Foreign Office. Things are getting very dull there. Bülow is seriously
ill, and is hardly likely to recover. I shall not see him again after
his holiday. And Gastein has not done me any good either. I was obliged
to work too much there, and yet to no purpose. I felt very well at
Kissingen, but now--my health was better when I left Berlin on the
closing of the Reichstag than it is at present. It was just the same
as long ago as 1877. I then took a longer holiday than usual, but
business followed me like my shadow. Radowitz is also not well. He,
too, complains, and requires some rest. There is now some talk of
looking for assistance to one of our Ministers abroad, Alvensleben and
Stirum being mentioned, as well as Schlözer, who is in favour with the
Crown Prince. With us the trade of a Minister is exhausting, and they
sometimes even die of it, as Brandenburg did after the Warsaw-Olmütz
events. A vast amount of nerve power is used up, particularly in the
Foreign Office among the elderly gentlemen. Fresh friction continually
arises. It was the same in former times, when three Ministers went out
of their minds.” He named them, Kernitz was one, and then continued:
“He (the King) has been wearing out others besides, for instance,
Falk, who retired solely on account of exhaustion and worry. He (Falk)
has no reason to complain of me, I took his part in all questions.
The King was always against him whenever he wanted to carry something
through. I advised him not to take it so much to heart. When the
Most Gracious, who is entirely under the influence of the Queen and
the Court Chaplains, sent him an order which he had to execute, he
should have pointed out that it must have his counter-signature if the
King wanted to keep up constitutional appearances, but that his own
convictions made it impossible for him to sign it, and he should then
have waited to see what would happen. But he is too easily offended,
and so he tendered his resignation--really on account of a mere trifle,
because a Herr von Hagen (so I understood him to say), an utterly
insignificant creature, a blockhead, a coarse, stupid Junker, who
had collected signatures to an address against him, had been elected
on to the Managing Committee of the General Synod. (?) But the real
reason was exhaustion, and vexation at not being able to make any
headway with the King. It was somewhat different in Friedenthal’s case.
He was an intriguer whom I was glad to see the last of. They would
have been pleased to retain him--at Court, where his wife was very
thick with the Empress, and the Emperor interfered very little in his
affairs. Hobrecht’s case was again different. He retired, doubtless
because he himself recognised his inefficiency. He was not at all
equal to his position, and was, besides, of too weak a character to
deal with the numerous obstructive forces in his Ministry. With us,
however, the Foreign Ministry is the worst of all. There the friction
never ceases. My nature is such that I have been able to stand it for
seventeen years; but Bülow, who conducted affairs during my absence,
and who, when he thought he was through with something, constantly met
with fresh hindrances and senseless and obstinate objections--he is
suffering from spinal disease and will die of it.”
He paused for a moment and then continued: “That comes chiefly of the
Emperor’s infatuation for Russia. I am also Russian in my sympathies,
but not blindly, like the Emperor, who, with the exception of his
brother, Prince Charles, and of Princess Alexandrine--is quite alone
in this respect at Court. He sees and hears nothing, and no argument
or evidence makes any impression upon him. He went to Alexandrowo in
spite of the fact that I repeatedly protested in the most positive way
against his doing so. They are making immense preparations in Russia,
have increased their forces by 400,000 men, as much as the peace
footing of the German Army. They can now put twenty-four new divisions
into the field, that is, twelve army corps. And a mass of cavalry is
stationed near the western frontier which could pour in upon us in
three days. The reports are reliable and the Emperor is acquainted with
the facts, but will not credit them. At Alexandrowo they turned his
head with sentimental talk and reminiscences of Queen Louise, so that
he does not recognise the danger, and nothing can be done with him. And
yet it is so evident. Against whom are those armaments directed? They
say in St. Petersburg that Constantinople must be conquered through
Berlin. Others say that the road lies through Vienna, but that Vienna
must be reached through Berlin. We must therefore seek support, and the
direction in which it is to be found is indicated. The sensible portion
of the 42,000,000 Germans would prefer to have a good understanding
with both Russia and Austria. But if one is obliged to choose between
them, then everything points to Austria, national reasons and others.
In that country there are some nine or ten millions of Germans, and the
Hungarians are also decidedly upon our side; indeed, even the Czechs
(with the exception of a dozen or so of irreconcilables who are of
no account) are at least disinclined to become Russians. But let us
suppose that Austria were a purely Slav country. Russia is strong
enough alone, and we cannot be of much assistance to her. Austria is
the weaker of the two, although at the same time a valuable ally, and
we can be of great assistance to her. She can also strengthen us in our
policy of peace. When we are united, with our two million soldiers back
to back, they, with their Nihilism, will doubtless think twice before
they disturb the peace. The idea of such an alliance has been very
favourably received by the German Princes; and they are in thorough
agreement with it in England also. France, too, is at present obviously
in favour of the maintenance of peace, but for how long? The Crown
Prince is quite of my opinion; it was a matter of course, he said, that
we should unite with Austria. It is only the Emperor--he has recovered
physically from the great loss of blood in the last attempt upon his
life, but his mental powers have been weakened.”
I remarked that the old gentleman’s age, his eighty-two years, must
doubtless also have some effect. Water on the brain was apt to set in
at that age.
“That too,” he added, “and consequently he does not understand what
is said to him, even when it is very simple, and will not adopt any
measures that are proposed to him. He and his brother and Princess
Alexandrine are the Russian Rütli. (An allusion to Schiller’s _Wilhelm
Tell_.) You must not say anything about this in the press--at least,
not as yet; nor of the intention to bring about an alliance for the
maintenance of peace either, as that is still in course of development.
But you may speak of the condition of affairs in the Foreign Office,
how one’s ideas and decisions are affected by consideration for
the political requirements of the Empire, by responsibility to the
Reichstag, and by the views of the Sovereign; and that the friction
thus arising wears some Ministers to death, and invariably injures
their health. Refer to Brandenburg as an instance which the present
situation recalls. Bülow has been destroyed in that way. It is our Most
Gracious who has done for him. The doctors say that the pain in the hip
indicates a dangerous spinal disease. He is to be brought in now from
Potsdam to Berlin, but I shall go out with my wife to see him. If he
goes to Italy, who knows if we shall meet again? I must not stay longer
than a quarter of an hour with him, as the excitement would be too much
for him. I am extremely sorry to lose him.”
I said: “I have heard him described as a particularly capable worker.”
“Yes,” he replied, “and adroit, sensible, and loyal; not like Thile,
who was the Empress’s messenger, and whom she kept here for a long time
after I had made up my mind to get rid of him, owing to his incapacity.
I learned to know and esteem him at Frankfurt (he was now referring
again to Bülow), whilst he still held the post of Danish Envoy to the
Germanic Diet. And when he had become Minister for Mecklenburg he also
showed great ability in the Federal Council, so that I was determined
to have him.”
He then recurred to the alliance with Austria, repeating in other words
what he had said to me, _inter alia_. With the exception of the Emperor
and the two other personages, almost the only people in Germany who
were still in favour of Russia were the East Prussian corn-dealers. In
reply to an inquiry as to the attitude of the Emperor Francis Joseph,
he said: “Very fair and reasonable. He came specially on my account to
Vienna from his shooting-box, adopted all my ideas, and was prepared to
do everything I proposed in the interest of peace.”
He observed, in conclusion, that he was leaving for Varzin in a few
days. “Friedrichsruh is too near,” he explained, “and I shall not take
any official with me.” He then rang the bell, and asked the servant if
the carriage which was to take him to the Potsdam railway station was
ready; and I took my leave, with good wishes for his health.
