Aggregation-Induced Emission (AIE): A

Practical Guide 1st Edition Jianwei Xu

Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://ebookmeta.com/product/aggregation-induced-emission-aie-a-practical-guide-1
st-edition-jianwei-xu/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

Handbook of Aggregation Induced Emission Volume 2

Typical AIEgens Design 1st Edition Youhong Tang
(Editor)

https://ebookmeta.com/product/handbook-of-aggregation-induced-
emission-volume-2-typical-aiegens-design-1st-edition-youhong-
tang-editor/

Handbook of Aggregation Induced Emission Volume 1

Tutorial Lectures and Mechanism Studies 1st Edition
Youhong Tang (Editor)

https://ebookmeta.com/product/handbook-of-aggregation-induced-
emission-volume-1-tutorial-lectures-and-mechanism-studies-1st-
edition-youhong-tang-editor/

Carbon Emission Calculation Methods for Highway Tunnel

Construction Chun Guo Jianfeng Xu

https://ebookmeta.com/product/carbon-emission-calculation-
methods-for-highway-tunnel-construction-chun-guo-jianfeng-xu/

Primary Mathematics 3A Hoerst

https://ebookmeta.com/product/primary-mathematics-3a-hoerst/
Continuous Emission Monitoring 3rd Edition James A.
Jahnke

https://ebookmeta.com/product/continuous-emission-monitoring-3rd-
edition-james-a-jahnke/

Continuous Emission Monitoring 3rd Edition James A

Jahnke

https://ebookmeta.com/product/continuous-emission-monitoring-3rd-
edition-james-a-jahnke-2/

A Practical Guide to IT Law

https://ebookmeta.com/product/a-practical-guide-to-it-law/

Civil Procedure A Practical Guide Vv.Aa.

https://ebookmeta.com/product/civil-procedure-a-practical-guide-
vv-aa/

Business Architecture A Practical Guide 1st Edition

Jonathan Whelan

https://ebookmeta.com/product/business-architecture-a-practical-
guide-1st-edition-jonathan-whelan/
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
 Favre arrived at 1.30 p.m. and spent nearly two hours in
negotiation with the Chancellor. He afterwards drove off towards
Paris, being accompanied by Bismarck-Bohlen as far as the bridge
at Sèvres.
These negotiations were not mentioned at dinner. It would
appear, however, to be a matter of course that the preliminaries of
the capitulation were discussed. The Chief spoke at first of
Bernstorff, and said: “Anyhow, that is a thing I have never yet been
able to manage—to fill page after page of foolscap with the most
insignificant twaddle. A pile so high has come in again to-day”—he
pointed with his hand—“and then the back references: ‘As I had the
honour to report in my despatch of January 3rd, 1863, No. so-and-
so; as I announced most obediently in my telegram No. 1666.’ I send
them to the King, and he wants to know what Bernstorff means, and
always writes in pencil on the margin, ‘Don’t understand this. This is
awful!’” Somebody observed that it was only Goltz who wrote as
much as Bernstorff: “Yes,” said the Chief, “and in addition he often
sent me private letters that filled six to eight closely-written sheets.
He must have had a terrible amount of spare time. Fortunately I fell
out with him, and then that blessing ceased.” One of the company
wondered, what Goltz would say if he now heard that the Emperor
was a prisoner, and the Empress in London, while Paris was being
besieged and bombarded by us. “Well,” replied the Chief, “he was
not so desperately attached to the Emperor—but the Empress in
London! Nevertheless, in spite of his devotion to her, he would not
have given himself away as Werther did.”
The death of a Belgian Princess having been mentioned,
Abeken, as in duty bound, expressed his grief at the event. The
Chief said: “How can that affect you so much? To my knowledge,
there is no Belgian here at table, nor even a cousin.”
The Minister then related that Favre complained of our firing at
the sick and blind—that is to say, the blind asylum. “I said to him, ‘I
really do not see what you have to complain about. You yourselves
do much worse, seeing that you shoot at our sound and healthy
men.’ He will have thought: What a barbarian!” Hohenlohe’s name
was then mentioned, and it was said that much of the success of the
bombardment was due to him. The Chief: “I shall propose for him the
title of Poliorketes.” The conversation then turned on the statues and
paintings of the Restoration, and their artificiality and bad taste. “I
remember,” said the Chief, “that Schuckmann, the Minister, was
painted by his wife, en coquille I think it was called at that time, that
is, in a rose-coloured shell, and wearing a kind of antique costume.
He was naked down to the waist—I had never seen him like that.”
“That is one of my earliest remembrances. They often gave what
used to be called assemblées, and are now known as routs—a ball
without supper. My parents usually went there.” Thereupon, the
Chief once more described his mother’s costume, and then
continued: “There was afterwards a Russian Minister in Berlin,
Ribeaupierre, who also gave balls, where people danced till 2 o’clock
in the morning, and there was nothing to eat. I know that, because I
and a couple of good friends were often there. At length we got tired
of it, and played them a trick. When it got late, we pulled out some
bread and butter from our pockets, and after we had finished, we
pitched the paper on the drawing-room floor. Refreshments were
provided next time, but we were not invited any more.”
 CHAPTER XVIII
DURING THE NEGOTIATIONS RESPECTING THE CAPITULATION OF
PARIS

