of all nations, and always ready for use,

would be a great gain.

As to disarmament, it is clear that nothing effective can be done

at present. The Geneva rules for the better care of the wounded

on land will certainly be improved and extended to warfare on

sea, and the laws of war will doubtless be improved and given

stronger sanction.

Whether we can get our proposals as to private property on the

high seas before the conference is uncertain; but I think we can.

Our hopes are based upon the fact that they seem admissible under

one heading of the Mouravieff circular. There is, of course, a

determination on the part of leading members to exclude

rigorously everything not provided for in the original programme,

and this is only right; for, otherwise, we might spend years in

fruitless discussion. The Armenians, for example, are pressing us

to make a strong declaration in their behalf. Poland is also here

with proposals even more inflammatory; so are the Finlanders; and

so are the South African Boers. Their proposals, if admitted,

would simply be bombshells sure to blow all the leading nations

of Europe out of the conference and bring everything to naught.

Already pessimists outside are prophesying that on account of

these questions we are doomed to utter failure.

The peace people of all nations, including our own, are here in

great force. I have accepted an invitation from one of them to

lunch with a party of like mind, including Baroness von Suttner,

who has written a brilliant book, "Die Waffen Nieder," of which

the moral is that all nations shall immediately throw down their

arms. Mr. Stead is also here, vigorous as usual, full of curious

information, and abounding in suggestions.

There was a report, on our arriving, that the Triple Alliance

representatives are instructed to do everything to bring the

conference into discredit, but this is now denied. It is said

that their programme is changed, and things look like it. On the

whole, though no one is sanguine, there is more hope.

May 21.

In the morning went with Dr. Holls to a Whitsunday service at the

great old church here. There was a crowd, impressive chorals, and

a sermon at least an hour long. At our request, we were given

admirable places in the organ-loft, and sat at the side of the

organist as he managed that noble instrument. It was sublime.

After the closing voluntary Holls played remarkably well.

To me the most striking feature in the service was a very earnest

prayer made by the clergyman for the conference. During the

afternoon we also visited the old prison near the Vijver, where

the De Witts and other eminent prisoners of state were confined,

and in front of which the former were torn in pieces by the mob.

Sadly interesting was a collection of instruments of torture,

which had the effect of making me better satisfied with our own

times than I sometimes am.

In the evening, with our minister, Mr. Newel, and the Dean of

Ely, his guest, to an exceedingly pleasant "tea" at the house of

Baroness Gravensteen, and met a number of interesting people,

among them a kindly old gentleman who began diplomatic life as a

British attache at Washington in the days of Webster and Clay,

and gave me interesting accounts of them.

The queer letters and crankish proposals which come in every day

are amazing. I have just added to my collection of diplomatic

curiosities a letter from the editor of a Democratic paper in

southern Illinois, addressed to me as ambassador at Mayence,

which he evidently takes to be the capital of Germany, asking me

to look after a great party of Western newspaper men who are to

go up the Rhine this summer and make a brief stay in the

above-named capital of the empire. I also receive very many

letters of introduction, which of course make large demands upon

my time. The number of epistles, also, which come in from public

meetings in large and small American towns is very great, some

evidently representing no persons other than the writers. As I

write the above, I open mechanically a letter from a peace

meeting assembled in Ledyard, Connecticut, composed of "Rogerine

Quakers"; but what a "Rogerine Quaker" is I know not. Some of

these letters are touching, and some have a comic side. A very

good one comes from May Wright Sewall; would that all the others

were as thoughtful!

It goes without saying that the Quakers are out in full force. We

have been answering by cable some of the most important

communications sent us from America; the others we shall try to

acknowledge by mail, though they are so numerous that I begin to

despair of this. If these good people only knew how all this

distracts us from the work which we have at heart as much as

they, we should get considerably more time to think upon the

problems before us.

May 22.

In the afternoon came M. de Bloch, the great publicist, who has

written four enormous volumes on war in modern times, summaries

of which, in the newspapers, are said to have converted the young

Emperor Nicholas to peace ideas, and to have been the real cause

of his calling the conference together. I found him interesting,

full of ideas, and devoted most earnestly to a theory that

militarism is gradually impoverishing all modern states, and that

the next European war will pauperize most of them.

Just afterward Count Welsersheimb, president of the Austrian

delegation, called, and was very anxious to know the line we are

to take. I told him frankly that we are instructed to present a

plan of arbitration, and to urge a resolution in favor of

exempting private property, not contraband of war, from seizure

on the high seas; that we are ready to go to the full length in

improving the laws of war, and in extending the Geneva rules to

maritime warfare; but that we look on the question of reducing

armaments as relating wholly to Europe, no part of it being

applicable to the United States.

As he seemed strongly in favor of our contention regarding

private property on the high seas, but fearful that Russia and

England, under a strict construction of the rules, would not

permit the subject to be introduced, I pointed out to him certain

clauses in the Mouravieff circular which showed that it was

entirely admissible.

May 23.

In the morning came a meeting of the American delegation on the

subject of telegraphing Washington for further instructions. We

find that some of the details in our present instructions are

likely to wreck our proposals, and there is a fear among us that,

by following too closely the plan laid down for us at Washington,

we may run full in the face of the Monroe Doctrine. It is indeed,

a question whether our people will be willing to have matters of

difference between South American States, or between the United

States and a South American State, or between European and South

American States, submitted to an arbitration in which a majority

of the judges are subjects of European powers. Various drafts of

a telegram were made, but the whole matter went over.