This interview resulted in an article, “Fresh Friction,” in No. 42 of
the _Grenzboten_, which was also discussed and commented upon at length
in the home and foreign press.
I did not see the Chief again that year. We continued, however, as
best we could to promote his ideas in the _Grenzboten_, Bucher, as
before, helping us faithfully and indefatigably with his counsel and
assistance as long as he was in Berlin. In these articles the party
Philistines were now and again treated to some pretty energetic
castigation, which is believed to have affected them rather painfully.
The Prince returned from his holiday late in the winter, and it was
only on the 9th of March, 1880, that I received an invitation from the
Imperial Chancellerie to pay him a visit. I went to his palace at the
time appointed, 1 o’clock, and had to wait for a quarter of an hour in
the large pillared antechamber. Whilst I was sitting there, Tiedemann
and the “Cerberus” (_Geheimer Hofrath_ Roland of the Foreign Office)
passed through the room. The latter seemed not to have been aware of
my renewed intercourse with the Chancellor, spoke a few words to me,
perhaps to satisfy himself that I was really the same person whom
he probably regarded as having fallen into permanent disfavour and
oblivion on account of my book, and had an opportunity of hearing the
Chancery attendant in a loud clear voice call me in to the Prince. If
he then further ascertained that I remained for nearly a full hour with
the Chief he will certainly have looked upon it as a miracle, and the
next time I meet him in the street I shall have the happiness of being
honoured by a friendly greeting from him. O these little bonzes!
So I wrote in my diary, which also contains the following particulars
of this interview with the Chief.
The Chancellor wore a dark grey coat (plain clothes) with a military
stock. During our interview he drank first a glass of beer, then some
Vichy water, which the attendant had to bring him. On my making my
bow, he reached me his hand across the table, and said: “I really have
not much to say to you to-day, but I was anxious to see you again. My
health is still indifferent. It is true I have nothing in particular
to complain of, and sleep well enough--nine hours last night--and eat
with appetite, but I tire immediately. I must not walk or stand for any
length of time, as it brings on neuralgic pains. That comes from the
overwork of last year, and from the violent excitement. You know that
that does not at all agree with the Gastein waters--it may even prove
dangerous.
“At that time I was extremely anxious on account of Russia, and feared
an alliance between her and Austria, which the French would also
have joined. Latterly the Russians had written us brutal letters,
threatening us in case we did not support them in the Eastern question,
and I thought they could never act in that way, unless they had
in Austria a good friend, who might become an ally. They had also
endeavoured to bring about an alliance in Paris, through Obrutscheff.
He is the adjutant and confidant of Miljutin, the Minister of War. But
the French did not want it, and informed us through our Ambassador
and others--just as a virtuous woman tells her husband when somebody
makes improper overtures to her. That worried me a great deal. I had
always desired to come to an understanding with Austria. As far back as
1852 I had an idea of the kind. It was--while the German Confederation
still existed--that Austria should not want to have the sole authority
in Germany, nor always hamper and coerce Prussia; she should grant
Prussia a position in the Bund, which would allow her to use her
whole strength in repelling the threatened attacks and pretensions of
neighbouring Powers. They would not hear of this in Vienna, however;
thought it was unnecessary. They held that Prussia had most to fear
from such pretensions, and required Austria’s good will and assistance
more than Austria required her’s. We had, therefore, to submit to
being treated as an inferior, and indeed treated abominably. You know
the Schwarzenberg policy, which was continued up to the Congress of
Princes. They refused to share, and insisted upon having everything for
themselves. We were therefore obliged, for our own self-preservation,
to give them a practical proof that they were mistaken in thinking
we must always lean upon them, and therefore give way to them, being
unable to do anything for ourselves. So we took the opportunity in
1866, pitched them out of doors, and came to an understanding with
the others--on fair terms. I then again thought of a reconciliation
with them, for instance in 1870; but it was impossible to do anything
with Beust, and so the preparatory steps came to nothing. Andrassy
seemed better disposed. It was necessary, however, to put my old idea
into a new shape, in consequence of the altered situation. _I wanted
an open constitutional alliance against a coalition_, indissoluble,
_i.e._, only to be dissolved on our side by the Emperor, the Federal
Council, and the Reichstag, and on theirs by the Emperor and Trans-
and Cis-Leithania. Then came the Turkish War, the Berlin Congress, and
the execution of what had been there agreed upon. In St. Petersburg
they expected us to look after their interests unconditionally, and to
support all their demands. We could not do that, however, as some of
them were unfair and dangerous. They began with imperious and arrogant
warnings, and finally proceeded to threats. I could only explain that
by the supposition either that an understanding had already been
arrived at between Vienna and St. Petersburg, or was being negotiated.
Andrassy’s Russian journey and various other circumstances seemed to
confirm these apprehensions, and so last summer I was in a state of
great anxiety. France would doubtless have soon joined the other two.
In these circumstances, it was questionable whether England would have
stood by Germany, as that country can never be easily induced to take
sides with a Power which does not seem to have the upper hand. It was,
therefore, with a heavy heart that I went from Kissingen to Gastein,
and when Andrassy came I was very curious to hear what he would say.
I then ascertained, however, that nothing of the kind existed. No
understanding had been come to with Russia. I then brought forward my
idea, which he immediately accepted, that is to say, he was in favour
of the alliance, but not of a constitutional one. He would not hear of
that, nor of publicity; and, indeed, in the end, it was as well not,
as their Reichstag would have picked holes in it from their ignorance,
and wanted this or that to be altered. Their Parliament is even worse
than our own.”
“Yes,” I said; “the Constitutional party there are still more
pettifogging than our Parliamentarians.”
“You are quite right,” he added. “With that exception Andrassy quite
agreed with me, and the Emperor in Vienna was perhaps even more
strongly in favour of the alliance. But our Emperor was not. He raised
really brutal objections, and wished to sacrifice the welfare of the
Fatherland upon the high altar of his Russian friendship, although the
Russians had been as perfidious and insolent as it was possible for
them to be--also towards Austria, so that the unquestionably russophil
Archduke Albrecht afterwards said to Andrassy: ‘I rejoice now in the
alliance with Germany, as the Russians are the most untrustworthy
intriguers.’ At that time I may have written I should say a thousand
pages, working day and night, using all sorts of arguments, and begging
and praying, but without the slightest result. And yet there was no
time to lose. Andrassy wished to retire. He, like myself, was tired,
and he could afford to rest and be lazy. He had already provided
himself with a successor, but considered it an honour to conclude
the treaty himself. Nor could I remain for ever in Vienna. Yet if it
were not now concluded with Andrassy, I felt the treaty would come
to nothing, as the others had no heart in it. Moreover, the Russians
might after all be able to come to terms with them against us. But the
Most Gracious did not understand this. Even in Berlin he continued
to hang back. At length he appeared to yield. I begged for leave of
absence, and it was granted in a particularly official tone. Hardly
had I turned my back when he issued a variety of contradictory orders,
and I was obliged to send Stolberg to him in order to bring him round
again. Stolberg behaved very well, and was not at all servile. And so
the thing was at length done, and I believe it will last. The Austrians
cannot help themselves now, and taken altogether the Emperor Francis
Joseph is honourable and trustworthy.”
“So he--I mean our Emperor--did finally sign it?” I remarked. “Until
now I thought, in spite of what the press said, that he had not done
so.”
