There is nothing more curious than the language used by the minister of

Prussia to the ambassador of France at those first conversations in

Moravia! M. de Bismarck began by renewing the fantasies of Biarritz, and

it was the very opposite of a Tilsit who appeared to form plans at the

head-quarters at Bruenn: the son of Frederick William III., conquered at

Jena, seemed to wish to offer to the nephew of Napoleon I. to share the

world with him, to share it to the detriment of Russia and England! "He

endeavored to prove to me," wrote M. Benedetti on the 15th July, "that

the reverses of Austria allowed France and Prussia to modify their

territorial situation, and to solve at the present time the greater part

of the difficulties which will continue to menace the peace of Europe. I

reminded him that treaties existed, and that the war which he desired to

prevent would be the first result of such a policy. M. de Bismarck

answered me, that I misunderstood, that France and Prussia, united and

resolved to remodel their respective frontiers by binding one another by

solemn engagements, were henceforward in a position to regulate together

these questions, without fear of meeting an armed resistance _either on

the part of England or on the part of Russia_." In other words,--and

these words were likewise employed in the report of M. Benedetti,--the

Prussian minister believed that "he could free himself from the

obligation to submit to the control of Europe," thanks to a separate

agreement with France. As to the means to bring about this precious

agreement, it was perfectly simple: France had only to seek its fortune

along the Meuse and the Escaut. "I do not tell your excellency anything

new," wrote M. Benedetti to his chief, some days after, from Nikolsburg,

in announcing to him that M. de Bismarck was of the opinion "that we

should seek compensation in Belgium, and that he offered to act in

concert with us." He did not, however, utterly repel the idea of giving

France its share on the Rhine, not, for instance, in the Prussian

territories, where it would be difficult to persuade King William to

renounce any portion of his possession; "but something could perhaps be

found in the Palatinate," that is, in Bavaria. He was always "much more

Prussian than German," and reasonable terms could be made with the

Walhalla.

The French government fell into the trap which was thus set, and it then

aided Prussia in _freeing itself from all control of Europe_, in working

at these preliminaries of Nikolsburg, signed the 26th July, and which

sealed the exclusion of Austria from Germany, and constituted a

confederation of the North, under the hegemony of the Hohenzollern. This

grave attack on public right and the equilibrium of the world once

conceded, and the war virtually ended, one began to talk of

compensations. In a letter addressed to M. de Goltz, and dated from Vichy

the 3d August, M. Drouyn de Lhuys declared that the emperor, his august

master, "had not wished to complicate the difficulties of a work of

_European interest_ in treating _prematurely_ with Prussia" on

territorial questions; but the moment seemed finally come to consider

these questions, all the more as they were preparing to obtain large

annexations north of the Main. "The king," M. de Bismarck had written to

M. de Goltz the 10th July,--"the king cares less for the constitution of

a political northern confederation, and _above all desires annexations_;

he would rather abdicate than return without an important territorial

acquisition."[82] In fact, besides the Duchies of the Elbe, the

abandonment of which had been stipulated at Nikolsburg, Prussia still

wished to absorb the free cities, Cassel, Hanover, even Saxony, and at

the Tuileries they hoped to measure the French demands according to the

number of souls and of square leagues that William the Conqueror should

demand for himself. "The great war for German nationality," which the

popular Caesar had recommended at Biarritz, turned in a measure into "this

human cattle market," so blamed at the congress of Vienna, at the

"execrated" treaties of 1815,--and how is it possible not to acknowledge

that France played a _role_ there unworthy of itself? It was for it to

deny at once the new and the old right, the principle of national will as

well as that of the legitimacy of princes; it wished, moreover, to

realize an illicit gain and a paltry sum on the occasion of a great

universal calamity, and, to speak with the English humorist, to profit by

the eruption of Vesuvius to boil an egg! M. de Bismarck uttered at this

moment a cruel _mot_, but which was not entirely unmerited. "France,"

said he to a former minister of the Germanic Confederation,--"France

_follows a Trinkgeld policy_ (_la France fait une politique de

pour-boire_)."