Wednesday, January 25th.—Count Lehndorff dined with us, and

talked about hunting and hunting dinners, including a great banquet
given by some Baron which consisted of no less than twenty-four
courses. His brother was present and fell asleep propped on his
elbows, while a neighbour of his sunk into slumber on the shoulder
of a governess who was sitting next him. The dinner lasted over five
hours and the people were most horribly bored, as often happens in
the country. The Chief remarked: “I always know how to get over that
difficulty. One must put down a good bit of liquor right at the
beginning, and under its influence one’s neighbours to the left and
right grow ever so much cleverer and pleasanter.”
The Minister then spoke about his first journey to St. Petersburg.
He drove in a carriage, as at first there was no snow. It fell very
heavily later on, however, and progress was terribly slow. It took him
five full days and six nights to reach the first railway station, and he
spent the whole time cramped up in a narrow carriage without sleep
and with the thermometer at fifteen degrees Reaumur below zero. In
the train, however he fell so fast asleep that on their arrival in St.
Petersburg, after a ten hours’ run, he felt as if he had been only five
minutes in the railway carriage.
“The old times before the railways were completed had also their
good side,” continued the Minister. “There was not so much to do.
The mail only came in twice a week, and then one worked as if for a
wager. But when the mail was over we got on horseback, and had a
good time of it until its next arrival.” Somebody observed that the
increased work, both abroad and at the Foreign Office, was due
more to the telegraph than to the railways. This led the Chief to talk
about diplomatic reports in general, many of which, while written in a
pleasant style, were quite empty. “They are like feuilletons, written
merely because something has to be written. That was the case, for
instance, with the reports of Bamberg, our Consul in Paris. One read
them through always thinking: Now something is coming. But nothing
ever came. They sounded very well and one read on and on. But
there was really nothing in them. All barren and empty.” Another
instance was then mentioned, Bernhardi, our Military Plenipotentiary
at Florence, of whom the Chief said: “He passes for being a good
writer on military subjects because of his work on Toll. We do not
know, however, how much of that he himself wrote. Thereupon he
was given the rank of major, although it is not certain that he ever
was an officer at all, and he was appointed Military Plenipotentiary in
Italy. Great things were expected of him there, and in the matter of
quantity he did a great deal—also in the matter of style. He writes in
an agreeable way, as if for a feuilleton, but when I have got to the
end of his closely-written reports in a small neat hand, for all their
length I have found nothing in them.”...
The Minister then returned to the subject of tiresome journeys
and long rides. He said: “I remember after the battle of Sadowa I was
the whole day in the saddle on a big horse. At first I did not want to
ride him as he was too high and it was too much trouble to mount. At
last, however, I did so, and I was not sorry for it. It was an excellent
animal! But the long waiting above the valley had exhausted me and
my seat and legs were very sore. The skin was not broken, that has
never happened to me, but afterwards when I sat down on a wooden
bench I had a feeling as if I were sitting on something that came
between me and the wood. It was only a blister. After Sadowa we
arrived late at night in the market-place of Horsitz. There we were
told that we were to seek out our own quarters. That, however, was
much easier said than done. The houses were bolted and barred,
and the sappers, who might have broken in the doors for us, were
not to arrive before five in the morning.” “His Excellency knew how to
help himself in a similar case at Gravelotte,” interrupted Delbrück.
The Chief continued his story: “Well, I went to several houses at
Horsitz, three or four, and at length I found a door open. After making
a few steps into the dark I fell into a kind of pit. Luckily it was not
deep, and I was able to satisfy myself that it was filled with horse-
dung. I thought at first, ‘How would it be to remain here,’—on the
dung-heap, but I soon recognised other smells. What curious things
happen sometimes! If that pit had been twenty feet deep, and full,
they would have had a long search next morning for their Minister,
and doubtless there would be no Chancellor of the Confederation to-
day.” “I went out again and finally found a corner for myself in an
arcade on the market-place. I laid a couple of carriage cushions on
the ground and made a pillow of a third, and then stretched myself
out to sleep. Later on some one waked me. It was Perponcher, who
