THE TRIPLE ALLIANCE AND ECONOMIC REFORM.
1878-1887.
The year 1878 forms a turning-point both in internal and in external
politics. Up to this year Prussia has been allied with the two Eastern
monarchies; the Empire has been governed by the help of the National
Liberal party; the chief enemy has been the Clericals. The traditions of
the time before the war are still maintained. After this year the
understanding with Russia breaks down; instead of it the peace of Europe
is preserved by the Triple Alliance with Austria and Italy. In internal
affairs the change is even more marked; the rising power of the
Socialists is the enemy to be fought against; for this conflict, peace
has to be made with the Catholics--the May laws are modified or
repealed. The alliance with Liberalism breaks down, and the efforts of
the Government are devoted to a far-reaching scheme of financial reform
and social legislation.
When, in April, 1877, the Emperor refused to accept Bismarck's
resignation, the whole country applauded the decision. In the Reichstag
a great demonstration was made of confidence in the Chancellor. Everyone
felt that he could not be spared at a time when the complications in the
East were bringing new dangers upon Europe, and in the seclusion of
Varzin he did not cease during the next months to direct the foreign
policy of the Empire. He was able with the other Governments of Europe
to prevent the spread of hostilities from Turkey to the rest of Europe,
and when the next year the English Government refused its assent to the
provisional peace of San Stefano, it was the unanimous desire of all the
other States that the settlement of Turkey should be submitted to a
Congress at Berlin over which he should preside. It was the culmination
of his public career; it was the recognition by Europe in the most
impressive way of his primacy among living statesmen. In his management
of the Congress he answered to the expectations formed of him. "We do
not wish to go," he had said, "the way of Napoleon; we do not desire to
be the arbitrators or schoolmasters of Europe. We do not wish to force
our policy on other States by appealing to the strength of our army. I
look on our task as a more useful though a humbler one; it is enough if
we can be an honest broker." He succeeded in the task he had set before
himself, and in reconciling the apparently incompatible desires of
England and Russia. Again and again when the Congress seemed about to
break up without result he made himself the spokesman of Russian wishes,
and conveyed them to Lord Beaconsfield, the English plenipotentiary.
None the less the friendship of Russia, which had before wavered, now
broke down. A bitter attack on Germany and Bismarck was begun in the
Russian Press; the new German fiscal policy led to misunderstandings;
the Czar in private letters to the Emperor demanded in the negotiations
that were still going on the absolute and unconditional support of
Germany to all Russian demands as the condition of Russian friendship.
In the autumn of the next year matters came near to war; it was in these
circumstances that Bismarck brought about that alliance which ever since
then has governed European politics. He hastily arranged a meeting with
Count Andrassy, the Austrian Minister, and in a few days the two
statesmen agreed on a defensive alliance between the two Empires. Many
years later, in 1886, the instrument of alliance was published. It was
agreed that if either of the German States was attacked by Russia the
other would join to defend it; if either was attacked by France the
other would observe neutrality; but if the French were supported by
Russia then the first clause would come into force. The Emperor of
Austria willingly gave his assent; it was only after a prolonged
struggle that Bismarck was able to gain the assent of his own sovereign.
This alliance, which in the next year was joined by Italy, again gave
Germany the ruling position in Europe.
During this crisis in foreign affairs Bismarck was occupied by another,
which threatened to be equally serious, in home politics. In the spring
of 1878 an attempt was made on the life of the Emperor; a young man,
named Hobel, a shoemaker's apprentice, shot at him in the streets of
Berlin, fortunately without result. The attempt naturally created
intense indignation throughout the country. This was increased when it
became known that he had been to some extent connected with the
Socialist party, and it seemed as though the motives of the crime were
supplied by the violent speeches made at Socialist gatherings. Bismarck
had long regarded the growth of Socialism with concern. He determined to
use this opportunity to crush it. He at once brought into the Bundesrath
a very severe law, forbidding all Socialist agitation and propaganda. He
succeeded in passing it through the Council, but it was thrown out in
the Reichstag by a very large majority. No one voted for it except the
Conservatives. The law indeed was so drawn up that one does not see how
anyone could have voted for it; the first clause began, "Printed
writings and unions which follow the aims of Social Democracy may be
forbidden by the Federal Council," but, as was pointed out, among the
aims of Social Democracy were many which were good in themselves, and
many others which, though they might be considered harmful by other
parties, were at least legitimate. Directly afterwards the Reichstag was
prorogued. Ten days later, another attempt was made on the Emperor's
life; this time a man of the name of Nobeling (an educated man who had
studied at the University) shot at him while driving in the Unter den
Linden, and wounded him severely in the head and arms with large shot.
The Emperor was driven home to his palace almost unconscious, and for
some time his life was in danger. This second attempt in so short a time
on the life of a man almost eighty years of age, so universally loved
and respected, who had conferred such benefits on his country, naturally
aroused a storm of indignation. When Bismarck received the news his
first words were, "Now the Reichstag must be dissolved." This was done;
the general elections took place while the excitement was still hot, and
of course resulted in a great loss to those parties--especially the
National Liberals--who had voted against the Socialist law; the Centre
alone retained its numbers. Before this new Parliament a fresh law was
laid, drafted with much more skill. It absolutely forbade all speeches
or writing in favour of plans for overthrowing the order of society, or
directed against marriage and property. It enabled the Government to
proclaim in all large towns a state of siege, and to expel from them by
the mere decree of the police anyone suspected of Socialist agitation.