A letter written by M. Rouher on the 6th August, 1866, and since found

among the papers of the Tuileries,[83] makes us see the strange

illusions which the French government then cherished, and the ambassador

of Prussia at Paris did his best to sustain. "M. de Goltz finds our

pretension legitimate in principle," wrote the minister of state; "he

considers that satisfaction ought to be given to the only wish of our

country to constitute between France and Prussia _a necessary and

fruitful alliance_." The embarrassment is solely to determine the sum of

the demands that should be put forward. "The empress would demand much

or nothing, in order not to compromise our final pretensions." As for M.

Rouher, he thinks that "public opinion would have _food_ and

_direction_, if to-morrow we could say officially, Prussia consents that

we retake the frontiers of 1814, and thus efface the consequences of

Waterloo." Let it be well understood, the minister of state does not

admit "that this rectification would serve as a receipt for the future!"

"Without doubt, new facts must develop in order that new pretensions

arise, but these facts will certainly be developed. Germany is only in

the first of those numerous oscillations which it will undergo before

finding its new position. Let us be more ready, in the future, to better

profit by events; opportunities will not be wanting. The States south of

the Main, especially, will be, in a few years from now, an apple of

discord or a matter for a compromise. M. de Goltz does not dissimulate

at present the covetousness as regards this group of confederates."

Thus, at the very moment that they boasted of "saving" the States of the

South, of establishing on the other side of the Rhine a new political

combination which the minister of state was soon to adorn with the

famous name of _three fragments_, and to declare, marvelously reassuring

for France, they already waited for an opportunity to abandon this

combination, and to traffic for it "at a reasonable price!"

How naive to think that after Sadowa and Nikolsburg, the ruin of Austria

consummated, Germany completely subjected, all intervention of Europe

checked, and the military weakness of France proclaimed to all the

winds,[84] that one would find Prussia accessible to those arrangements

which it had not wished to make before its immense victories, at the

moment of its greatest perplexities, and in the midst of the anguish of

a crisis which all the world agreed in proclaiming perilous in the

extreme! Even on the 8th June, on the eve of the war, M. Benedetti thus

summed up the state of public opinion in Prussia in regard to France:

"The apprehensions which we inspire everywhere in Germany still exist,

and they will awaken unanimously and violently at the least sign which

would allow our intention of enlarging our boundaries towards the East

to be guessed. The king, like the most humble of his subjects, would not

bear at this moment the suggestion of the probability of a sacrifice on

the Rhine. The crown prince, so profoundly convinced of the dangers of

the policy of which he is the witness, declared, not long ago, to one of

my colleagues, with extreme vivacity, that he preferred war to cession,

if it was only the little county of Glatz."[85] And it was the same

diplomat who had so appreciated the situation before the campaign of

Bohemia, it was this same ambassador who now took upon himself to

present to M. de Bismarck the demands of the cabinet of the Tuileries,

who even submitted to him on the 5th August a project for a secret

treaty, implying the abandonment to France of all the left bank of the

Rhine, without excepting the great fortress of Mayence! "In view of the

important acquisitions which the peace assures to the Prussian

government," said M. Benedetti, "I was of the opinion that a territorial

remodeling would hereafter be necessary for our security; I have

instigated nothing, I have still less guaranteed the success; I have

only allowed myself to hope for it, provided that our language were firm

and our attitude resolute." Was firmness wanting, or was too much of it

shown? In any case, M. de Bismarck asserts that he replied in a tone

which certainly showed no irresolution. "Very well," he replied to the

pressing entreaties of the ambassador, "then we will have war. But let

his majesty well observe, that such a war could become in certain

eventualities _a_ war with a revolution, and that in presence of

revolutionary dangers, the German dynasties would prove to be much more

firmly established than that of Napoleon."[86]

That was not, however, the last remark of the Prussian minister.

