Part 15 (2/2)
Although Germany has commemorated her victories for the last twenty-five years, and will doubtless continue to commemorate them for the next six months and then for evermore, it seems that we are to be compelled, in deference to ”superior orders” revealed at the Council of Ministers, to postpone the official consecration of a monument intended to prove our devotion to our mutilated country, and our incurable grief at the defeat of Sedan. It seems that we have not the right, a free people, to give to sorely oppressed Alsace-Lorraine (which never ceases to give proofs of her fidelity to France) a proof in our turn, that we remember the disaster which has separated us, that we lament this disaster, and hope one day to repair, if not to avenge it. Our pride is being systematically humiliated in every direction! The nature and consequences of victory have indeed been cruelly modified, if one must submit to the law of the conqueror after having been delivered from him for twenty-five years. The glorious resistance of the past thus becomes an ignominious surrender and makes us shed tears of shame, even more bitter than those which we shed over our saddest memories.
Gentlemen of the Government of France, I would ask you to read the German newspapers; go to Berlin, go wherever you like in Germany or in Alsace-Lorraine, and you will find there hundreds and hundreds of monuments which have been inaugurated by the Imperial German Government. For these, the smallest event, ancient or modern, affords sufficient pretext. [14]
In all things and in every direction we yield today to the authority of a monarch who emphasises our defeat more severely than those who actually conquered us. Our strict national duty towards him who did not overcome us with his own sword, was to hold ourselves firmly upright before him and to protect our brethren, victims of the war.
Alas! we have been obedient to Bismarck, and we shall be submissive to William II. But why, and to what end? Had we met the liar and cheat with honesty, had we remained calm in presence of this nerve-ridden individual, we should have been able to recover, morally at first and then actually, all the advantages that Prussia gained by her victory.
The Imperial victim of restlessness, whose nerves are so unhealthily and furiously shaken when he goes abroad, has a craving for disturbing the nerves of others; this in itself makes him the most dangerous of advisers. William II never allows to himself or to others any relaxation of the brain; like all spirits in torment, he must needs find, forthwith, to the very minute, a counter-effect to every thing that confronts him. With him, even a sudden calm contains the threat of a storm, excitement lurks beneath his moods of quietness. The b.a.s.t.a.r.d peace which he has authorised Turkey to conclude, conceals a new revolution in Crete: such is his will. No sooner is there evidence of an improvement in our relations with Italy, than he invites King Humbert to be present at the German military manoeuvres, in order to create dissension between the two countries. And so it is in everything. He makes it his business to inspire weariness and vexation of spirit, to destroy those hopes and feelings which restore vitality to the soul of a people. He is for ever stretching out a hand that would fain control by itself the rotation of the globe, and he sets it all awry.
The glorification of William II at Kiel is founded upon s.h.i.+fting sands.
Schleswig remains Danish and resists the Germanising process with a force of energy at least equal to that of Alsace-Lorraine. The Danes of Schleswig are still Danes, they have not bowed the knee in admiration of German _Kultur_, any more than the Alsatians, Schleswig says: ”Let them ask us by a _plebiscite_ and they shall see what we want, what civilised men have the right to ask: light and air and the right to dispose of themselves.” The people of Alsace-Lorraine say: ”If you would know what Alsace-Lorraine, which was never consulted, thinks of the Treaty of Frankfort, ask her.”
I blush, and my soul is filled with shame, when I think of the degradation of French patriotism contained in the utterances of . . . ., of those words which, to our lasting sorrow, evoked in _the Centre_ of the Chamber an outburst of enthusiasm. May our patriots never forget this cowardly session of the French Parliament! Thus, then, twenty-seven years after the war, when we have spent countless millions on the remaking of our army and navy, when every Frenchman has bled himself to the bone to make France so strong and independent that she might cherish the brightest hopes, a President of the French Council has the unutterable weakness, from the tribune, to threaten France with the German cane, should she dare to follow any other policy than that desired by Berlin!
And French deputies have applauded these shameful words, that are reproduced, with such joy as may be imagined, by the whole German Press! That Press has every reason to be delighted and to find in these words clear proof that the official cla.s.s in France has always looked upon the Russian Alliance as a show-piece, never relying upon it, and that since the Berlin Congress (how often have I said it!) this official cla.s.s has never ceased to gravitate towards Germany.
And I, a Republican, a fanatic for the Russian Alliance, such as it might and should have been, a Frenchwoman, blind wors.h.i.+pper of my vanquished country--how can I hold my head up in the face of such a shameful collapse!