The law, which was easily carried, was enforced with great severity; a
state of siege was proclaimed in Berlin and many other places. Socialist
papers, and even books, for instance the writings of Lassalle, were
forbidden; they might not even be read in public libraries; and for the
next twelve years the Socialist party had to carry on their propaganda
by secret means.
This Socialist law is very disappointing; we find the Government again
having recourse to the same means for checking and guiding opinion which
Metternich had used fifty years before. Not indeed that the Socialists
themselves had any ground for complaint; their avowed end was the
overthrow of government and society; they professed to be at war with
all established institutions; if they confined their efforts to legal
measures and did not use violence, it was only because the time had not
yet come. The men who avowed admiration for the Paris Commune, who were
openly preparing for a revolution more complete than any which Europe
had hitherto seen, could not complain if the Government, while there was
yet time, used every means for crushing them. The mistake was in
supposing that this measure would be successful. Bismarck would, indeed,
had he been able, have made it far more severe; his own idea was that
anyone who had been legally convicted of holding Socialist opinions
should be deprived of the franchise and excluded from the Parliament.
What a misunderstanding does this shew of the whole object and nature of
representative institutions! It had been decided that in Germany
Parliament was not to govern; what then was its function except to
display the opinions of the people? If, as was the case, so large a
proportion of the German nation belonged to a party of discontent, then
it was above all desirable that their wishes and desires should have
open expression, and be discussed where they could be overthrown. The
Government had enormous means of influencing opinion. In the old days
the men of letters had been on principle in opposition; now Germany was
flooded by papers, books, and pamphlets; all devoted to the most
extravagant praise of the new institutions. The excuse which was made
for these laws was not a sufficient one. It is seldom necessary to meet
political assassination by repressive measures, for they must always
create a danger which they intend to avert. There was not the slightest
ground for supposing that either Hobel or Nobeling had any confederates;
there was no plot; it was but the wild and wicked action of an
individual. It was as absurd to put a large party under police control
for this reason as it was to punish Liberals for the action of Sand. And
it was ineffective, as the events of the next years shewed; for the
Socialist law did not spare Germany from the infection of outrage which
in these years overran Europe.
The Socialist laws were soon followed by other proposals of a more
useful kind, and now we come to one of the most remarkable episodes in
Bismarck's career. He was over sixty years of age; his health was
uncertain; he had long complained of the extreme toil and the constant
annoyance which his public duties brought upon him. It might appear that
he had finished his work, and, if he could not retire altogether, would
give over the management of all internal affairs to others. That he
would now take upon himself a whole new department of public duties,
that he would after his prolonged absence appear again as leader and
innovator in Parliamentary strife--this no one anticipated.
Up to the year 1876 he had taken little active part in finance; his
energies had been entirely absorbed by foreign affairs and he had been
content to adopt and support the measures recommended by his technical
advisers. When he had interfered at all it had only been on those
occasions when, as with regard to commercial treaties, the policy of his
colleagues had impeded his own political objects. In 1864 he had been
much annoyed because difference on commercial matters had interfered
with the good understanding with Austria, which at that time he was
trying to maintain. Since the foundation of the Empire almost the
complete control over the commercial policy of the Empire had been
entrusted to Delbrück, who held the very important post of President of
the Imperial Chancery, and was treated by Bismarck with a deference and
consideration which no other of his fellow-workers received, except
Moltke and Roon. Delbrück was a confirmed Free-Trader, and the result
was that, partly by commercial treaties, and partly by the abolition of
customs dues, the tariff had been reduced and simplified. The years
following the war had, however, not been altogether prosperous; a great
outbreak of speculation was followed in 1873 by a serious commercial
crisis. And since that year there had been a permanent decrease in the
Imperial receipts. This was, for political reasons, a serious
inconvenience. By the arrangement made in 1866 the proceeds of the
customs and of the indirect taxation (with some exceptions) were paid
into the Exchequer of the Federation, and afterwards of the Empire. If
the receipts from these sources were not sufficient to meet the Imperial
requirements, the deficit had to be made up by contributions paid (in
proportion to their population) by the separate States. During later
years these contributions had annually increased, and it is needless to
point out that this was sufficient to make the relations of the State
Governments to the central authorities disagreeable, and to cause some
discontent with the new Constitution. This meant also an increase of the
amount which had to be raised by direct taxation. Now Bismarck had
always much disliked direct taxes; he had again and again pointed out
that they were paid with great reluctance, and often fell with peculiar
hardship on that very large class which could only just, by constant and
assiduous labour, make an income sufficient for their needs. Worst of
all was it when they were unable to pay even the few shillings required;
they then had to undergo the hardship and disgrace of distraint, and see
their furniture seized and sold by the tax-collectors. He had therefore
always wished that the income derived from customs and indirect taxation
should be increased so as by degrees to do away with the necessity for
direct taxation, and if this could be done, then, instead of the States
paying an annual contribution to the Empire, they would receive from the
central Government pecuniary assistance.