Perfectly decided not to admit the discussion on the subject of the

Rhine, he took care, nevertheless, not to completely discourage the

French ambassador, and to continue a game with him which later, in his

circular of the 29th July, 1870, he called by the name, unknown until

then in the diplomatic dictionary, of _dilatory negotiations_. He spoke

of his liking for Napoleon III., of his great ambition to solve in

concert with him the important problems of the future. "Prussia needs an

alliance with a great Power;" that was his inmost conviction; he did not

cease to preach it to the king his august master,--and what alliance

more desirable, in a point of view of progress and of civilization, than

that with the French empire? He thus returned to his recent effusions of

Bruenn and Nikolsburg; he insinuated "that _other arrangements_ could be

made which would satisfy the respective interests of the two

countries,"[87] and he strengthened M. Benedetti in his design to return

to Paris and to expose the situation.

At Paris the conflict of Powers was carried on with vigor between the

minister of foreign affairs and the ambassador of Prussia, M. de Goltz,

ably seconded by the _party of action_, to which the arrival of M.

Benedetti (11th August) brought considerable support. M. Drouyn de Lhuys

was not at all surprised at the _Prussian ingratitude_, as M. Benedetti

had expressed it in one of his last dispatches,[88] but, by a logic

which escapes us, he did not the less rejoice at seeing the French

demands at last stated, "They can be taken up again in good time." He

had no doubt of the use that they would soon make on the banks of the

Spree of the project of the treaty of the 5th August! He hoped, besides,

that the final refusal given at Berlin would cause the ardent promoters

of dangerous intrigues to reflect that it would prevent certain

engagements for the future which he apprehended above all. M. de Goltz

suddenly told him that he had come to an agreement with the emperor

concerning the annexations to be effected by William I. in Northern

Germany, and a letter addressed the 12th August by the chief of state to

the Marquis de La Valette cut short all controversy with Prussia. "It

results from my conversation with Benedetti," wrote Napoleon III. to the

minister of the interior, "that we will have all Germany against us for

a small profit; it is important not to let public opinion be mistaken on

this point." The misfortune was only that the imperial government

allowed itself at this moment to be misled on a very dangerous point,

and that Belgium became for it, from that time, the object of a

negotiation as deceptive as fatal, and from which later, at the

beginning of the war of 1870, it in vain endeavored to elude the

crushing responsibility.

That M. de Bismarck was, from the beginning, the great tempter of the

imperial government, and the tempter repulsed even for a long time, in

these shadowy projects concerning the country of the Meuse and the

Escaut, is a truth which to-day cannot be doubted, the authentic

documents published lately suffice to convince the most incredulous

mind. It was not only in his conversations with General Govone that the

president of the Prussian council indicated on several occasions, and

very clearly, Belgium and certain parts of Switzerland as the most

proper territories to "indemnify France:" long before the spring of the

year 1866, even long before the interview of Biarritz, M. de Bismarck

had tried to _sell the bear-skin_, as Napoleon III. said to him one day.

General La Marmora, who understood it a long time, adds that "the bear

was neither in the Alps nor in the Carpathians; he was very well (_stava

benone_) and he neither wished to die nor to be caged up."[89] Such

suggestions were, without doubt, of a nature to startle the _party of

action_ in the councils of the empire, they were, however, eagerly

received by it; but scornfully checked, up to that point, by M. Drouyn

de Lhuys, treated as "projects of brigandage" by the chief of the state,

they had to await that hour of _patriotic anguish_ which marked the

arrival of Benedetti, to be at last taken into serious consideration.