told me that the Grand Duke of Mecklenburg had a room for me and
an unoccupied bed. That turned out to be correct, but the bed was
only a child’s cot. I managed to fix it, however, by arranging the back
of a chair at the end of it. But in the morning I could hardly stand, as
my knees had been resting on the bare boards.” “One can sleep
quite comfortably if one has only a sackful of straw, however small.
You cut it open in the middle, push the straw to the two ends, and let
yourself into the hollow part. I used to do that in Russia when out
hunting. I ripped the bag open with my hunting knife, crept into it and
slept like a log.” “That was when the despatch from Napoleon came,”
observed Bohlen. The Chief replied: “Yes, the one at which the King
was so pleased, because it showed that he had won a great battle—
his first great battle.” “And you were also glad,” said Bohlen, “and
you swore an oath that you would one day requite the Gauls when
an opportunity offered.”...
 Finally the Chief related: “Favre told me the day before yesterday
that the first shell that fell in the Pantheon cut off the head of the
statue of Henri IV.” “He doubtless thought that was a very pathetic
piece of news,” suggested Bohlen. “Oh, no,” replied the Chief, “I
rather fancy that, as a democrat, he was pleased that it should have
happened to a King.” Bohlen: “That is the second piece of bad luck
that Henri has had in Paris. First a Frenchman stabbed him there,
and now we have beheaded him.”
The dinner lasted very long this evening, from 5.30 till after 7.
Favre was expected back from Paris every moment. He came at
length at 7.30, again accompanied by his son-in-law with the
Spanish name. It is understood that neither hesitated this time, as
they did on the former occasion, to take the food that was offered to
them, but, like sensible people, did justice to the good things that
were laid before them. It is doubtless to be inferred from this that
they have also listened to reason in the main point, or will do so.
That will soon appear, as Favre is again conferring with the
Chancellor.
After dinner read drafts. Instructions have been sent to
Rosenberg-Grudcinski at Reims respecting the collection of taxes.
The Municipalities are to be called upon to pay five per cent. extra
for each day of arrears. Flying columns with artillery are to be sent to
districts where payment is obstinately refused. They are to summon
the inhabitants to pay up the taxes and if this is not done
immediately to shell the place and set it on fire. Three examples
would render a fourth unnecessary. It is not our business to win over
the French by considerate treatment or to take their welfare into
account. On the contrary, in view of their character, it is desirable to
inspire them with a greater fear of us than of their own Government,
which, of course, also enforces compulsory measures against them.
According to a report by the Minister of the Netherlands to his
Government, the Red Republicans in Paris attempted a rising the
night before last, released some of their leaders, and then provoked
a riot outside the Hôtel de Ville. The National Guard fired upon the
Mobiles, and there were some dead and wounded, but ultimately
order was restored.
About 10 o’clock, while Favre was still here, there was heavy
firing from big guns which continued for perhaps an hour. I went to
tea at 10.30 p.m., and found Hatzfeldt and Bismarck-Bohlen in
conversation with Del Rio in the dining-room. He is a man of medium
height, dark beard, slightly bald, and wears a pince-nez. Shortly after
I came down, he left for his quarters at Stieber’s house,
accompanied by Mantey, and he was followed a quarter of an hour
later by Favre. Del Rio spoke of Paris as being the “centre du
monde,” so that the bombardment is a kind of target practice at the
centre of the world. He mentioned that Favre has a villa at Reuil and
a large cellar in Paris with all sorts of wine, and that he himself has
an estate in Mexico of six square German miles in extent. After
Favre’s departure the Chief came out to us, ate some cold partridge,
asked for some ham, and drank a bottle of beer. After a while he
sighed, and sitting up straight in his chair, he exclaimed: “If one could
only decide and order these things one’s self! But to bring others to
do it!” He paused for a minute and then continued: “What surprises
me is that they have not sent out any general. And it is difficult to
make Favre understand military matters.” He then mentioned a
couple of French technical terms of which Favre did not know the
meaning. “Well, it is to be hoped that he had a proper meal to-day,”
said Bohlen. The Chief replied in the affirmative, and then Bohlen
said he had heard it rumoured that this time Favre had not despised
the champagne. The Chief: “Yes, the day before yesterday he
refused to take any, but to-day he had several glasses. The first time
he had some scruples of conscience about eating, but I persuaded