The dislike of direct taxation is an essential part of Bismarck's
reform; he especially disapproved of the Prussian system, the barbarous
system, as he called it, according to which every man had to pay a small
portion, it might be even a few _groschen_, in direct taxes.
"I ascribe," he said, "the large part of our emigration
to the fact that the emigrant wishes to escape the
direct pressure of the taxes and execution, and to go to
a land where the _klassensteuer_ does not exist, and where
he will also have the pleasure of knowing that the produce
of his labours will be protected against foreign
interference."
His opinion cannot be called exaggerated if it is true that, as he
stated, there were every year over a million executions involving the
seizure and sale of household goods on account of arrears of taxation.
It was not only the State taxes to which he objected; the local rates
for municipal expenses, and especially for education, fell very heavily
on the inhabitants of large cities such as Berlin. He intended to devote
part of the money which was raised by indirect taxation to relieving the
rates.
His first proposals for raising the money were of a very sweeping
nature. He wished to introduce a State monopoly for the sale of tobacco,
brandy, and beer. He entered into calculations by which he proved that
were his policy adopted all direct taxation might be repealed, and he
would have a large surplus for an object which he had very much at
heart--the provision of old-age pensions. It was a method of legislation
copied from that which prevails in France and Italy. He pointed out with
perfect justice that the revenue raised in Germany from the consumption
of tobacco was much smaller than it ought to be. The total sum gained by
the State was not a tenth of that which was produced in England by the
taxing of tobacco, but no one could maintain that smoking was more
common in England than in Germany. In fact tobacco was less heavily
taxed in Germany than in any other country in Europe.
In introducing a monopoly Bismarck intended and hoped not only to
relieve the pressure of direct taxation,--though this would have been a
change sufficient in its magnitude and importance for most men,--but
proposed to use the very large sum which the Government would have at
its disposal for the direct relief of the working classes. The Socialist
law was not to go alone; he intended absolutely to stamp out this
obnoxious agitation, but it was not from any indifference as to the
condition of the working classes. From his earliest days he had been
opposed to the Liberal doctrine of _laissez-faire_; it will be
remembered how much he had disliked the _bourgeois_ domination of the
July Monarchy; as a young man he had tried to prevent the abolition of
guilds. He considered that much of the distress and discontent arose
from the unrestricted influence of capital. He was only acting in
accordance with the oldest and best traditions of the Prussian Monarchy
when he called in the power of the State to protect the poor. His plan
was a very bold one; he wished to institute a fund from which there
should be paid to every working man who was incapacitated by sickness,
accident, or old age, a pension from the State. In his original plan he
intended the working men should not be required to make any contribution
themselves towards this fund. It was not to be made to appear to them as
a new burden imposed on them by the State. The tobacco monopoly, he
said, he looked on as "the patrimony of the disinherited."
He did not fear the charge of Socialism which might be brought against
him; he defended himself by the provisions of the Prussian law. The Code
of Frederick the Great contained the words:
"It is the duty of the State to provide for the sustenance and support
of those of its citizens who cannot procure sustenance themselves"; and
again, "work adapted to their strength and capacity shall be supplied to
those who lack means and opportunity of earning a livelihood for
themselves and those dependent on them."
In the most public way the new policy was introduced by an Imperial
message, on November 17, 1881, in which the Emperor expressed his
conviction that the social difficulties could not be healed simply by
the repression of the exaggerations of Social Democracy, but at the same
time the welfare of the workmen must be advanced. This new policy had
the warm approval of both the Emperor and the Crown Prince; no one
greeted more heartily the change than Windthorst.
"Allow me," he once said to Bismarck, "to speak
openly: you have done me much evil in my life, but, as
a German patriot, I must confess to you my gratitude
that after all his political deeds you have persuaded our
Imperial Master to turn to this path of Social Reform."
There were, he said, difficulties to be met; he approved of the end, but
not of all the details,
"and," he continued, "something of the difficulty, if I
may say so, you cause yourself. You are often too stormy
for us; you are always coming with something new and
we cannot always follow you in it, but you must not
take that amiss. We are both old men and the Emperor
is much older than we are, but we should like ourselves
in our lifetime to see some of these reforms established.
That I wish for all of us and for our German country,
and we will do our best to help in it."
Opinions may differ as to the wisdom of Bismarck's social and financial
policy; nobody can deny their admiration for the energy and patriotism
which he displayed. It was no small thing for him, at his age, to come
out of his comparative retirement to bring forward proposals which would
be sure to excite the bitterest opposition of the men with whom he had
been working, to embark again on a Parliamentary conflict as keen as any
of those which had so taxed his energies in his younger years. Not
content with inaugurating and suggesting these plans, he himself
undertook the immediate execution of them. In addition to his other
offices, in 1880 he undertook that of Minister of Trade in Prussia, for
he found no one whom he could entirely trust to carry out his proposals.
During the next years he again took a prominent part in the
Parliamentary debates; day after day he attended to answer objections
and to defend his measures in some of his ablest and longest speeches.