Certainly the ambassador of France at the court of Berlin had, in this

year 1866, a very difficult and painful situation, we had almost said a

pathetic one. He had worked with ardor, with passion, to bring about

this _connubio_ of Italy and Prussia, which seemed to him to be an

immense good fortune for the imperial policy, a brilliant victory gained

over the old order of things to the profit of the "new right" and

Napoleonic ideas. In the fear, very well founded besides, of seeing this

work miscarry and Prussia draw back, if one spoke to it of eventual

compensations and preventive engagements, he had not ceased to dissuade

his government from any attempt of this kind, and to lay stress upon the

fierce, intractable, and suspicious patriotism of the House of

Hohenzollern, even to the point of being sometimes suspected at the

Hotel of the Quai d'Orsay of somewhat exaggerating the colors, and of

making a certain devil blacker and more German than he really was. The

work had at last succeeded; succeeded beyond all expectations; succeeded

in inspiring fear, in suddenly convincing M. Benedetti "that a

territorial remodeling was henceforth necessary to the security of

France." This remodeling he had flattered himself for a moment with

having obtained on the Rhine: "He had not guaranteed the success, but he

had allowed himself to _hope_ for it." Refused with firmness, if not

with pride, "and having taken the measure of Prussian ingratitude," he

was nevertheless soon given to hope what the minister of William I. had

insinuated to him, "that other proper arrangements could be made to

satisfy the respective interests of the two countries," and he had

grasped at the expedient which was thus pictured before his eyes, with

so much the more feverish energy as he saw in it a new triumph for the

modern right and the principles dear to his party. Anxious to repair the

consequences of a policy to which for his part he had contributed more

than any other to make it successful; recognizing, however, the

difficulties, if not the impossibility, for the court of Berlin to cede

any portion of the German soil, and always convinced of the sincere

desire of M. de Bismarck "to indemnify France,"[90] at this decisive

hour he made himself, at the side of Napoleon III., the interpreter of

the ideas which he had gathered from the head-quarters at Bruenn, and

pleaded with warmth for this necessary and fruitful alliance with

Prussia, which, extolled for a long time by the Palais Royal, had

recently deluded even the well balanced mind of M. Rouher.

Let it be well understood, there was no question of immediate action, of

which, indeed, the military situation of the country allowed no thought;

the question was simply of an agreement and a solidarity to be

established for future eventualities, for the time more or less distant,

but inevitable, when Prussia should think of crowning its work, of

freeing the Main, of extending its rule from the Baltic to the

Alps,--this question was of _boldly taking stand on the ground of

nationalities_! "If France boldly takes its stand on the ground of

nationalities," said a curious note found among the papers of the

Tuileries, and which incontestably sums up the ideas of the party of

action at this epoch,[91] "it is necessary to establish now that there

exists no Belgian nationality, and to fix this essential point with

Prussia. As the cabinet of Berlin seemed to be, on the other hand,

disposed to enter with France into arrangements which would suit France,

there would be time to negotiate a secret act which should bind the two

parties. Without pretending that this act was a perfectly sure

guarantee, it would have the double advantage of compromising Prussia,

and would be for it a gage of the sincerity of the policy or of the

intentions of the Emperor.... To be certain of finding at Berlin a

confidence which is necessary for the maintenance of an intimate

understanding, we must try to dissipate the apprehensions which have

always been entertained, which have been reawakened, and even

overexcited by our last communications. This result cannot be obtained

by words; an act is necessary, and one which will regulate the ulterior

lot of Belgium in concert with Prussia, in proving at Berlin that the

emperor seeks elsewhere than on the Rhine the extension necessary for

France since the events of which Germany was the theatre. We must at

least have a relative certainty that the Prussian government will not

oppose our aggrandizement in the North."

III.