him, and his hunger doubtless supported me, for he ate like one who
had had a long fast.”
 Hatzfeldt reported that the Mayor, Rameau, had called about an
hour before and asked if M. Favre was here. He wanted to speak to
him and to place himself at his disposal. Might he do so? He,
Hatzfeldt, had replied that of course he did not know. The Chief: “For
a man to come in the night to a person who is returning to Paris is
sufficient of itself to bring him before a court-martial. The audacious
fellow!” Bohlen: “Mantey has doubtless already told Stieber. Probably
this M. Rameau is anxious to return to his cell.” (Rameau was
obliged some time since to study the interior of one of the cells in the
prison in the Rue Saint Pierre for a few days in company with some
other members of the corporation—if I am not mistaken, on account
of some refusal or some insolent reply about supplying provisions for
Versailles.)
The Minister then related some particulars of his interview with
Favre. “I like him better now than at Ferrières,” he said. “He spoke a
good deal and in long, well-rounded periods. It was often not
necessary to pay attention or to answer. They were anecdotes of
former times. He is a very good raconteur.” “He was not at all
offended at my recent letter to him. On the contrary, he felt indebted
to me for calling his attention to what he owed to himself.” “He also
spoke of having a villa near Paris, which was, however, wrecked and
pillaged. I had it on the tip of my tongue to say, ‘But not by us!’ but he
himself immediately added that it had doubtless been done by the
Mobiles.” “He then complained that Saint Cloud had been burning for
the last three days, and wanted to persuade me that we had set the
palace there on fire.” “In speaking of the franctireurs and their
misdeeds, he wished to call my attention to our guerillas in 1813—
they indeed had been much worse. I said to him: ‘I don’t want to
deny that, but you are also aware that the French shot them
whenever they caught them. And they did not shoot them all in one
place, but one batch on the spot where the act was committed,
another batch at the next halt, and so on, in order to serve as a
deterrent.’” “He maintained that in the last engagement, on the 19th,
the National Guard, recruited from the well-to-do classes, fought
best, while the battalions raised from the lower classes were
worthless.”
The Chief paused for a while and seemed to be reflecting. He
then continued: “If the Parisians first received a supply of provisions
and were then again put on half rations and once more obliged to
starve, that ought, I think, to work. It is like flogging. When it is
administered continuously it is not felt so much. But when it is
suspended for a time and then another dose inflicted, it hurts! I know
that from the criminal court where I was employed. Flogging was still
in use there.”
The subject of flogging in general was then discussed, and
Bohlen, who favours its retention, observed that the English had re-
introduced it. “Yes,” said Bucher, “but first for personal insult to the
Queen, on the occasion of an outrage against the Royal person, and
afterwards for garrotting.” The Chief then related that in 1863, when
the garrotters appeared in London, he was often obliged to go after
twelve o’clock at night through a solitary lane, containing only stables
and full of heaps of horse-dung, which led from Regent Street to his
lodgings in Park Street. To his terror, he read in the papers that a
number of these attacks had taken place on that very spot.
Then, after a pause, the Minister said: “This is really an unheard-
of proceeding on the part of the English. They want to send a
gunboat up the Seine” (Odo Russell put forward this demand, which
the Chancellor absolutely refused) “in order, they say, to remove the
English families there. They merely want to ascertain if we have laid
down torpedoes and then to let the French ships follow them. What
swine! They are full of vexation and envy because we have fought
great battles here—and won them. They cannot bear to think that
shabby little Prussia should prosper so. The Prussians are a people
who should merely exist in order to carry on war for them in their
pay. This is the view taken by all the upper classes in England. They
have never been well disposed towards us, and have always done
their utmost to injure us.” “The Crown Princess herself is an
incarnation of this way of thinking. She is full of her own great
condescension in marrying into our country. I remember her once
telling me that two or three merchant families in Liverpool had more
silver-plate than the entire Prussian nobility. ‘Yes,’ I replied, ‘that is
possibly true, your Royal Highness, but we value ourselves for other
things besides silver.’”
The Minister remained silent for a while. Then he said: “I have
often thought over what would have happened if we had gone to war
about Luxemburg—should I now be in Paris or would the French be