In placing his services at the disposal of the Grand Turk for the persecution of Christians, in supporting those in Russia whose policy it is to urge their country into war with j.a.pan and China and to divert it from its natural sphere of action in Europe, our Minister for Foreign Affairs has ruined one of the finest political situations in which France has ever found herself. If the conduct of our foreign affairs had been entrusted to a real statesman, France might have recovered her position in Europe instead of going, with giant strides, down the path of hopeless decadence.
Are not the intentions of Germany plain enough now and sufficiently proved? They must be stupidly foolish who cannot see that a great German war is being prepared against the Slavs and Gallo-Latins, under most disastrous conditions for us and for Russia. It needs all the blindness of King Humbert, of Leopold II and of the Hungarian Centralists, to believe that if and when it comes, a German victory would confer any benefits on anything that is not German.
September 8, 1897. [15]
The mind of Germany is everlastingly concerned with the toasts proposed by William II. We know the toast proposed after his review of the 8th Army Corps. First of all, come his remarks on the subject of foreign policy. ”It rests with us to maintain in its integrity the work accomplished by the great Emperor and to defend it against the influences and claims of foreigners.” On such an occasion, after the remarks on ”justice and equity,” which he made on board the _Pothuau_, the hot-headed Emperor was bound to deliver himself in some such strain.
The next toast was that which he proposed at Hamburg in honour of King Humbert and Queen Marguerita. This one is emphatic and at the same time gracious, for William II cultivates every style and all the arts.
On this occasion the King of Prussia, Emperor of Germany, referred as usual to the solidity of the Triple Alliance and to the mandate which it has a.s.sumed for the preservation of peace. He spoke as the grandson of William I. King Humbert replied as the grandson of Victor Emmanuel (_sic_), skilfully gliding over the question of the indissoluble nature of the Triple Alliance and reminding his hearers that Germany has no monopoly in the pursuit of peace, but that all the Governments of Europe are equally concerned in endeavouring to attain it.
A movement is taking shape in Italy, full of danger and of promise, as events will prove. The clericals and the republicans have sketched the outline of an understanding, which looks as if it might be approved by Leo XIII. The danger of this union between the parties will lead King Humbert back to a more national, a more peninsular, policy. The strong opposition that it has to face is useful, in that it will oblige the country's rulers to pay more attention to home affairs and to the nation's interests than to the glorification of the dynasty.
September 28, 1897. [16]
”Germany is the enemy,” Skobeleff used to say at Paris in 1882, speaking to the younger generation of Slavs in the Balkans. These prophetic words were inspired in the hero of Plevna by Germany's intrigues at the Berlin Congress, intricate intrigues, full of menace for the future of the East. They should have haunted the spirit of every chancellery ever since, and become the formula around and about which European diplomacy should have organised its forces to resist Prussia's invading tendencies.
Until 1870 the liberal, philosophic, learned and federalist genius of Germany, was spreading all over the world through its literature, science, poetry and music, a genius whose att.i.tude and equilibrium were the fruit of an equal fusion of the mind of North Germany with that of the South. By the victories and conquest of 1870, this genius became suddenly and entirely absorbed in Prussian militarism, and has now grown to be a force hostile to all other races. The power of the intellect in all its forms, recognises reciprocity and scientific research; the power of brute force only recognises the idea of predominance and the subjection of others. The genius of Prussianised Germany to-day combines the l.u.s.t of conquest and power with the shopkeeping spirit, but even in this last, there is no idea of reciprocity but only of exclusive encroachment. Her international misdeeds are past all number; she saps and undermines all that has been laboriously built up by others. Germanisation carries with it the seeds of disintegration; it is a sower of hatred, proclaiming for its own exclusive benefit the equity of iniquity, the justice of injustice.
Only less extraordinary than the audacity of Prussia is Europe's failure to realise these truths. In 1870 Napoleon III was deluded, fooled and compromised, led into war by means of lies. Nameless intrigues set our generals one against the other. At a moment when victory was possible, the treachery of Bazaine made defeat inevitable for France, whom the so-called genius of Moltke and Frederick-Carl would never have vanquished. Having overthrown the Empire, the King of Prussia, who had declared that he was fighting against it alone, made war on France, well aware that sufficient vitality remained in the broken pieces to enable them to come together again, and that, under the threat of a French _revanche_, Prussia would be able to keep Germany exercised in such a state of mind as would reconcile her to remaining under the military yoke of the Hohenzollerns. And Europe, without protest, accepts this condition of things, fatal to her interests and security, created for the sole profit of the lowest of nations. By her self-effacement, indeed, she increased fivefold the influence and power of that nation.
<script>