By his proposals for a duty on corn he regained the support of most of
the Conservatives, but in the Reichstag which was elected in 1884 he
found himself opposed by a majority consisting of the Centre,
Socialists, and Progressives. Many of the laws were rejected or
amended, and it was not until 1890 that, in a modified form, the whole
of the social legislation had been carried through.
For the monopoly he gained no support; scarcely a voice was raised in
its favour, nor can we be surprised at this. It was a proposal very
characteristic of his internal policy; he had a definite aim in view and
at once took the shortest, boldest, and most direct road towards it,
putting aside the thought of all further consequences. In this others
could not follow him; quite apart from the difficulties of organisation
and the unknown effect of the law on all those who gained their
livelihood by the growth, preparation, and sale of tobacco, there was a
deep feeling that it was not safe to entrust the Government with so
enormous a power. Men did not wish to see so many thousands enrolled in
the army of officials, already too great; they did not desire a new
check on the freedom of life and occupation, nor that the Government
should have the uncontrolled use of so great a sum of money. And then
the use he proposed to make of the proceeds: if the calculations were
correct, if the results were what he foretold, if from this monopoly
they would be able to pay not only the chief expenses of the Government
but also assign an old-age pension to every German workman who reached
the age of seventy--what would this be except to make the great majority
of the nation prospective pensioners of the State? With compulsory
attendance at the State schools; with the State universities as the only
entrance to public life and professions; when everyone for three years
had to serve in the army; when so large a proportion of the population
earned their livelihood in the railways, the post-office, the customs,
the administration--the State had already a power and influence which
many besides the Liberals regarded with alarm. What would it be when
every working man looked forward to receiving, after his working days
were over, a free gift from the Government? Could not this power be used
for political measures also; could not it become a means for checking
the freedom of opinions and even for interfering in the liberty of
voting?
He had to raise the money he wanted in another way, and, in 1879, he
began the great financial change that he had been meditating for three
years; he threw all his vigour into overthrowing Free Trade and
introducing a general system of Protection.
In this he was only doing what a large number of his countrymen desired.
The results of Free Trade had not been satisfactory. In 1876 there was a
great crisis in the iron trade; owing to overproduction there was a
great fall of prices in England, and Germany was being flooded with
English goods sold below cost price. Many factories had to be closed,
owners were ruined, and men thrown out of work; it happened that, by a
law passed in 1873, the last duty on imported iron would cease on the
31st of December, 1876. Many of the manufacturers and a large party in
the Reichstag petitioned that the action of the law might at any rate be
suspended. Free-Traders, however, still had a majority, for the greater
portion of the National Liberals belonged to that school, and the law
was carried out. It was, however, apparent that not only the iron but
other industries were threatened. The building of railways in Russia
would bring about an increased importation of Russian corn and
threatened the prosperity, not only of the large proprietors, but also
of the peasants. It had always been the wise policy of the Prussian
Government to maintain and protect by legislation the peasants, who were
considered the most important class in the State. Then the trade in
Swedish wood threatened to interfere with the profits from the German
forests, an industry so useful to the health of the country and the
prosperity of the Government. But if Free Trade would injure the market
for the natural products of the soil, it did not bring any compensating
advantages by helping industry. Germany was flooded with English
manufactures, so that even the home market was endangered, and every
year it became more apparent that foreign markets were being closed. The
sanguine expectations of the Free-Traders had not been realised;
America, France, Russia, had high tariffs; German manufactured goods
were excluded from these countries. What could they look forward to in
the future but a ruined peasantry and the crippling of the iron and
weaving industries? "I had the impression," said Bismarck, "that under
Free Trade we were gradually bleeding to death."
He was probably much influenced in his new policy by Lothar Bucher, one
of his private secretaries, who was constantly with him at Varzin.
Bucher, who had been an extreme Radical, had, in 1849, been compelled
to fly from the country and had lived many years in England. In 1865 he
had entered Bismarck's service. He had acquired a peculiar enmity to the
Cobden Club, and looked on that institution as the subtle instrument of
a deep-laid plot to persuade other nations to adopt a policy which was
entirely for the benefit of England. He drew attention to Cobden's
words--"All we desire is the prosperity and greatness of England." We
may in fact look on the Cobden Club and the principles it advocated from
two points of view. Either they are, as Bucher maintained, simply
English and their only result will be the prosperity of England, or they
are merely one expression of a general form of thought which we know as
Liberalism; it was an attempt to create cosmopolitan institutions and to
induce German politicians to take their economic doctrines from England,
just as a few years before they had taken their political theories. In
either case these doctrines would be very distasteful to Bismarck, who
disliked internationalism in finance as much as he did in constitutional
law or Socialist propaganda.
Bismarck in adopting Protection was influenced, not by economic theory,
but by the observation of facts. "All nations," he said, "which have
Protective duties enjoy a certain prosperity; what great advantages has
America reached since it threatened to reduce duties twice, five times,
ten times as high as ours!" England alone clung to Free Trade, and why?