in Berlin? I think I did well to prevent war at that time. We should not
have been nearly so strong as we are to-day. At that time the
Hanoverians would not have made trustworthy soldiers. I will say
nothing about the Hessians—they would have done well. The
Schleswig-Holstein men have now fought like lions, but there was no
army there then. Saxony was also useless. The army had been
disbanded and had to be recruited over again. And there was little
confidence to be placed in the South Germans. The Würtembergers,
what excellent fellows they are now, quite first rate! But in 1866 they
would have been laughed at by every soldier as they marched into
Frankfurt like so many militiamen. The Baden troops were also not
up to the mark. Beyer, and indeed the Grand Duke, has since then
done a great deal for them.” “It is true that public opinion throughout
Germany would have been on our side had we wished to fight for
Luxemburg. But that was not enough to compensate for such
deficiencies. Moreover, we had not right on our side. I have never
confessed it publicly, but I can say it here: after the dissolution of the
Confederation the Grand Duke had become the sovereign of
Luxemburg and could have done what he liked with the country. It
would have been mean of him to part with it for money, but it was
open to him to cede it to France. Our right of occupation was also
not well founded. Properly speaking, after the dissolution of the
Confederation we ought no longer to have occupied even Rastatt
and Mainz. I said that in the Council—I had at that time yet another
idea, namely, to hand over Luxemburg to Belgium. In that case we
should have united it to a country on behalf of whose neutrality, as
people then thought, England would intervene. That would also have
strengthened the German element there against the French
speaking inhabitants, and at the same time have secured a good
frontier. My proposal was not received with any favour, and it is just
as well as it has turned out.”
Bismarck-Bohlen drew attention to a capital cartoon in
Kladderadatsch: Napoleon waiting on the platform of the railway
station and saying “They have already given the signal to start.” He
has put on an ermine cloak for his journey to Paris, and is carrying
his portmanteau in his hand. The Chief, however, observed:
“Doubtless he thinks so, and he may be right. But I fear he will miss
the train. Yet, after all, there may be no other way left. He would be
easier to convince than Favre. But he would always require half the
army to maintain him on the throne.”
Thursday, January 26th.—The Chief drove off to see the King at
10.30 a.m.
Herr Hans von Rochow and Count Lehndorff dined with us. The
Chief talked about Favre: “He told me that on Sundays the
boulevards are still full of fashionably dressed women with pretty
children. I remarked to him, ‘I am surprised at that. I wonder you
have not yet eaten them!’” As some one noticed that the firing was
particularly heavy to-day, the Minister observed: “I remember in the
criminal court we once had a subordinate official—I believe his name
was Stepki—whose business it was to administer the floggings. He
was accustomed to lay on the last three strokes with exceptional
vigour—as a wholesome memento!” The conversation then turned
upon Strousberg, whose bankruptcy was said to be imminent, and
the Chief said: “He once told me, ‘I know I shall not even die in my
own house.’ But for the war, it would not have happened so soon,
perhaps not at all. He always kept afloat by issuing new shares, and
the game succeeded, although other Jews, who had made money
before him, did their best to spoil it. But now comes the war, and his
Rumanians have fallen lower and lower, so that at present one might
ask how much they cost per hundredweight. For all that, he remains
a clever man and indefatigable.” The mention of Strousberg’s
cleverness and restless activity led on to Gambetta, who was said to
have also “made his five millions out of the war.” But doubts were
expressed on this point, and I believe rightly. After the Dictator of
Bordeaux, it was Napoleon’s turn to be discussed, and according to
Bohlen, people said he had saved at least fifty millions during the
nineteen years of his reign. “Others say eighty millions,” added the
Chief, “but I doubt it. Louis Philippe spoiled the business. He had
riots arranged, and then bought stocks on the Amsterdam Exchange,
but at last business men saw through it.” Hatzfeldt or Keudell then
observed that this resourceful monarch used to fall ill from time to
time with a similar object.
Morny was then spoken of as having been specially ingenious in
making money in every possible way under the Empire. The Chief
told us that “when Morny was appointed Ambassador to St.
Petersburg he appeared with a whole collection of elegant carriages,
some forty-three of them altogether, and all his chests, trunks and