“Yes, he _has_ signed it,” he replied.
“And it is a formal treaty, no mere protocol, as was stated?” I further
inquired.
He smiled as he answered in low German: “Dat kann ik Se nich seggen.”
(I cannot tell you that.)
“Well, I observed that your Serene Highness referred to it several
times as the ‘treaty.’”
“Yes,” he replied, “but that must not be written. You must not let
that be known. It would be all the same to me. I even wanted a public
treaty.”
He was silent for a few seconds, and then spoke about the weather.
“A very fine day. Last night we had three degrees of cold, and now
I should fancy there are fifteen degrees of heat. Can you see the
thermometer there? How high is it?”
“Nineteen degrees.”
He held his spectacles before his eyes and said: “Eighteen, no, you
are right, nineteen. I cannot go out, although I should like to; I
am afraid of catching cold. And yet I ought to show myself in the
Reichstag for once, and honour them with my presence. I have no mind
to it. I do not love their students’ club ways. For them the Party is
always the first consideration, and everything hinges upon that. It
is the case with the Conservatives as well as the Liberals. Instead
of working with the National Liberals, where it is obvious that the
leaders of the Left Wing no longer exercise their former influence,
instead of at least approaching them, the Conservatives prefer to
go with the Ultramontane Centre. And yet there is no trusting the
latter. I, too, desire peace, but they are not to be gained over by
any concessions whatever, so long as a Protestant Imperial House
rules here. Bennigsen manages his people very well. It is true that
nothing can be done with Rickert and the little Jew, Lasker. All the
same he acted sensibly with regard to Stosch. And Hänel, too, who is
otherwise accustomed to look up to the Court (the Crown Prince). He
ought to have been treated quite differently--I mean Stosch, a vain,
incapable fellow. But they are a servile lot. It is true that the Free
Conservative section is the party of the distinguished and the wealthy,
and it was their duty and that of the other Conservatives to oppose
anything that was really unwise or bad, otherwise they would have
forfeited their position. But they are all servile, Court Conservatives
in secret, and Court Liberals in public. They spare him because they
believe he is in favour with the successor, which is really not the
case, however.”
I observed that the same sort of thing happened in England, where they
all kneel and crawl on their stomachs before the Queen, and even look
up with devotion to the Prince of Wales.
He replied: “Perhaps, but it is harmless there. She has little to say
in matters of State, and cannot modify the policy of the Ministry of
the day. In that particular they do not hold with the Court, and do
not, as here, spare incapables because they are in favour there. And
he is not even liked by the future Master. He is only retained because
he is a Freemason of high degree. I have had that experience also with
others who were incompetent, but held high Masonic rank. He concluded
that mischievous military agreement with Saxony. I knew nothing
whatever about it until the Saxons appealed to its provisions, and
it was then too late. He did us harm also in France in 1871, when we
were negotiating respecting compensation for the troops that remained
behind, making us lose at least sixty millions. I do not want to bring
any charge against him, but one cannot help wondering what he got from
the Saxons and from Thiers. And our fleet, which has cost us such a
fearful amount of money, is quite worthless, because the right man has
never been put at the head of it. I thought it ought to be at least
equal to the Russian fleet, but it is not--the Russian is better. He
is a servile creature, and deceived the Emperor at the review. The
sailors had to show themselves smart well-drilled infantry men; and so
the Emperor, who is himself a foot soldier, thought everything was all
right. But they pass it over in the Reichstag because they do not wish
to offend the Court, and want orders and titles. It is just the same
with our press. Pindter, for example (the editor of the _Norddeutsche
Allgemeine Zeitung_), begged to be invested with a higher official
title. Well, he can have it. Those sort of people place their paper
at the disposal of the Government whenever it is wanted. But I should
prefer to be plain Herr Pindter, rather than Commissionsrath Pindter.”
The Chief then, after referring to Hohenlohe, “who also does not
wish to injure himself with the upper circles,” came to talk of the
appointment of the Secretary of State in the Foreign Office. There were
great difficulties in the way of this appointment, he said, as the
pecuniary position of those in view was such that they could not take
the post.
I asked: “Was Hatzfeldt really thought of in this connection?” “Yes,
but he cannot take it. He is in financial difficulties. He can manage
to get on as Minister in Constantinople, but not here. He would have
been capable enough. Hohenlohe cannot do so either. He has a great
château at Schillingsfuerst which costs him a great deal and brings
him in nothing. Radowitz, who is even more capable than Hatzfeldt, is
no better off in money matters. Moreover he has a Russian wife and six
children, which is also not quite the thing. Solms, in Madrid, is too
servile,--he would do everything that the Most Gracious desired.”
I: “How about Werther, in Munich, who used to write those brilliant
despatches with so little in them?”
He: “He, too, has not enough money.”
I: “He is understood to have a large estate in Thuringia, Beichlingen,
near Eckartsberg.”
He: “First of all that is not the place; then it is an entailed estate,
and his father has impressed upon him to live economically and extend
the property.”
I: “In that case I do not know any other who would be suitable.”
He: “Keudell, in Rome might be nominated.”
I: “He has a rich wife, but has he the ability?”
He: “Your question shows that you have formed a more accurate opinion
of him than others have done. He has a reputation for ability because
he knows how to hold his tongue, and people fancy that his silence
covers ideas and knowledge. I thought so too, but have convinced
myself that he has neither. Moreover, he is too hasty in judgment,
sanguine, and thoughtless. Finally, he would be unfair to his
subordinates, which would also be the case with Radowitz, who, it
is true, is not a German. Both are vain, and want admiration and
obsequiousness. Whoever is not prepared for that sort of thing will
find himself overlooked and treated with disfavour.”
I asked: “How is it now with the Empress, Serene Highness? Does she
still cause you difficulties?”
He: “Exactly the same as ever. She is still intriguing with the
Ultramontanes, and I know that the coarse and brutal notes which I have
received are due to her.”
He paused for a moment and then said: “Now if you have anything further
to say to me or to ask----”
I stood up, thanked him for giving me the pleasure of seeing him once
more, and took my leave, meeting Philippsborn in the first antechamber
on my way out.
I took the first part of this interview as the subject of an article
which appeared in No. 12 of the _Grenzboten_ under the heading “The
History of the German-Austrian Alliance.” This caused as great a
sensation in the German and foreign press as the previous articles on
Gortschakoff’s policy and the Fresh Friction.
The same number of the _Grenzboten_ contained another article by me,
which dealt with the second principal topic of the conversation of
the 9th of March. I had received, on the 10th of that month, further
materials for it from Count Herbert, on behalf of his father. It was
simply entitled “From the Reichstag.” The second half of this article
was also commented upon at great length in the Berlin newspapers....
About 12 o’clock on the 20th of March I received the following note
from Count Herbert:--
“My Dear Sir,--My father would be glad to see you, either
immediately if you have time, or at 2.30 P.M. He is going to
the palace at 1.45 to offer his congratulations. Therefore, if you
cannot come before 1 o’clock, 2.30 will be better.
“Respectfully,
“Count Bismarck.”
I was at No. 77 Wilhelmstrasse at 2.15, just as the Chief returned from
seeing the Emperor. In the hall I met Bucher, who looked very poorly
and complained of overwork. On my entering the Prince’s room I found
him sitting at his writing-table, which this time was so placed that
the Chief had his back towards the window opening on the garden. He had
on a grey coat, white trousers, and varnished top-boots, and wore an
order round his neck. He said, after shaking hands as usual, and while
he drew from an envelope the articles on the Treaty with Austria, and
on Stosch, which I had sent him on the previous day: “Did you send me
these?” I replied in the affirmative.