Because she had grown so strong under the old system of Protection that
she could now as a Hercules step down into the arena and challenge
everyone to come into the lists. In the arena of commerce England was
the strongest. This was why she advocated Free Trade, for Free Trade was
really the right of the most powerful. English interests were furthered
under the veil of the magic word Freedom, and by it German enthusiasts
for liberty were enticed to bring about the ruin and exploitation of
their own country.
If we look at the matter purely from the economic point of view, it is
indeed difficult to see what benefits Germany would gain from a policy
of Free Trade. It was a poor country; if it was to maintain itself in
the modern rivalry of nations, it must become rich. It could only become
rich through manufactures, and manufactures had no opportunity of
growing unless they had some moderate protection from foreign
competition.
The effect of Bismarck's attention to finance was not limited to these
great reforms; he directed the whole power of the Government to the
support of all forms of commercial enterprise and to the removal of all
hindrances to the prosperity of the nation. To this task he devoted
himself with the same courage and determination which he had formerly
shewn in his diplomatic work.
One essential element in the commercial reform was the improvement of
the railways. Bismarck's attention had long been directed to the
inconveniences which arose from the number of private companies, whose
duty it was to regard the dividends of the shareholders rather than the
interests of the public. The existence of a monopoly of this kind in
private hands seemed to him indefensible. His attention was especially
directed to the injury done to trade by the differential rate imposed on
goods traffic; on many lines it was the custom to charge lower rates on
imported than on exported goods, and this naturally had a very bad
effect on German manufactures. He would have liked to remedy all these
deficiencies by making all railways the property of the Empire (we see
again his masterful mind, which dislikes all compromise); in this,
however, he was prevented by the opposition of the other States, who
would not surrender the control of their own lines. In Prussia he was
able to carry out this policy of purchase of all private lines by the
State; by the time he laid down the Ministry of Commerce hardly any
private companies remained. The acquisition of all the lines enabled the
Government greatly to improve the communication, to lower fares, and to
introduce through communications; all this of course greatly added to
the commercial enterprise and therefore the wealth of the country.
He was now also able to give degrees his encouragement and support to
those Germans who for many years in countries beyond the sea had been
attempting to lay the foundations for German commerce and even to
acquire German colonies. Bismarck's attitude in this matter deserves
careful attention. As early as 1874 he had been approached by German
travellers to ask for the support of the Government in a plan for
acquiring German colonies in South Africa. They pointed out that here
was a country fitted by its climate for European occupation; the
present inhabitants of a large portion of it, the Boers, were anxious to
establish their independence of England and would welcome German
support. It was only necessary to acquire a port, either at Santa Lucia
or at Delagoa Bay, to receive a small subsidy from the Government, and
then private enterprise would divert the stream of German emigration
from North America to South Africa. Bismarck, though he gave a courteous
hearing to this proposal, could not promise them assistance, for, as he
said, the political situation was not favourable. He must foresee that
an attempt to carry out this or similar plans would inevitably bring
about very serious difficulties with England, and he had always been
accustomed to attach much importance to his good understanding with the
English Government. During the following years, however, the situation
was much altered. First of all, great enterprise had been shewn by the
German merchants and adventurers in different parts of the world,
especially in Africa and in the Pacific. They, in those difficulties
which will always occur when white traders settle in half-civilised
lands, applied for support to the German Government. Bismarck, as he
himself said, did not dare to refuse them this support.
"I approached the matter with some reluctance; I
asked myself, how could I justify it, if I said to these
enterprising men, over whose courage, enthusiasm, and
vigour I have been heartily pleased: 'That is all very
well, but the German Empire is not strong enough, it
would attract the ill-will of other States.' I had not the
courage as Chancellor to declare to them this bankruptcy
of the German nation for transmarine enterprises."
It must, however, happen that wherever these German settlers went, they
would be in the neighbourhood of some English colony, and however
friendly were the relations of the Governments of the two Powers,
disputes must occur in the outlying parts of the earth. In the first
years of the Empire Bismarck had hoped that German traders would find
sufficient protection from the English authorities, and anticipated
their taking advantage of the full freedom of trade allowed in the
British colonies; they would get all the advantages which would arise
from establishing their own colonies, while the Government would be
spared any additional responsibility. He professed, however, to have
learnt by experience from the difficulties which came after the
annexation of the Fiji Islands by Great Britain that this hope would not
be fulfilled; he acknowledged the great friendliness of the Foreign
Office, but complained that the Colonial Office regarded exclusively
British interests. As a complaint coming from his mouth this arouses
some amusement; the Colonial Office expressed itself satisfied to have
received from so high an authority a testimonial to its efficiency which
it had rarely gained from Englishmen.
The real change in the policy of the Empire must, however, be attributed
not to any imaginary shortcomings of the English authorities; it was an
inevitable result of the abandonment of the policy of Free Trade, and
of the active support which the Government was now giving to all forms
of commercial enterprise. It was shewn, first of all, in the grant of
subsidies to mail steamers, which enabled German trade and German
travellers henceforward to be carried by German ships; before they had
depended entirely on English and French lines. It was not till 1884 that
the Government saw its way to undertake protection of German colonists.
They were enabled to do so by the great change which had taken place in
the political situation. Up to this time Germany was powerless to help
or to injure England, but, on the other hand, required English support.