boxes were full of laces, silks, and feminine finery, upon which, as
Ambassador, he had to pay no customs duty. Every servant had his
own carriage, and every attaché and secretary had at least two. A
few days after his arrival he sold off the whole lot by auction, clearing
at least 800,000 roubles. He was a thief, but an amiable one.” The
Chief then, pursuing the same subject and quoting further instances,
continued: “For the matter of that, influential people in St. Petersburg
understood this sort of business—not that they were willing to take
money directly. But when a person wanted something, he went to a
certain French shop, and bought expensive laces, gloves or
jewellery, perhaps for five or six thousand roubles. The shop was run
on behalf of some official or his wife. This process repeated, say,
twice a week, produced quite a respectable amount in the course of
the year.”
Bohlen called out across the table: “Do, please, tell that lovely
story about the Jew with the torn boots who got twenty-five lashes.”
The Chief: “It came about in this way. One day a Jew called at our
Chancellerie declaring that he was penniless, and wanted to be sent
back to Prussia. He was terribly tattered, and he had on in particular
a pair of boots that showed his naked toes. He was told that he
would be sent home, but then he wanted to get other boots as it was
so cold. He demanded them as a right, and became so forward and
impudent, screaming and calling names, that our people did not
know what to do with him. And the servants also could not trust
themselves to deal with the furious creature. At length, when the row
had become intolerable, I was called to render physical assistance. I
told the man to be quiet or I would have him locked up. He answered
defiantly: ‘You can’t do that. You have no right whatever to do that in
Russia!’ ‘We shall see!’ I replied. ‘I must send you home, but I am
not called upon to give you boots, although perhaps I might have
done so. But first you shall receive punishment for your abominable
behaviour.’ He then repeated that I could not touch him. Thereupon I
opened the window and beckoned to a Russian policeman, who was
stationed a little way off. My Jew continued to shriek and abuse us
until the policeman, a tall stout man, came in. I said, ‘Take him with
you—lock him up till to-morrow—twenty-five!’ The big policeman
took the little Jew with him, and locked him up. He came again next
morning quite transformed, very humble and submissive, and
declared himself ready for the journey without new boots. I asked
how he had got on in the interval. Badly, he said, very badly. But
what had they done to him? They had—well, they had—physically
maltreated him. I thought that when he got home he would enter a
complaint against me, or get his case into the newspapers—the
Volkszeitung, or some such popular organ. The Jews know how to
make a row. But he must have decided otherwise, for nothing more
was heard of him.”
When I came down to tea at 10.30 p.m. I found the Chief in
conversation with the members of Parliament, Von Köller and Von
Forckenbeck. The Minister was just saying that more money would
soon be required. “We did not want to ask more from the Reichstag,”
he said, “as we did not anticipate that the war would last so long. I
have written to Camphausen, but he suggests requisitions and
contributions. They are very difficult to collect, as the immense area
of country over which we are dispersed requires more troops than
we can spare for purposes of coercion. Two million soldiers would be
necessary to deal thoroughly with a territory of 12,000 German
square miles. Besides, everything has grown dearer in consequence
of the war. When we make a requisition we get nothing. When we
pay cash there is always enough to be had in the market, and
cheaper than in Germany. Here the bushel of oats costs four francs,
and if it is brought from Germany six francs. I thought at first of
getting the contributions of the different States paid in advance. But
that would only amount to twenty millions, as Bavaria will keep her
own accounts until 1872. Another way out of the difficulty occurred to
me, namely, to apply to our Diet for a sum on account. But we must
first find out what Moltke proposes to extort from the Parisians, that
is to say, from the city of Paris—for that is what we are dealing with
for the present.” Forckenbeck was of opinion that the Chief’s plan
would meet with no insurmountable resistance in the Diet. It is true
the doctrinaires would raise objections, and others would complain
that Prussia should again have to come to the rescue and make
sacrifices for the rest of the country, but in all probability the majority
would go with the Government. Köller could confirm that opinion,
which he did.
Afterwards an officer of the dark blue hussars, a Count Arnim
who had just arrived from Le Mans, came in and gave us a great
deal of interesting news. He said the inhabitants of the town