He: “H’m, I suppose, then, they are already printed?”
I: “Yes, already copied into the other papers and telegraphed to
London.”
He: “That’s a pity. On the whole, the article is very good--you have a
powerful memory--but there are some things in it which I should have
liked to see modified. It is somewhat too highly seasoned--too blunt.”
He then read aloud the passage in which it was stated that even towards
the end the Emperor still manifested great reluctance, and said: “That
is true, but it is too strongly expressed.” He then went on reading,
and on coming to the part in which the trickery and mendacity of
Russia were mentioned, he observed: “That is also true, but it ought
to have been expressed with more diplomatic tact, now that they struck
a different chord. Of course, what we now want is peace, after we have
buckled on our armour, or our revolver. And it would also have been
better if both articles had not appeared in the same number. Then a
great deal is mentioned which was not intended for the public, but only
for your own private information. They will now mark these passages and
send them to him--she (the Empress) or Prince Charles, who always tries
to injure me, and who has always been very Russophil, like his sister,
Alexandrine of Mecklenburg. He also knows why!”--and he made a motion
as if he were counting out money.
“Money, Serene Highness?” I asked.
“Well, or----Surely you know--the old rake!”
I observed: “Perhaps it would interest your Serene Highness to see
how an English correspondent has telegraphed the whole article at
full length to the _Daily Telegraph_ in London, so that it appeared
there simultaneously with the publication in the _Grenzboten_. In many
instances he has toned down the original.”
“Yes, I should be glad to see that,” he said. I gave him the newspaper.
He read the beginning, and then said: “Leave it with me, and I will
return it later.”
I now said: “Might I ask what is the attitude of England towards the
alliance?”
He replied: “They are entirely engrossed in the elections. A great deal
will depend upon the result. The Italians hope that Gladstone will be
victorious. You have doubtless read their assurance that they wish to
retain friendly relations with all the Powers, but reserve the right
to act in accordance with their own interests? They are like carrion
crows on the battle-field that let others provide their food. They were
prepared in 1870 to fall upon us with the others, if they were promised
a piece of the Tyrol. At that time a Russian diplomat said: ‘What!
they are asking for something again, although they have not yet lost a
battle!’”
I said: “Of these it is only the Piedmontese who seem to be any good as
soldiers. Always covetous and always weak. Look at Lissa, where their
powerful fleet was shamefully beaten, and their admiral fled like a
coward. If they would only seek to strengthen their position at home,
where no Ministry lasts more than a few months, and where the people
are crushed by taxation and debt!”
“Yes,” he replied, “that is the real _irredenta Italia_. They ought to
take that in hand instead of thinking of conquests. But one day they
will find themselves in the same case as Spain under Isabella, and the
Papal States and the Kingdom of Naples will be once more restored.
Russia and Italy are the only Powers opposed to peace. Russia who is
not satisfied with her 400,000 square (German) miles of territory and
wants further conquests. Well, I don’t know of anything else to tell
you.”
I suggested: “I thought I might at the same time get instructions to
write about the Pope.”
“Yes,” he said, “it might be pointed out that Leo’s conciliatory
attitude should not be over-estimated. Not only the _Germania_, but
also the Progressist journals exaggerate it, but only for the sake of
opposition, in order that they may be able to say, ‘The Curia desires
peace, but the Imperial Chancellor will not have it.’ The present
Pope is, it is true, more reasonable, and, perhaps, more moderate
than his predecessor, but the utterances in his letter are after all
capable of many interpretations, and on the whole are more academic
than practical. Of what good is it for him to say: ‘I believe I shall
be able to consent to this or to that?’” He then quoted a Latin
sentence, and continued: “And who will vouch for the accuracy of the
interpretation which is now being placed upon it? Who will guarantee
that his successor will think in the same way? The Church has been
putting forward the same claims for a thousand years, and will continue
to do so. One Pope may carry out the old policy in a more peaceful, or
in a bolder and more imperious fashion than another, but at bottom the
policy itself is always the same. The May laws remain, but if they show
moderation in Rome we can administer them in a less rigorous way--a
_modus vivendi_. There are many people, however, who desire to have
peace at any price, and would even go to Canossa--to save themselves
trouble. These include, for example, the Minister of the Interior and
the Crown Prince. He wants above everything to have peace and a quiet
life, and nothing to trouble him. He will not go into battle. It is
just like the septennate with regard to the army. He wanted a permanent
grant in order to avoid fresh struggles, as he thought his turn would
come within the next few years, and he thinks so now, for the old
gentleman can hardly live to be ninety.”
At this moment the Princess entered the room and showed him a paper
that seemed to refer to to-day’s birthday celebration. She asked if
they were to illuminate. He said: “No, but it would perhaps be better
to ascertain first whether any of the other Ministers were inclined to
disobey the order,” which was probably contained in the paper. “In
that case I shall also disobey--_i.e._, disobey myself for it was I who
issued the order. I suppose the flags have been hung up, however?” The
Princess replied in the affirmative.
When she had left I remarked: “What your Serene Highness has just said
about the Crown Prince bears out the description of him which you gave
me in 1870 during the drive from Beaumont to Vendresse--a pleasant life
without much thought or care, plenty of money, and praise from the
newspapers.”
“Yes, that is his character,” he replied. “Like his grandfather
Frederick William III., whom he resembles in other respects also. Of
course you have read the Memoirs of Caroline Bauer?” “Yes,” I replied.
“And those of old Hofrath Schneider.” “Ah, quite so; he also tells
similar stories, but in his innocence does not know what injury they do
him. The old King used to drive seven times a week from the Pfaueninsel
or the palace at Potsdam to the theatre in Berlin, in order to see
worthless commonplace pieces, and afterwards to go behind the scenes
and chuck the actresses under the chin, and then drive back the long
dusty road he came. That is also the Crown Prince’s style--he wants
to amuse himself, not to govern. It may turn out badly some day when
I am too weak to do anything more, and we may lose ground again in
many ways. It is true he wishes to keep me, but I shall go. In future,
a Great Elector or a Frederick the Great, will not be required. A
Frederick William I. would suffice, or even a Frederick William II.,
for he would not have been so bad had he not been rendered effeminate
by the women.”
I said: “But you were satisfied with the article on Stosch, Serene
Highness?”
He: “Up to the present I have looked chiefly at the first one.
Moreover, anything one likes may be said about him. That is a matter
of indifference to me. He cannot come in my way. He speculates upon
the Successor, and owing to his position among the Freemasons, he has
managed to give some people the idea that he has a certain prestige
with the Crown Prince. There are some others also who dined together
recently and divided the duchies amongst themselves as at Wallenstein’s
banquet. How does that passage run? Ah, I can’t remember.” I quoted it.
“Sie theilen dort am Tische Fuerstenhuete aus. Des Eggenberg, Slawata,
Lichtenstein, des Sternbergs Gueter werden ausgeboten. Wenn er hurtig
macht, fällt auch für ihn was ab.”
The Chief smiled and said: “Friedenthal was also one of them, a vain,
intriguing fellow, whom I was glad to see go. Then Gneist--of whom I
had rather a good opinion formerly, but who lacks character, and is a
trimmer--Delbrück and Falk, and also Rickert. Falk has spoken about my
relations with him in a way that cannot be reconciled with the truth. I
have always taken his part, and acted as mediator between him and our
Most Gracious, causing myself thereby a great deal of worry. Hohenlohe
is apparently to preside over this new Ministry, in order to secure it
some prestige. He has been selected as their Chancellor.”