All this was changed by the occupation of Egypt. Here England required a
support on the Continent against the indignation of France and the
jealousy of Russia. This could only be found in Germany, and therefore a
close approximation between the two countries was natural. Bismarck let
it be known that England would find no support, but rather opposition,
if she, on her side, attempted, as she so easily could have done, to
impede German colonial enterprise.
In his colonial policy Bismarck refused to take the initiative; he
refused, also, to undertake the direct responsibility for the government
of their new possessions. He imitated the older English plan, and left
the government in the hands of private companies, who received a charter
of incorporation; he avowedly was imitating the East India Company and
the Hudson's Bay Company. The responsibilities of the German Government
were limited to a protection of the companies against the attack or
interference by any other Power, and a general control over their
actions. In this way it was possible to avoid calling on the Reichstag
for any large sum, or undertaking the responsibility of an extensive
colonial establishment, for which at the time they had neither men nor
experience. Another reason against the direct annexation of foreign
countries lay in the Constitution of the Empire; it would have been
easier to annex fresh land to Prussia; this could have been done by the
authority of the King; there was, however, no provision by which the
Bundesrath could undertake this responsibility, and it probably could
not be done even with the assent of the Reichstag unless some change
were made in the Constitution. It was, however, essential that the new
acquisitions should be German and not Prussian.
All these changes were not introduced without much opposition; the
Progressives especially distinguished themselves by their prolonged
refusal to assent even to the subsidies for German lines of steamers. In
the Parliament of 1884 they were enabled often to throw out the
Government proposals. It was at this time that the conflict between
Bismarck and Richter reached its height. He complained, and justly
complained, that the policy of the Progressives was then, as always,
negative. It is indeed strange to notice how we find reproduced in
Germany that same feeling which a few years before had in England nearly
led to the loss of the colonies and the destruction of the Empire.
It is too soon even now to consider fully the result of this new
policy; the introduction of Protection has indeed, if we are to judge by
appearances, brought about a great increase in the prosperity of the
country; whether the scheme for old-age pensions will appease the
discontent of the working man seems very doubtful. One thing, however,
we must notice: the influence of the new policy is far greater than the
immediate results of the actual laws passed. It has taught the Germans
to look to the Government not only as a means of protecting them against
the attacks of other States, but to see in it a thoughtful, and I think
we may say kindly, guardian of their interests. They know that every
attempt of each individual to gain wealth or power for his country will
be supported and protected by the Government; they know that there is
constant watchfulness as to the dangers to life and health which arise
from the conditions of modern civilisation. In these laws, in fact,
Bismarck, who deeply offended and irretrievably alienated the survivors
of his own generation, won over and secured for himself and also for the
Government the complete loyalty of the rising generation. It might be
supposed that this powerful action on the part of the State would
interfere with private enterprise; the result shews that this is not the
case. A watchful and provident Government really acts as an incentive to
each individual. Let us also recognise that Bismarck was acting exactly
as in the old days every English Government acted, when the foreign
policy was dictated by the interests of British trade and the home
policy aimed at preserving, protecting, and assisting the different
classes in the community.
Bismarck has often been called a reactionary, and yet we find that by
the social legislation he was the first statesman deliberately to apply
himself to the problem which had been created by the alteration in the
structure of society. Even if the solutions which he proposed do not
prove in every case to have been the best, he undoubtedly foresaw what
would be the chief occupation for the statesmen of the future. In these
reforms he had, however, little help from the Reichstag; the Liberals
were bitterly opposed, the Socialists sceptical and suspicious, the
Catholics cool and unstable allies; during these years the chronic
quarrel between himself and Parliament broke out with renewed vigour.
How bitterly did he deplore party spirit, the bane of German life, which
seemed each year to gain ground!
"It has," he said, "transferred itself to our modern public life and the
Parliaments; the Governments, indeed, stand together, but in the German
Reichstag I do not find that guardian of liberty for which I had hoped.
Party spirit has overrun us. This it is which I accuse before God and
history, if the great work of our people achieved between 1866 and 1870
fall into decay, and in this House we destroy by the pen what has been
created by the sword."
In future years it will perhaps be regarded as one of his chief claims
that he refused to become a party leader. He saved Germany from a
serious danger to which almost every other country in Europe which has
attempted to adopt English institutions has fallen a victim--the
sacrifice of national welfare to the integrity and power of a
Parliamentary fraction. His desire was a strong and determined
Government, zealously working for the benefit of all classes, quick to
see and foresee present and future evil; he regarded not the personal
wishes of individuals, but looked only in each matter he undertook to
its effect on the nation as a whole. "I will accept help," he said,
"wherever I may get it. I care not to what party any man belongs. I have
no intention of following a party policy; I used to do so when I was a
young and angry member of a party, but it is impossible for a Prussian
or German Minister." Though the Constitution had been granted, he did
not wish to surrender the oldest and best traditions of the Prussian
Monarchy; and even if the power of the King and Emperor was limited and
checked by two Parliaments it was still his duty, standing above all
parties, to watch over the country as a hundred years before his
ancestors had done.
