Chapter XIV: Part EIGHT (6)

You mention the letters written to President Kruger and General
Joubert by me on the 29th of September of last year, which have lately
been published by Mr. Chamberlain and copied by the continental press.
It is quite true that there has been a great deal of misrepresentation
on that subject. For some months before the war began there had been a
small party in this country who had been working to bring about a
peaceable settlement. I had some correspondence with President Kruger
and General Joubert, in which I had advised them to make such
concessions to the British government that the calamity of war might
be averted, since the prosperity of South Africa must depend on the
good faith and friendly feeling between the two white races. The
published letters, to which you refer, are the last portion of this
correspondence, and were written less than a fortnight before the war
began. In my letter to President Kruger I gave him the result of an
interview which I had with Mr. Chamberlain, in which I endeavored to
induce him to accede to the repeated request which the Transvaal
government had made that matters at issue should be settled by
arbitration, and to consent that a permanent arbitration tribunal
should be formed to which all present and future disputes should at
once be submitted. I told him that the Transvaal government were
willing to submit the differences pending between the two governments
to a court of arbitration, consisting of the four chief justices of
South Africa, and to accept the Lord Chief Justice of England as
umpire in the event of the two colonial and two republican chief
justices not being able to agree,—a suggestion which, as you will have
seen, the colonial secretary was not able to accept.

The force of misrepresentation and calumny which the peace party here
have had to endure from the virulent and unscrupulous jingo press can
be estimated by the manner in which they have misrepresented my
warning to President Kruger. I knew, as every one who knew anything of
the geography of South Africa must have known, that the obvious line
of action for the Boers to adopt would be that of seizing the passes,
and I warned President Kruger that to do so would alienate the
sympathy of many of their supporters in this country and on the
continent of Europe. My words were deliberately misconstrued, and it
was asserted that I urged the Boers to seize the passes. Nothing
further from the truth can be imagined.

But, in spite of the difficulties with which we have had to contend,
there is, undoubtedly, a large minority here who are firmly convinced
that the war is an unjust one, and who regard the settlement by
annexation as another wrong against which they will continue to
protest. We shall go on working by all constitutional means for the
restoration of the independence of the two republics, believing that
by these means only can peace and prosperity exist once more in South
Africa. We believe that we are working in a just cause, and shall hope
in the not too distant future that we may be able to appeal to the
justice of this people, who will then have recognized the folly and
wickedness for which they have been made responsible.

We do not doubt the future. We are sure that it is with us. It is true
that the middle classes and the moderate liberals have abandoned their
old watchword of “Peace, retrenchment, and reform,” but the radicals
and socialists are standing firmly by these principles. I send you a
copy of the socialist paper _Justice_, which expressed fairly the
attitude of the democratic party. I have, as you know, opposed the
growth of socialism, which I formerly believed to be inimical to
freedom and progress, but I am considerably modifying my views. The
power for evil of the lawless and conscienceless capitalism which is
now rampant is so great, and entails such unlimited moral and physical
degeneracy, that I am convinced some form of collective action is a
necessity to put an end to its baneful influence.

The history of this miserable war determines us to stand more
determinedly by the principle of the substitution of arbitration for
war. It becomes clearer and clearer that no permanent settlement can
be based on war, and that, as between individuals, so between nations,
magnanimity is not only morally desirable, _but it is the best
policy_.

I am taking a yachting holiday in Scotland, but we may be overtaken by
a general election here at any time.

Thanking you again for your letter, believe me to remain

Yours faithfully
G. B. Clark

But in this Transvaal affair I must also let the _altera pars_ have its say. The English nation, so vilified on the Continent because of the Boer War, was not as a whole (as many liked to assert) led into this campaign merely by the passion for gain and through love of warfare. Noble motives—as is usually the case in every war—animated the majority. The desire is to “give freedom,” to make wrong into right, to serve the fatherland; life itself is sacrificed. The object and aim may be praiseworthy; only it is unfortunate that the method is so unholy and vicious. I received the following letter from the sister of the Minister of Cape Colony:

Stockton, April 18, 1900

Madam:

Because of the high honor in which I bear you and the deep sympathy
with which I read _Die Waffen nieder_, I send you this letter, written
by a Cape Dutch woman, sister of Mr. Schreiner, Prime Minister of Cape
Colony. I do not know if you are well enough acquainted with Cape
politics to be aware of the full significance of the fact that he came
into office as leader of the Afrikander Bond.

That his sister should write as she does about this war should surely
come as a startling revelation to many people on the Continent who are
so sorely misjudging my beloved country.

She will answer for you as to the motives of those Cape Dutch who are
holding by the Union Jack. For those of my own country I, living in
the heart of England, daily in touch with the lower, middle, and upper
middle classes, affirm to you, as before God, that no wish for
conquest and no lust for gold weighs anything at all with us.