“And,” I said, “who has not already wished to be Chancellor? Even
Münster, the Cloud-compeller!”
“Yes,” he replied, “and others too, because it is such an easy task.
That reminds me how the Elector of Hesse sent his own doctor to
Bernburg to make inquiries as to the mental condition of the last Duke.
He reported that he had found him worse than he had expected, quite
imbecile. ‘But, good Heavens! he cannot govern in that case!’ exclaimed
the Elector. ‘Govern?’ replied the doctor, ‘Why, that will not prevent
him.’”
The Chief then came to speak of his conduct of affairs and of the
trouble and cares and dangers he had gone through, and of the opponents
who had declaimed and worked against him during the past eighteen
years. “I had frequently to apprehend danger and ill-will from several
directions at the same time, and occasionally from all quarters of
the compass.” He smiled and then continued: “That reminds me of
Gerstäcker, of whom a comic paper once gave a picture in which he was
simultaneously attacked by a boa constrictor, a lion, a crocodile and a
bear, while he was exclaiming: ‘Why, what a fine article this will make
for the _Augsburger Zeitung_!’ But seriously, I am not good enough for
this company, who know everything better, and think that a successor
would manage things so much more cleverly. But, _contenti estote_, rest
satisfied with your daily ration.”
On his referring again to Friedenthal and his disposition to
intrigue, I said: “Why, there we have three or four Jews in
combination--Friedenthal, Falk, and Rickert. In future it will be
just the same here as in England and in France--Beaconsfield and
Gambetta, with the Hebrew tail of the 1870 Government. Andrassy is also
understood to have Jewish blood in his veins.”
“No,” he replied, “they say it is gipsy blood, and he looks as if he
had that. But Rickert? Is he also one of the chosen people?”
I said: “I do not know him personally, but I have heard so, and indeed
he is believed to belong to the unbaptised variety.”
“I should really like to know that for certain,” he said. “Please make
inquiries.”
I promised to do so. He rang the bell, and asked for the Parliamentary
Almanac, and looking up Rickert’s name, found that he was described
as belonging to the Evangelical Church. His birthplace and indeed
all closer particulars were omitted, and this the Chief considered
“suspicious.” He then observed: “Friedenthal has even come forward as
a National Jew. He will not permit the _Post_ to attack Lasker or the
Jews. Treitschke wrote good articles for it, in fact the most brilliant
they had ever had. But when he began to attack Lasker, Friedenthal, who
is one of the principal shareholders, intervened with his veto.”
He then spoke once more about his future retirement, and said: “How
difficult it is to replace even Bülow! The gentlemen sit in their
comfortable embassies and will not come here to undertake the heavy
work. Hatzfeldt would do. He is intelligent and serviceable, but has
no proper income, and might be tempted to associate himself with the
financiers. It would be necessary to give him a grant. In that way the
thing could be managed. Hohenlohe also is clever, but he allows others
to use him for their own purposes. There is my eldest son, who has been
working under my guidance for seven years, and who promises well--but
that would not do, as he is only thirty.”
With these words he rose and gave me his hand. As I was leaving
he called after me: “Quite gently and diplomatically--I mean your
writing.” I had been with him over fifty minutes. In the second
antechamber I met the Privy Councillor of Embassy, Von Bülow, who had
been waiting there and who exchanged a few friendly words with me.
From what the Prince had told me of his attitude towards the Curia,
I wrote an article, which appeared in No. 13 of the _Grenzboten_,
entitled “The Conciliatory Pope.”
Towards the first week in April the newspapers began to talk of a
Chancellor crisis. After that had gone on for a few days I wrote to
the Chief (on Friday, the 9th of April) suggesting that if I could be
of use to him he should give me information in the matter. On the 11th
I received a letter from Sachse in which I was requested to visit the
Chancellor on Monday at 4 o’clock. I kept the appointment punctually,
and had to wait a quarter of an hour, as the Prince had disappeared
in the garden. At length I saw him walking in the grounds attached to
the Foreign Office. He was in plain clothes, carried a big stick in
his hand and was accompanied by his two dogs. Theiss went out to him
and informed him that I had come. In a few minutes I was summoned to
him in his study. “How are you, doctor?” he said. “Things have again
been going badly with me during the last few days. I have been worrying
over our officials--over the clownishness of Stephan--and others are
just the same. The newspapers give a false account of the origin of
the present crisis, and I would request you to rectify it. It has not
turned solely or even chiefly on the attitude of the non-Prussian
Governments in the question of taxing receipt stamps on Post Office
Orders and advances, but to fully as great an extent on the improper
behaviour of our officials. You know I have repeatedly complained
in public of Prussian Particularism in regard to the arrangements
and requirements of the Empire. During my frequent long absences one
arbitrary proceeding has followed another, so that a kind of Republic
of the Polish type has grown up, in which each departmental chief
insists not only upon having views of his own, but also upon putting
them into execution. _Vortragende Räthe_ (Councillors who have the
privilege of direct intercourse with their chief), whose views are not
in agreement with those of the heads of their department, and even
Ministers who differ from me in their opinions, endeavour to give
practical effect to their ideas, and that too as if it were a matter
of course. But it is nothing of the kind, and it is obvious that that
cannot be permitted by the head of the Government of the Emperor and
King.”
He paused and seemed to expect that I would write down what he had
said. Before I had come in he had placed a fold of blotting paper,
several sheets of foolscap, and two freshly-pointed pencils at the
side of the writing-table where I usually sat. I began by making a
note of a few of the principal points, but I now wrote down everything
he said literally, he speaking more slowly and in tolerably regular
sentences. The following, therefore, after a few introductory words
referring to what had been previously communicated, was published in
the form of an article entitled “The Cause of the Chancellor Crisis,”
in the _Grenzboten_ of the 15th of April. In this way the _Grenzboten_
had the honour of having the German Imperial Chancellor as one of its
contributors. He said or dictated:--
“So far as we know (I afterwards added: ‘and we believe ourselves to be
well informed’) there is absolutely nothing in the Chancellor crisis
that tends towards any change in the Constitution. Nothing is farther
from the Prince’s mind. He considers the Federal Constitution fully
sufficient if the rights which it accords to the individual States
are exercised with moderation. Any irregularities or stoppages of
the machinery have been due in part to the procedure of the Federal
Council, and in part to the circumstance that many Governments have
not attached sufficient value to the exercise of their right to vote.
According to the practice hitherto followed, too much importance has
been given to the committees and too little to the general meetings.
The former have discussed matters at great length, while on the other
hand, the plenary sittings have been almost exclusively devoted to
questions which had been so far settled by the committees that nothing
remained to be done beyond taking the simple decision, Yes or No. It
was, therefore, not possible for those Governments that had not been
included in the committees in question, or had found themselves in a
minority there, to secure consideration for their views at the plenary
meeting, and to bring about a timely understanding, without causing
great delay either by asking for fresh instructions or by referring
the matter back to the Committee. The balance of parties is not the
same in the committees and in the plenary Council. If the committees’
majorities carry their resolutions into effect they deprive the
unrepresented Governments of their due influence. If on the other hand,
the negotiations and discussions of these matters were transferred from
the committees to the plenary meeting the views of all parties would
receive timely consideration.