His power, however, was checked by the Parliaments. Bismarck often
sighed for a free hand; he longed to be able to carry out his reforms
complete and rounded as they lay clear before him in his own brain; how
often did he groan under all the delay, the compromise, the surrender,
which was imposed upon him when, conscious as he was that he was only
striving for the welfare of his country, he had to win over not only the
King, not only his colleagues in the Prussian Ministry, his
subordinates, who had much power to check and impede his actions, but,
above all, the Parliaments. It was inevitable that his relation to them
should often be one of conflict; it was their duty to submit to a
searching criticism the proposals of the Government and to amend or
reject them, and let us confess that it was better they were there. The
modifications they introduced in the bills he proposed were often
improvements; those they rejected were not always wise. The drafting of
Government bills was often badly done; the first proposals for the
Socialistic law, the original drafts of many of his economic reforms,
were all the better when they had been once rejected and were again
brought forward in a modified form. More than this, we must confess that
Bismarck did not possess that temperament which would make it wise to
entrust him with absolute dictatorial power in internal matters. He
attempted to apply to legislation habits he had learnt in diplomacy. And
it is curious to notice Bismarck's extreme caution in diplomacy, where
he was a recognised master, and his rashness in legislation, where the
ground was often new to him. In foreign affairs a false move may easily
be withdrawn, a change of alliance quickly made; it often happens that
speed is more important than wisdom. In internal affairs it is
different; there, delay is in itself of value; moreover, false
legislation cannot be imposed with impunity, laws cannot be imposed and
repealed.
Bismarck often complained of the conduct of the Reichstag. There were in
it two parties, the Socialists and the Centre, closely organised,
admirably disciplined, obedient to leaders who were in opposition by
principle; they looked on the Parliamentary campaign as a struggle for
power, and they maintained the struggle with a persistency and success
which had not been surpassed by any Parliamentary Opposition in any
other country. Apart from them the attitude of all the parties was
normally that of moderate criticism directed to the matter of the
Government proposals. There were, of course, often angry scenes;
Bismarck himself did not spare his enemies, but we find no events which
shew violence beyond what is, if not legitimate, at least inevitable in
all Parliamentary assemblies. The main objects of the Government were
always attained; the military Budgets were always passed, though once
not until after a dissolution. In the contest with the Clerical party
and the Socialists the Government had the full support of a large
majority. Even in the hostile Reichstag of 1884, in which the
Socialists, Clericals, and Progressives together commanded a majority, a
series of important laws were passed. Once, indeed, the majority in
opposition to the Government went beyond the limits of reason and honour
when they refused a vote of £1000 for an additional director in the
Foreign Office. It was the expression of a jealousy which had no
justification in facts; at the time the German Foreign Office was the
best managed department in Europe; the labour imposed on the secretaries
was excessive, and the nation could not help contrasting this vote with
the fact that shortly before a large number of the members had voted
that payments should be made to themselves. The nation could not help
asking whether it would not gain more benefit from another £1000 a year
expended on the Foreign Office than from £50,000 a year for payment of
members. Even this unfortunate action was remedied a few months later,
when the vote was passed in the same Parliament by a majority of twenty.
Notwithstanding all their internal differences and the extreme party
spirit which often prevailed, the Reichstag always shewed determination
in defending its own privileges. More than once Bismarck attacked them
in the most tender points. At one time it was on the privileges of
members and their freedom from arrest; both during the struggle with the
Clericals and with the Socialists the claim was made to arrest members
during the session for political utterances. When Berlin was subject to
a state of siege, the President of the Police claimed the right of
expelling from the capital obnoxious Socialist members. On these
occasions the Government found itself confronted by the unanimous
opposition of the whole House. In 1884, Bismarck proposed that the
meetings of the Reichstag should be biennial and the Budget voted for
two years; the proposal was supported on the reasonable grounds that
thereby inconvenience and press of work would be averted, which arose
from the meeting of the Prussian and German Parliaments every winter.
Few votes, however, could be obtained for a suggestion which seemed to
cut away the most important privileges of Parliament.
Another of the great causes of friction between Bismarck and the
Parliament arose from the question as to freedom of debate. Both before
1866, and since that year, he made several attempts to introduce laws
that members should be to some extent held responsible, and under
certain circumstances be brought before a court of law, in consequence
of what they had said from their places in Parliament. This was
represented as an interference with freedom of speech, and was bitterly
resented. Bismarck, however, always professed, and I think truly, that
he did not wish to control the members in their opposition to the
Government, but to place some check on their personal attacks on
individuals. A letter to one of his colleagues, written in 1883, is
interesting:
"I have," he says, "long learned the difficulties which educated
people, who have been well brought up, have to overcome in order
to meet the coarseness of our Parliamentary _Klopfechter_
[pugilists] with the necessary amount of indifference, and to
refuse them in one's own consciousness the undeserved honour of
moral equality. The repeated and bitter struggles in which you
have had to fight alone will have strengthened you in your
feeling of contempt for opponents who are neither honourable
enough nor deserve sufficient respect to be able to injure you."