At ten the heads of delegations met and considered a plan of

organizing the various committees, and the list was read. Each of

the three great committees to which the subjects mentioned in the

Mouravieff circular are assigned was given a president,

vice-president, and two honorary presidents. The first of these

committees is to take charge of the preliminary discussion of

those articles in the Mouravieff circular concerning the

non-augmentation of armies and the limitation in the use of new

explosives and of especially destructive weapons. The second

committee has for its subject the discussion of humanitarian

reforms--namely, the adaptation of the stipulations of the

Convention of Geneva of 1864 to maritime warfare, the

neutralization of vessels charged with saving the wounded during

maritime combats, and the revision of the declaration concerning

customs of war elaborated in 1874 by the Conference of Brussels,

which has never yet been ratified. The third committee has charge

of the subject of arbitration, mediation, and the like.

The president of the first committee is M. Bernaert, a leading

statesman of Belgium, who has made a most excellent impression on

me from the first; and the two honorary presidents are Count

Munster, German ambassador at Paris, and myself.

The president of the second committee is M. de Martens, the

eminent Russian authority on international law; and the two

honorary presidents, Count Welsersheimb of Austria-Hungary, and

the Duke of Tetuan from Spain.

The third committee receives as its president M. Leon Bourgeois,

who has held various eminent positions in France; the honorary

presidents being Count Nigra, the Italian ambassador at Vienna,

and Sir Julian Pauncefote, the British ambassador at Washington.

There was much discussion and considerable difference of opinion

on many points, but the main breeze sprang up regarding the

publicity of our doings. An admirable speech was made by Baron de

Bildt, who is a son of my former Swedish colleague at Berlin, has

held various important positions at Washington and elsewhere, has

written an admirable history of Queen Christina of Sweden, and is

now minister plenipotentiary at Rome. He spoke earnestly in favor

of considerable latitude in communications to the press from the

authorities of the conference; but the prevailing opinion,

especially of the older men, even of those from constitutional

states, seemed to second the idea of Russia,--that communications

to the press should be reduced to a minimum, comprising merely

the external affairs of the conference. I am persuaded that this

view will get us into trouble; but it cannot be helped at

present.

May 24.

As was to be expected, there has begun some reaction from the

hopes indulged shortly after the conference came together. At our

arrival there was general skepticism; shortly afterward, and

especially when the organization of the arbitration committee was

seen to be so good, there came a great growth of hope; now comes

the usual falling back of many. But I trust that this will not be

permanent. Yesterday there was some talk which, though quiet, was

none the less bitter, to the effect that the purpose of Russia in

calling the conference is only to secure time for strengthening

her armaments; that she was never increasing her forces at a

greater rate, especially in the southwestern part of the empire

and in the Caucasus, and never intriguing more vigorously in all

directions. To one who stated this to me my answer simply was

that bad faith to this extent on the part of Russia is most

unlikely, if not impossible; that it would hand down the Emperor

and his advisers to the eternal execration and contempt of

mankind; and that, in any case, our duty is clear: to go on and

do the best we can; to perfect plans for a permanent tribunal of

arbitration; and to take measures for diminishing cruelty and

suffering in war.

Meeting Count Munster, who, after M. de Staal, is very generally

considered the most important personage here, we discussed the

subject of arbitration. To my great regret, I found him entirely

opposed to it, or, at least, entirely opposed to any

well-developed plan. He did not say that he would oppose a

moderate plan for voluntary arbitration, but he insisted that

arbitration must be injurious to Germany; that Germany is

prepared for war as no other country is or can be; that she can

mobilize her army in ten days; and that neither France, Russia,

nor any other power can do this. Arbitration, he said, would

simply give rival powers time to put themselves in readiness, and

would therefore be a great disadvantage to Germany.

Later came another disappointment. M. de Martens, having read the

memorandum which I left with him yesterday on the subject of

exempting private property, not contraband of war, from seizure

upon the high seas called, and insisted that it would be

impossible, under any just construction of the Mouravieff

programme, to bring the subject before the second committee as we

had hoped to do; that Russia would feel obliged to oppose its

introduction; and that Great Britain, France, and Italy, to say

nothing of other powers, would do the same. This was rather

trying, for I had especially desired to press this long-desired

improvement in international law; and I showed him how persistent

the United States had been as regards this subject throughout our

whole history, how earnest the President and his cabinet are in

pressing it now, and how our delegation are bound, under our

instructions, to bring it before the conference. I insisted that

we should at least have the opportunity to present it, even if it

were afterward declared out of order. To this he demurred, saying

that he feared it would arouse unpleasant debate. I then

suggested that the paper be publicly submitted to our whole body

for special reference to a future conference, and this he took

into consideration. Under other circumstances, I would have made

a struggle in the committee and, indeed, in the open session of

the full conference; but it is clear that what we are sent here

for is, above all, to devise some scheme of arbitration, and that

anything which comes in the way of this, by provoking ill-feeling

or prolonging discussion on other points, will diminish our

chances of obtaining what the whole world so earnestly desires.

During the day our American delegation held two sessions; and, as

a result, a telegram of considerable length to the State

Department was elaborated, asking permission to substitute a new

section in our original instructions regarding an arbitration

tribunal, and to be allowed liberty to make changes in minor

points, as the development of opinion in the conference may

demand. The substitute which we suggested referred especially to

the clash between the original instructions and the Monroe

Doctrine. I was very reluctant to send the despatch; but, on the

whole, it seemed best, and it was adopted unanimously.