“We must here repeat what we said at the commencement” (this sentence
was mine), “namely, that during the frequent absences of the Chancellor
there has arisen among a section of the Prussian officials a condition
which borders on absolute indiscipline; and, if it be true that the
Prince has stated that he hardly ever succeeds in securing due regard
for his legitimate authority without raising the Cabinet question, it
is quite certain that a remedy is absolutely indispensable unless
the prestige of the Federal Council and of its chief is to suffer
irreparable damage. The Federal Council cannot become a public meeting,
at which each official of the Ministry may, without authority and
at his own good will and pleasure, give expression to his personal
opinions on every question, and endeavour to secure their adoption.
“If the Royal decree lays stress on the conflict of duties in which
the Imperial Chancellor may be involved under the Constitution,
that difficulty can scarcely be overcome by an alteration of the
Constitution in a manner acceptable to all concerned, but rather by
a statesmanlike and prudent exercise on the part of all concerned
of the rights bestowed by the Constitution. This does not mean that
the Chancellor would be justified in declining to co-operate in the
execution of a decision taken by the Federal Council. But assuming that
he is bound to carry out such a decision and is therefore the immediate
official representative of a decision for the consequences or the
principle of which he may find himself unable to accept responsibility,
it could hardly be contended any longer that he occupied a responsible
position, but on the contrary that the post could be filled equally
well by any subordinate official who would have simply to carry out the
instructions given to him.
“It can scarcely contribute to strengthen the constitutional
organisation of the Empire, to force the Imperial Chancellor, and
with him the three largest Federal States, into a position in which
they must appeal to the lawful privileges of the minority. For the
Chancellor, on his own initiative, to refuse to carry out a formal
decision of the Federal Council would be a course barely compatible
with the consideration which he owes in his official capacity to the
majority of the Federal Governments. A sense of official propriety
would probably lead the Chancellor in such circumstances to avoid
having to execute a resolution for which he could not accept the
responsibility, by tendering his resignation, thereby announcing
his readiness to co-operate in the selection of a successor whose
convictions should not stand in the way of the Federal resolution.
Anyhow, the best solution would be not to drive things to extremities.”
At this point it seemed as if something pressing had suddenly occurred
to him. He rang the bell, and asked the Chancery attendant to call
Privy Councillor Tiedemann, whom he then requested to ascertain at
the palace what had been done in connection with the _pro memoria_,
which ought to be dealt with promptly and without delay. He was to go
immediately and make inquiries. When Tiedemann had left, he said: “The
_pro memoria_ concerns the matter on which we are engaged. But where
was I?” I read him the last sentence, and he then continued: “Oh yes!
The prevention of such crises as the present will be facilitated if
less importance is given to the discussions in Committee, and more to
those in the plenary sittings, and if the custom which has recently
arisen, for half and even more than half of the Federal Governments not
to be individually represented at these plenary sittings, is abandoned.
The practice of appointing proxies is based solely upon the rules of
procedure, and not upon the terms of the Constitution. The matter would
take a very different complexion if the decisive plenary sittings took
place only during a relatively short period within the Parliamentary
Session, instead of being spread over the greater part of the year,
according to daily requirements, as has hitherto been the case.”
He then, without giving any indication that the interview was at an
end, took up a document on which the word “Memorandum” was written,
made a few corrections in it, had Sachse called and gave him
instructions to “have that copied in the same hand.”
He then turned to me again, asked me to read over the last sentence
he had dictated, and said: “That will be enough. Do you wish to know
anything further?”
I: “What does your Serene Highness think of the result of the elections
in England?”
He: “The matter is not one of importance for us. The Russians, however,
expect a great deal from it. But the Liberals must in general follow
the same lines as Beaconsfield. That is always the case here too. If
the National Liberals were to come into office, they would find that
affairs could not be carried on as they imagine.”
I: “It is just the same with Crown Princes. They almost always hold
different views to the reigning sovereign, or act as if they did. They
are for the most part Liberal, and yet when they themselves assume
responsibility they must follow the same course as their predecessors.
I say they act in that way, as doubtless the difference is often only
apparent. It seems to me that modern Princes have no self-reliance, no
real belief in themselves, and feel dependent upon public opinion, or
the party doctrines which pass themselves off as public opinion. Our
dynasties consider it necessary to win the sympathies of all parties,
and therefore Crown Princes take credit to themselves for being of a
different political or religious opinion to the reigning sovereign,
Liberal when he is Conservative, or very advanced when he is only a
moderate Liberal. When they ascend the throne and have to assume the
responsibility of their actions, they throw their theories overboard,
if they ever seriously believed in them, and enter into the hard world
of reality where facts and not aspirations are the determining forces,
and where one is met by impossibilities which it is necessary to reckon
with or submit to.”
He listened to me attentively, and when I had finished, said: “You are
quite right. That was a very just observation. But even if the English
were to come to an understanding with the Russians, and were to be
joined by Italy, which has always been coquetting with the English
Liberals, that would not lead to any great danger, and might turn out
badly for the Italians. The closer England draws to Russia the more she
drifts away from France. A combination would then arise in the East
which would threaten French interests in that quarter, and particularly
in the Mediterranean, where they are different from those of Russia and
England. The same remark applies to England’s relations with Italy.
In certain circumstances the result might be an understanding between
France and Austria and ourselves. As yet we cannot positively say what
we should have to offer in return--certainly not Alsace-Lorraine, but
perhaps something else. Italy, however, would fare badly in the matter,
as in that case Austria and France could easily come to terms. Italy is
like the woman in the fairy tale who had caught the golden fish--what
was her name? Ilsebill--and could never catch enough. The fish may have
to go back to their old places. Naples and the States of the Church may
be restored.”
I said: “In speaking to Tiedemann your Serene Highness mentioned
a memorandum on the causes of the present crisis, which had been
submitted to the King. What is his attitude in the affair?”
He replied: “Oh, satisfactory. Only he has not yet read the _pro
memoria_, as it is too long. He laid it on one side.... And Wilmowski
interferes. He considers it his duty and his right to put a finger in
the pie, and advise him--of course against me, for he is a Liberal. So
I have had a warning conveyed to him.” He stood up and said again: “The
clownishness of Stephan, who is quite insubordinate! That comes of his
self-assurance. King Stephan _versus_ King William! (smiling)--that
will never do, and you might say as much on some opportunity.”
I promised to do so at an early date, and then left. I had been with
him for about three-quarters of an hour. In the large antechamber I
saw Bleichröder’s birthday present to the Chief--a pipe-rack in carved
oak, and seven long cherrywood pipes with painted porcelain bowls
representing game, together with two large vases containing azaleas in
blossom.
I incorporated what the Chancellor had said to me respecting the
English elections and a possible co-operation between England, Russia
and Italy, in a _Grenzboten_ article, entitled, “The New Ministry in
England.” This was commented upon in leading articles in London, Paris
and Italy.
On the 25th of April, Lowe of _The Times_ called upon me, and wished to
have the same favours as Lavino “on the same conditions.” I told him
there was no other condition than that the copy should be telegraphed
across. He said he had a special wire. I promised to consider the
matter and let him know in a fortnight, after I had consulted the
publisher, who would have to send him proofs of the articles in
advance. Abel came to me on the 1st of May with a request that I should
oblige the _Standard_ in a similar way. He received the same answer.
On the 7th of May I concluded an arrangement with Lavino,[20] who had
in the meantime received authority from London by telegraph, and thus
became an “Occasional Correspondent” for his paper.