It was with the mission of negotiating a _secret act_, binding the two

parties in the sense indicated by the note which we have just given,

that M. Benedetti left Paris towards the end of the month of August. The

act was to provide for an offensive and defensive alliance between the

two states, and, in exchange for the recognition of the changes already

accomplished or still to be accomplished in Germany, to assure to

Napoleon III. the diplomatic aid of Prussia for the acquisition of

Luxemburg, and its _armed_ aid at the moment when France should judge it

opportune to annex Belgium. Immediately on his arrival at his post the

French ambassador went resolutely to work: he carried on the negotiation

_without the knowledge of his immediate chief_, and only referred to the

emperor and the minister of state.[92] He begged the president of the

council of Prussia to regard the propositions of the 5th August, those

relative to the left bank of the Rhine, as null and void, as a joke of

M. Drouyn de Lhuys during the sickness of his august master, and

submitted to him a new project in five articles concerning Belgium. It

matters little that the ambassador of France had with him the minute of

it which he had written in the cabinet of the Prussian minister, at his

request, and, "in some measure at his dictation;" it is certain that

Benedetti acted according to the instructions from Paris,[93] and that

M. de Bismarck on his part did not decline such overtures. He had even

made observations on some of the terms employed in the draft, and

insisted on introducing several changes in the text. The project thus

amended was sent to Paris, and returned anew to Berlin with

rectifications made by the emperor and M. Rouher. On the banks of the

Seine, in the councils of the small number initiated in the secret,

they were full of expectation and cheerfulness; they debated the

question of the successor of M. Drouyn de Lhuys, and the opinions were

divided between M. La Valette and M. Benedetti; they exchanged ideas

which were soon expressed in a sadly celebrated document, and they

rejoiced at seeing "the treaties of 1815 destroyed, the coalition of the

three Powers of the North broken, and Prussia made sufficiently

independent and sufficiently compact to ignore its former

traditions."[94] All of a sudden a discouraging dispatch from the

ambassador of France at the court of Berlin (29th August) troubled their

minds, and they had again some apprehensions on the subject of the

"necessary and fruitful alliance" which they flattered themselves with

having established.

The conferences had continued up to the last days of the month of

August, and M. de Bismarck had lent himself with good grace to the

_dilatory negotiations_. In the mean time, the peace of Prague, the

definite peace with Austria, was signed (26th August); the States of the

South had adhered one after the other to the stipulations of Nikolsburg,

and solemnly recognized the confederation of the North, as well as the

territorial acquisitions of Prussia. The secret act concerning Belgium

was in the hands of the minister of William I., and only needed to be

fairly copied and signed, but at this moment M. Benedetti suddenly met

with strange inconceivable distrusts which did not fail to wound him

deeply. M. de Bismarck hesitated, spoke to him of his fears "that the

Emperor Napoleon would wish to make use of such a negotiation to create

suspicion between Prussia and England." The stupefaction of the French

ambassador was extreme. "What degree of confidence can we on our side

accord to those open to such suspicions?" he asked in his dispatch of

the 29th August.[95] The proceeding seemed to him unjustifiable, and, in

order not to be tempted to qualify it, he judged it opportune "to go for

a fortnight to Carlsbad where he would hold himself ready to return to

Berlin on receipt of the first telegram which M. de Bismarck should

address to him." Slightly moved at this circumstance, the court of the

Tuileries was not the less obstinate in believing in the _secret act_

which was preparing at Berlin; it dismissed M. Drouyn de Lhuys, and long

before the arrival of his successor from Constantinople, M. de Moustier,

they hastened to publish that famous circular of the 16th September,

which bore the signature of the minister of the interior, M. de La

Valette, and was one more pledge given to the conqueror of Sadowa. The

manifest praised the theory of combinations and affirmed that "Prussia,

enlarged, free henceforth from any solidarity, would assure the

independence of Germany;" as to the most secret hopes, scarcely an

allusion was made to them: "France can only desire territorial

aggrandizements which do not alter its powerful cohesion." Nothing

happened, however, and M. Benedetti waited in vain under the elms and

the beautiful firs of Carlsbad: M. de Bismarck gave no sign of life. He

had gone to Varzin, from whence he did not return until the month of

December. The _dilatory negotiations_ had borne all their fruit in the

month of August, and the French government would have been too happy if

all those shadowy intrigues had remained for it only a simple deception:

they became its chastisement.

Two Chancellors: Prince Gortchakof and Prince Bismarck · 第 14 / 23 段