appeared to be very sensible people who disapproved of Gambetta’s
policy, and everywhere expressed their desire for peace. “Yes,”
replied the Chief, “that is very good of the people, but how does it
help us if with all their good sense they allow Gambetta, time after
time, to stamp new armies of 150,000 men out of the ground?” Arnim
having further related that they had again made great numbers of
prisoners, the Minister exclaimed: “That is most unsatisfactory! What
shall we do with them all in the end? Why make so many prisoners?
Every one who makes prisoners ought to be tried by court-martial.”
This, like many other similar expressions, must doubtless not be
taken literally, and applies only to the franctireurs.
Friday, January 27th.—It is said that the bombardment ceased at
midnight. It was to have recommenced at 6 o’clock this morning in
case the Paris Government was not prepared to agree to our
conditions for a truce. As it has ceased, the Parisians have doubtless
yielded. But Gambetta?
Moltke arrives at 8.30 a.m., and remains in conference with the
Chief for about three-quarters of an hour. The Frenchmen put in an
appearance shortly before 11. Favre (who has had his grey Radical
beard clipped) with thick underlip, yellow complexion, and light grey
eyes; General Beaufort d’Hautpoule, with his aide-de-camp, Calvel;
and Dürrbach, a “Chief of the Engineers of the Eastern Railway.”
Beaufort is understood to have led the attack on the redoubt at
Montretout on the 19th. Their negotiations with the Chief appear to
have come to a speedy conclusion, or to have been broken off.
Shortly after twelve o’clock, just as we sit down to lunch, they drive
off again in the carriages that brought them here. Favre looks very
depressed. The general is noticeably red in the face, and does not
seem to be quite steady on his legs. Shortly after the French had
gone the Chancellor came in to us and said: “I only want a breath of
fresh air. Please do not disturb yourselves.” Then, turning to
Delbrück and shaking his head, he said: “There is nothing to be done
with him. Mentally incapable—drunk, I believe. I told him to think it
over until half-past one. Perhaps he will have recovered by that time.
Muddle-headed and ill-mannered. What is his name? Something like
Bouffre or Pauvre?” Keudell said: “Beaufort.” The Chief: “A
distinguished name, but not at all distinguished manners.” It appears,
then, that the general has actually taken more than he was able to
carry, perhaps in consequence of his natural capacity having been
weakened by hunger.
At lunch it was mentioned that on his way here, Forckenbeck saw
the village of Fontenay still in flames. It had been fired by our troops
as a punishment for the destruction of the railway bridges by the
mutinous peasantry. Delbrück rejoiced with us “that at last adequate
punishment had been once more inflicted.”
In the afternoon we heard that the Chancellor drove off shortly
before 1 o’clock, first to see the Emperor, and then to Moltke’s,
where he and Podbielski again met the Frenchmen. The latter
afterwards left for Paris, about 4 o’clock, and will return to-morrow at
noon for the purpose of completing the capitulation.
At dinner, the Chief, speaking of Beaufort, said he had behaved
like a man without any breeding. “He blustered and shouted and
swore like a trooper, and with his ‘moi, général de l’armée française,’
he was almost unendurable. Favre, who is not very well bred either,
said to me: ‘J’en suis humilié!’ Besides, he was not so very drunk; it
was, rather, his vulgar manners. At the General Staff they were of
opinion that a man of that sort had been chosen in order that no
arrangement should be come to. I said that, on the contrary, they
had selected him because it did not matter for such a person to lose
credit with the public by signing the capitulation.”
The Chief then continued: “I said to Favre during our last
interview: ‘Vous avez été trahi—par la fortune.’ He saw the point
clearly, but only said: ‘A qui le dites-vous! Dans trois fois vingt quatre
heures je serai aussi compté au nombre des traîtres.’ He added that
his position in Paris was very critical. I proposed to him: ‘Provoquez
donc une émeute pendant que vous avez encore une armée pour
l’etouffer.’ He looked at me quite terror-stricken, as if he wished to
say, How bloodthirsty you are. I explained to him, however, that that
was the only right way to manage the mob.” “Then, again, he has no
idea of how things are with us. He mentioned several times that
France was the land of liberty, while Germany was governed by a
despotism. I told him, for instance, that we wanted money and that
Paris must supply some. He suggested that we should raise a loan. I
replied that that could not be done without the approval of the Diet.
‘Ah’ he said, ‘you can surely get five hundred million francs without
the Chamber.’ I answered: ‘No, not five francs.’ But he would not