In the meantime, I had, on the 28th of April, received the following
letter from Bucher:--
“Esteemed Friend,--Kindly commit the indiscretion of handing
the enclosed to the correspondent of the _Daily Telegraph_. You must
not tell him anything more about it than appears in the introductory
part. For your information I may tell you that the affair is a (very
full) extract from an existing despatch. He has therefore no reason
to fear a _démenti_. Perhaps it would be well if you immediately
took a copy, so that you could publish it in the _Grenzboten_ as a
retranslation directly it arrives here in English, if you are not
forestalled by other newspapers. But the _D. T._ must have priority.
“Yours, Br.”
The enclosure was the text of a despatch by the Chief in which he
stated the position of the Prussian Government in the negotiations
for the settlement of the differences with the Curia and its German
allies. Only a few sentences were omitted from the original, which was
published in full a few weeks later. Lavino translated the document
into English, and it occupied a whole column of the _Daily Telegraph_
of the 3rd of May, appearing in the _Grenzboten_ two days later. So
far as I remember it was only noticed by the German press after the
document had been published in full, some of them then remembering
that they had seen the most important parts of it in the _Grenzboten_.
I now proceeded to Leipzig, but on Thursday, the 10th of May, received
a telegram from home stating that the Chancellor wished to see me that
evening at 9.30 P.M. I therefore returned to Berlin next
morning, announced my arrival in a letter to Sachse, and was received
at 9.5 A.M. by the Chief in his study, and had an interview
with him which lasted an hour and a half.
He began: “You were on a holiday?”
“Yes, Serene Highness, I was in Leipzig for a few days, but had left
word at home to telegraph if you sent for me, and so I am here.”
He: “That was too much. I only wished to speak to you on some matters
of principle. I would commend two subjects to your consideration. First
the exceptionally outspoken and cordial pleasure which the Liberals
manifest in their papers at the circumstance that in future I shall
let internal questions alone, and restrict myself to foreign affairs.
They argue that I know nothing about internal questions, and have
accomplished nothing. On that point you might read up Hahn’s book,
in which you will find detailed particulars. Who, then, proposed the
May laws, and persuaded Falk to agree to them in spite of innumerable
judicial scruples, which he only surrendered after long hesitation? Now
they extol them as a kind of Palladium, and so does he. But he showed
by no means as much energy against the Clericals in his administrative
capacity, as he does now in his Parliamentary speeches. And who carried
through the scheme for the purchase of the railways by the State?
Surely not their Camphausen, who, on the contrary, fought against it,
and tried with all his might to create delay. And yet it has turned
out well, even now, since Maybach is making money, and will cover the
deficit for us. Moreover, the gentlemen who--as they assert--wish
to strengthen the Empire by the development of the constitutional
system, forget that I twice carried the military septennate, and thus
avoided a dangerous conflict by acting as a mediator between the Crown,
which wanted the military budget to be permanently fixed, in order
to get rid of the differences once for all, and the Reichstag, which
insisted upon its constitutional right of supply,--avoided it twice,
as the conflict which formerly threatened would now have broken out
afresh. This time it was managed by an increase of the army, which
the Crown accepted as an equivalent, and which the Liberals in the
Reichstag consented to more readily than they would have done to a
renunciation of their constitutional rights. You may then refer to the
anti-Socialist laws which I proposed, and to which the Liberals raised
all sorts of objections. But I may regard as my chief service the new
Customs policy, which I forced through in spite of Delbrück, and in
dealing with which, I was not only opposed by the free-traders in the
Reichstag, but also by the Governments that held free-trade views, and
by their Councillors. As you know, in this case the initiative has
been taken by me, and I have also done most of the work in curing this
Delbrück disease.”
I took the liberty of interrupting him with the remark: “This Bright’s
disease in the economic body of the nation.”
“Yes,” he replied, smiling, “that’s what I mean--this Bright’s disease!
In the course of years we have become more and more pulled down by
it--grown poorer and poorer--and it was time that something should be
done in the matter. But for the five milliards of 1871 we should have
been close upon bankruptcy a few years sooner. It is true people will
not see that, but the nation knows it, for it feels the consequences.
The representatives of the learned classes, the lawyers and the holders
of invested property are not conscious of it. I have repeatedly
received addresses from the lower classes, as for instance, from
Westphalian miners, congratulating and thanking me. But my opponents
will have to open their minds still further, when I come to them with
my war tariffs, which they will of course fight against, and first of
all with the tariffs against Russia. Besides, I have been the only
champion of the national interests against Hamburg Particularism in
the free harbour question. In this matter the National Liberals, and
especially the Left wing, are rather Liberal and Particularistic than
National. Lasker, Bamberger, Wolfssohn, Rickert,--also a Jew, although
baptised a Protestant--are in this matter no better than Sonnemann,
the Socialists, the Poles and the Guelphs. They are only national when
it comes to opposing the pretensions of a monarch, as for instance the
King of Bavaria. But when, as in this case, it is the Particularism
of a Social Democratic republic where the Socialists have the upper
hand at the elections--that is quite another thing. Then Particularism
must be supported, and I must be opposed. That I have always taken a
determined stand against these people is a point upon which I may well
take credit to myself in connection with internal affairs.”
He paused for a moment and then continued: “It is I and I alone
who have taken up the struggle against the Centre party and its
wire-pullers, and gone through with it in spite of all the intrigues of
the Court. If a few paragraphs in the Ecclesiastical Bills should be
thought to give evidence of yielding, that is a mere optical delusion.
We make no terms with Rome, and will not go to Canossa, but we shall
endeavour to restore peace independently between ourselves and our
Prussian Catholics. It is better that Bishops should return accompanied
by triumphal processions than with wailings and complaints. In that
way they recognise that something has been conceded to them--a great
deal if they like to put it so. But if they do not then manage to get
on with us, why, we have the discretionary powers in our hands and can
remove them once more, or render them harmless in some other way. They
do not, however, understand that at the Dönhofplatz, nor do the Free
Conservatives either. That is the reason why I do not go there, as I
do not care to speak to deaf ears. It may yet come to my being obliged
to retire without the King’s permission. And then--a Bavarian painter,
Lenbach, made a good remark recently: ‘To deliver a good speech there,
is like letting off fireworks before the blind.’ Their policy is party
policy. Bennigsen and Miquel called on me a few days ago and wanted
to talk me into abandoning the Bill, but allowed themselves to be
persuaded by my arguments. A meeting of the party was held the same
evening and there they returned to their former position. You must,
however, say nothing about this in the press--as to our attitude
towards the Bill and the parties, that is only for your private
information. They must not think that we wish to influence them, and
if you were to say anything on the subject it would be immediately
regarded as a communiqué. Of course you are aware that Windthorst
recently described you as the leading official mouthpiece. We shall
first see what they make of the Bill. Perhaps that will suffice for us,
perhaps not.”