There was indeed a serious evil arising from the want of the feeling of
responsibility in a Parliamentary assembly which had no great and
honourable traditions. He attempted to meet it by strengthening the
authority of the House over its own members; the Chairman did not
possess any power of punishing breaches of decorum. Bismarck often
contrasted this with the very great powers over their own members
possessed by the British Houses of Parliament. He drew attention to the
procedure by which, for instance, Mr. Plimsoll could be compelled to
apologise for hasty words spoken in a moment of passion. It is strange
that neither the Prussian nor the German Parliament consented to adopt
rules which are really the necessary complement for the privileges of
Parliament.
The Germans were much disappointed by the constant quarrels and disputes
which were so frequent in public life; they had hoped that with the
unity of their country a new period would begin; they found that, as
before, the management of public affairs was disfigured by constant
personal enmities and the struggle of parties. We must not, however,
look on this as a bad sign; it is rather more profitable to observe that
the new institutions were not affected or weakened by this friction. It
was a good sign for the future that the new State held together as
firmly as any old-established monarchy, and that the most important
questions of policy could be discussed and decided without even raising
any point which might be a danger to the permanence of the Empire.
Bismarck himself did much to put his relations with the Parliament on a
new and better footing. Acting according to his general principle, he
felt that the first thing to be done was to induce mutual confidence by
unrestrained personal intercourse. The fact that he himself was not a
member of the Parliament deprived him of those opportunities which an
English Minister enjoys. He therefore instituted, in 1868, a
Parliamentary reception. During the session, generally one day each
week, his house was opened to all members of the House. The invitations
were largely accepted, especially by the members of the National Liberal
and Conservative parties. Those who were opponents on principle, the
Centre, the Progressives, and the Socialists, generally stayed away.
These receptions became the most marked feature in the political life of
the capital, and they enabled many members to come under the personal
charm of the Chancellor. What an event was it in the life of the young
and unknown Deputy from some obscure provincial town, when he found
himself sitting, perhaps, at the same table as the Chancellor, drinking
the beer which Bismarck had brought into honour at Berlin, and for which
his house was celebrated, and listening while, with complete freedom
from all arrogance or pomposity, his host talked as only he could!
The weakest side of his administration lay in the readiness with which
he had recourse to the criminal law to defend himself against political
adversaries. He was, indeed, constantly subjected to attacks in the
Press, which were often unjust and sometimes unmeasured, but no man who
takes part in public life is exempt from calumny. He was himself never
slow to attack his opponents, both personally in the Parliament, and
still more by the hired writers of the Press. None the less, to defend
himself from attacks, he too often brought his opponents into the police
court, and _Bismarckbeleidigung_ became a common offence. Even the
editor of _Kladderadatsch_ was once imprisoned. He must be held
personally responsible, for no action could be instituted without his
own signature to the charge. We see the same want of generosity in the
use which he made of attempts, or reputed attempts, at assassination. In
1875, while he was at Kissingen, a young man shot at him; he stated that
he had been led to do so owing to the attacks made on the Chancellor by
the Catholic party. No attempt, however, was made to prove that he had
any accomplices; it was not even suggested that he was carrying out the
wishes of the party. It was one of those cases which will always occur
in political struggles, when a young and inexperienced man will be
excited by political speeches to actions which no one would foresee, and
which would not be the natural result of the words to which he had
listened. Nevertheless, Bismarck was not ashamed publicly in the
Reichstag to taunt his opponents with the action, and to declare that
whether they would or not their party was Kuhlmann's party; "he clings
to your coat-tails," he said. A similar event had happened a few years
before, when a young man had been arrested on the charge that he
intended to assassinate the Chancellor. No evidence in support of the
charge was forthcoming, but the excuse was taken by the police for
searching the house of one of the Catholic leaders with whom the accused
had lived. No incriminating documents of any kind were found, but among
the private papers was the correspondence between the leaders in the
party of the Centre dealing with questions of party organisation and
political tactics. The Government used these private papers for
political purposes, and published one of them. The constant use of the
police in political warfare belonged, of course, to the system he had
inherited, but none the less it was to have been hoped that he would
have been strong enough to put it aside. The Government was now firmly
established; it could afford to be generous. Had he definitely cut
himself off from these bad traditions he would have conferred on his
country a blessing scarcely less than all the others.
The opposition of the parties in the Reichstag to his policy and person
did not represent the feelings of the country. As the years passed by
and the new generation grew up, the admiration for his past achievements
and for his character only increased. His seventieth birthday, which he
celebrated in 1885, was made the occasion for a great demonstration of
regard, in which the whole nation joined. A national subscription was
opened and a present of two million marks was made to him. More than
half of this was devoted to repurchasing that part of the estate at
Schoenhausen which had been sold when he was a young man. The rest he
devoted to forming an institution for the help of teachers in higher
schools. A few years before, the Emperor had presented to him the
Sachsen Wald, a large portion of the royal domains in the Duchy of
Lauenburg. He now purchased the neighbouring estate of Friedrichsruh, so
that he had a third country residence to which he could retire. It had a
double advantage: its proximity to the great forest in which he loved
to wander, and also to a railway, making it little more than an hour
distant from Berlin. He was able, therefore, at Friedrichsruh, to
continue his management of affairs more easily than he could at Varzin.