believe it. I told him that I had been at loggerheads with the popular
representatives for four whole years, but that the raising of a loan
without the Diet was the limit to which I went, and which it never
occurred to me to overstep. That seemed to disconcert him
somewhat, but he only said that in France ‘on ne se gênerait pas.’
And yet he returned afterwards to the immense freedom which they
enjoy in France. It is really funny to hear a Frenchman talk in that
way, and particularly Favre, who has always been a member of the
Opposition. But that’s their way. You can give a Frenchman twenty-
five lashes, and if you only make a fine speech to him about the
freedom and dignity of man of which those lashes are the
expression, and at the same time strike a fitting attitude, he will
persuade himself that he is not being thrashed.”
 “Ah, Keudell,” said the Chief suddenly, “it just occurs to me. I
must have my full powers drawn up for to-morrow, of course in
German. The German Emperor must only write German. The
Minister can be guided by circumstances. Official communications
must be written in the language of the country, not in a foreign
tongue. Bernstorff was the first to try to introduce that system in our
case, but he went too far with it. He wrote to all the diplomatists in
German, and they replied, of course by agreement, each in his own
language, Russian, Spanish, Swedish and what not, so that he had
to have a whole army of translators in the office. That was how I
found matters when I came into power. Budberg (the Russian
Ambassador in Berlin) sent me a note in Russian. That was too
much for me. If they wanted to have their revenge Gortschakoff
should have written in Russian to our Ambassador in St. Petersburg.
That would have been the right way. It is only fair to ask that the
representatives of foreign countries should understand and speak
the language of the State to which they are accredited. But it was
unfair to send me in Berlin a reply in Russian to a note in German. I
decided that all communications received in other languages than
German, French, English and Italian should be left unnoticed and put
away in the archives. Budberg then wrote screed after screed,
always in Russian. No answer was returned and the documents
were all laid by with the State papers. At last he came himself and
asked why he had received no reply. ‘Reply!’ I exclaimed. ‘To what?’
Why, he had written a month ago and had afterwards sent me
several reminders. ‘Ah, quite so!’ I said. ‘There is a great pile of
documents in Russian down stairs, and yours are probably amongst
them. But we have no one who understands Russian, and I have
given instructions for all documents written in a language we do not
understand to be put away in the archives.’” It was then arranged
that Budberg should write in French, and the Foreign Office also
when it suited them.
 The Chief then talked about the French negotiators and said: “M.
Dürrbach introduced himself as ‘membre de l’administration du
Chemin de fer de l’Est; j’y suis beaucoup intéressé.’—If he only
knew what we intend.” (Probably the cession of the Eastern
Railway.) Hatzfeldt: “He threw up his hands in dismay when the
General Staff pointed out to him on the map the tunnels, bridges,
&c., destroyed by the French themselves. ‘I have always been
against that’ he said, ‘and I pointed out to them that a bridge could
be repaired in three hours—but they would not listen to me.’” The
Chief: “Repaired after a fashion, certainly, but not a railway bridge
capable of carrying a train. They will find it hard now to bring up
provisions to Paris, particularly if they have committed the same
stupid destruction in the west. I think they rely upon drawing supplies
from Brittany and Normandy, where there are large flocks of sheep,
and from the ports. To my knowledge there are plenty of bridges and
tunnels in those parts too, and if they have destroyed them they will
find themselves in great straits. I hope, moreover, that people in
London will only send them hams and not bread!”
Saturday, January 28th.—At 11 o’clock the French negotiators
again arrived—Favre, Dürrbach and two others, who are understood
to be also leading railway officials; and two officers, another general,
and an aide-de-camp, both men with a good presence. They take
lunch with us. Then follows a lengthy negotiation at Moltke’s
lodgings. The Chief afterwards dictates to the Secretaries Willisch
and Saint Blanquart the treaties of capitulation and armistice, which
are drawn up in duplicate. They are afterwards signed and sealed by
Bismarck and Favre, at twenty minutes past seven, in the green
room next to the Minister’s study up stairs.
The Frenchmen dined with us. The general (Valden is his name)
ate little and hardly spoke at all. Favre was also dejected and
taciturn. The aide-de-camp, M. d’Hérisson, did not appear to be so
much affected, and the railway officials, after their long privations,