He again made a short pause, and afterwards continued: “And now as
to the second subject which you might treat. I should like to have a
sketch of the Centre party, showing that we should gain little from its
dissolution or reorganisation. The Conservatives would not be largely
reinforced thereby--that is through concessions on the part of the
Government with regard to the ecclesiastical laws.” He was silent for a
moment, and then, turning from this train of thought, he said:
“You know how Russia would never willingly permit us to grow too strong
as against France, lest the value of her own friendship and possible
assistance should be reduced. Her notion is that we should remain
dependent upon her, and under an obligation to render her equivalent
services. It is just the same with the Liberals, including the Right
wing. They think of themselves and of their party, first of all, and
want the Government to regard them as a power whose good will has its
price. They really look upon themselves as outsiders, and--so far as
the Government is concerned--as an opposition which must be won over
by concessions, and whose support must be duly appreciated and paid
for at the highest possible rate, and as promptly as may be. I must
always be made to feel that they are indispensable, in order that I may
be obliged to come to terms with them. For that reason the Government
must not be too strong, must have no secure majority, and therefore in
their hearts they are pleased at the existence of the Centre party.
Its numerical strength suits their views, however little they may have
in common with them as Ultramontanes. The Government should constantly
feel its weakness in presence of this opposition of 95 or 100 members,
and bear in mind the possibility of the Liberals refusing their
support. They, the Liberals, must be reckoned and negotiated with, and
their good will must be purchased. That is a party policy, and not one
which keeps in view the welfare of the State.”
He then returned to the Centre party, and explained to me that only
about one-third of its members could be won over by concessions on
the part of the Government to oppose the pretensions of the Curia and
to reinforce the supporters of the Ministry. “These are the Bavarian
nobles,” he continued, “and the South German nobles in general, as
well as those of Silesia. Not the Westphalians. The latter were never
reconciled to Prussian rule, and have always opposed the Government,
even before the Empire came into existence--even when the Pope himself
seemed to be quite satisfied with Prussia--I mean Pius IX., who said
that the Catholic Church was better off in Prussia than anywhere
else. The Westphalian nobles are sulking like the Guelphs out of
sheer Particularism. They cannot forget the old episcopal _régime_
and the advantages,--the fleshpots of Egypt--which they lost when it
disappeared. It is different again with another group of the Centre
party, with the Rhenish members, for example. They are, in the first
place, Liberal or Democratic Catholics, and only in a secondary sense
Ultramontane, Catholic Progressists, anti-Imperialists. Most of them
would not have got in on their Liberal programme. They were returned
to Parliament because they had promised to support the demands of the
Bishops and the Pope. They, like the Particularists of the Centre,
could not be won over by any concessions, however great, as they are
really Progressists, or little less.”
I was now about to leave, but he made a motion as if he wished me to
remain, rang the bell, and ordered a bottle of seltzer water. On this
being brought in by the attendant, he pointed to it and to a full
bottle of cognac which stood on the table, saying, “Now, old Yankee,
is that to your taste? Brandy and water. Help yourself! It is very
good cognac, or, at least, I have been told so. It is a present, and
may have cost twenty to thirty francs a bottle. I have some, however,
which is still better, although it only costs a thousand francs the
hectolitre.”
Whilst I inquired as to his own health and whether he intended to go to
Gastein this summer, and learnt in reply that his health was tolerable
but that he slept badly and felt fatigued, he had brought a large box
of cigarettes from which he asked me to help myself, at the same time
taking one himself, and remarking that he no longer found any real
enjoyment in smoking. It was the same with riding for the last year
and a half. He had to give it up, as it brought on a pain in the back.
I asked him whether he had received the book on the Jews which I had
handed to the Chancery attendant for him about a week before. “What
book?” he asked. _Israel and the Gentiles_, I replied. No, he had not.
I explained that I had sent a letter with it saying that it was written
by me, and that a glance at the preface might perhaps induce his Serene
Highness to look it through more carefully at Varzin or Friedrichsruh.
He remembered the letter, looked for the book on the writing-table
and the shelves near it, and said at last “Probably I have taken it
upstairs to read in bed, or Tiedemann has taken it.”
I then turned the conversation upon Lenbach, and remarked that the
picture representing the Chief in profile looking upwards was to my
mind the best portrait of him which I had seen.
He replied: “He has painted a whole crowd of them. The one you mean
came about in this way. I was looking up at a flight of birds in
Friedrichsruh. ‘Hold hard,’ Lenbach exclaimed, ‘that’s good. Please
stand still and I will sketch it in at once.’”
I then mentioned the photograph of the other portrait in which the
hair of his eyebrows was twisted upwards and he had a romantically
curled moustache, observing that I did not quite like it, as it was not
natural.
“No,” he said, “it is natural. It grows in that way until I shorten it
with the scissors.”
We then spoke of the enterprising Thorndike Rice, an American, who
published the New York monthly, _The North American Review_, I having
asked the Prince whether he had read Blowitz’s account of Rice’s
alleged visit and request. A few weeks previously Rice paid me several
visits, and after having first ordered an article on Bismarck,
introduced a further request by saying “You must not be offended, but
you know that we Yankees are bold enough when we have something in
view.” He then asked whether I could not procure for him an article
by Bismarck himself to be published in his periodical. He was quite
prepared to pay £500, half of it in advance, if I could manage that.
I said that it was “utterly impossible,” even if he were to give me
£1000, and explained the reasons. He then suggested that I should write
the article, to which the Prince need only put his name. Of course, I
also declined that proposal. He then contented himself with my promise
to write the article in question, and send it after him to Paris, and
to let him have further contributions later on. In about three weeks he
received the Bismarck article, which appeared in the July and August
numbers of his review under the title “Prince Bismarck as a friend of
America, and as a Statesman. By Moritz Busch.” I was paid at the rate
of 500 marks a sheet, an enormous sum according to German ideas, and
had moreover the honour of figuring with Gladstone as a contributor to
the American _Revue des Deux Mondes_. From a message sent by Blowitz
to _The Times_ it would appear that Rice, after his last visit to me,
called at the Chief’s to request him to contribute to his periodical,
and, of course, there also received a negative answer.
“The account is correct,” the Chief replied; “but he only spoke to my
son, through whom I informed him that I was too much occupied to be
able to gratify my strong taste for journalism, and to earn the large
sum of money which he had offered me.”
I then gave him an account of my conversations with Mr. Rice, and
afterwards asked him once more about Gastein. No, he replied, he must
rest himself, and wished to be quite alone away from everybody. He then
came to speak of his household, which costs him a great deal of money.
A successor could not make both ends meet if he were not also assisted
by a grant, the salary as Imperial Chancellor not being sufficient.
I said I had always been under the impression that he drew a salary
merely as Prussian Minister.
“It is the other way about,” he answered. “As Imperial Chancellor I
receive 18,000 thalers; as Premier and Minister for Foreign Affairs I
get nothing, and my expenses now come to 60,000 thalers a year. In this
house alone the lighting costs me 2,000 extra. It is most unpractically
built, full of dark passages and back-stairs, and it is only the
offices down stairs that I do not need to light myself. They have also
increased the inhabited house tax, the rent being reckoned at 5,000
thalers, which I consider unfair, although it is better than the other
house, the poor accommodation of which you know.” After I had made
a few remarks in reply, we both rose, an example which was followed
by his dog. This animal at first seemed to entertain evil intentions
respecting my coat or throat, but had grown quiet on his master
ordering him to lie down, when he crouched under the table and put his
head between my knees. The Prince told him to jump on the sofa, from
which he fetched a piece of wood. The Chief then took it from him and
pitched it into the niche between the two windows, the dog springing
after it. It is a savage animal which has already severely bitten and
torn the clothes of people well known in the house such as Chancery
attendants. In spite of the chastisement inflicted upon him with the
heavy leather whip that lies on the table, he has not considered the
error of his ways nor assumed politer manners. He appeared to take a
liking to me, however, and I had also later on occasion to congratulate
myself on his good will.