We are giving the lives of our best beloved—giving them by
thousands—to right wrong, to destroy oppression of our
fellow-subjects, both white and black, to put an end to a very unjust
and most corrupt form of government. Also to prevent our Colony of the
Cape, Natal, Rhodesia, and Bechuanaland, conquered by our blood and
treasure at various times, from being wrested from us.

This is the simple truth. We should like high-minded people abroad to
know and recognize that truth. But if it may not be, we can only still
repeat the old battle cry of our forefathers, “May God defend the
right!”

Pardon an insignificant old Englishwoman for venturing to address you.
It is only because of the immense sympathy with your noble-hearted
efforts to stop wars, ambitious and unjust, that I have done so.
England loves peace also, and her united millions who now with one
heart and soul are carrying out this war (and madam, the very peasants
are naming their children after our generals) would never allow war to
be made on our European neighbors. There is not the slightest wish or
expectation of such a thing among us. Foreign journals which assert
the contrary and thereby try to fan the flames of war are guilty of a
European crime.

I am, madam, faithfully yours
Emily Axbell

The year 1900 brought, besides the struggle so obstinately contested in South Africa, still other warlike events into the world, notably the troubles in China. First the Boxer uprising, the assassination of the German ambassador Ketteler, then the expedition for rescue and revenge sent by the combined European powers.

I can still remember vividly with what feelings we followed the successive phases of these events. First the tidings of alarm, then the full horror of it. Then the Emperor William’s “Pardon-will-not-be-granted” speech—“Never in a thousand years shall a Chinaman venture to look askance at a German!” Great Heavens! in a thousand years it is to be hoped that no man will any longer inspire other men with fear.... Then the anxious question every day, “Are the legations still safe?” Then the joy that something corresponding to our ideal had been spontaneously developed: an international protective army for the rescue of the oppressed European brotherhood-in-arms,—a precursor of European unity. Then again the sorrow at the behavior of this army. Not only protection but also revenge, cruelty, and looting! The description of the outrages committed there by Europeans on noncombatants, even on the innocent, made one’s blood run cold. The thing itself—a united force of French, Russian, and other troops under the command of a German general—belonged to the new methods that are to come; but the execution still showed the old spirit.

Even before things had reached their worst in China, the Chinese ambassador in St. Petersburg, Yang-Yü, whom we met at The Hague, wrote the following letter in reply to one which my husband had addressed to him in this emergency:

Imperial Chinese Embassy
St. Petersburg, August 4 (17), 1900

My dear Baron:

The melancholy events now happening in my country often make me think
of the friends of peace and those whom I had the honor of knowing at
The Hague.

Your letter of the eighth instant has deeply touched me, and I am
persuaded that, in spite of the fact that you are, as you say, a
negligible quantity, you will finally triumph and rule. The light will
shine from this negligible quantity, and a spark will suffice to
kindle forever this pharos of peace. May the sword and the cannon of
which you speak soon be beaten into plowshares.

So, then, it is a sacred duty for you to defend this noble cause
without ever yielding to discouragement, with absolute firmness,
resolution, and conviction, and without ever ceasing to make your
voice heard!

I should be most happy if by my opinion and my personal impressions I
could contribute in some way to the humanitarian work in which you are
engaged. During journeys which I have taken, both as an envoy and as
an investigator, I have visited the United States of America, Peru and
other states of South America, Austria-Hungary, Germany, England,
Spain, France, Holland, Japan, and Russia; everywhere I went I studied
the customs of the people, and I have been particularly interested in
the army, in commerce, and in agriculture, all of which I have found
most perfectly administered. I took note of what differentiates these
countries from ours and what benefits they have to confer upon my
country. But what should I say? This incessant rivalry and this
jealousy manifested among all nations somewhat detract from this
perfection. If I have one desire to formulate, it is to see all
countries rise superior to these sentiments and live always in a good
understanding; this would assure them a lasting peace.

The conflict existing at present between China and the foreign powers
comes in large part from mutual misunderstandings. I am firmly
convinced that neither China nor any of these powers desires to break
these pleasant relationships. Things have been pushed to this point,
owing to the heedlessness of Chinese functionaries and military
parties blinded by ambition. It is more than time to do away with
these misunderstandings, and to reëstablish the old relations;
otherwise, not only will China be brought to the greatest distress,
but, moreover, international quarrels may result, and this would
certainly not be in the interest of humanity as a whole. I hope that
the governments of none of the countries will lose sight of the
opportunity of putting an end to this state of things.

The first cause that prepared and brought about the present conflict
is due to the sworn hatred of the people against the Christians.
Assuredly the end pursued by the missionaries, of doing good to
others, is very praiseworthy. But, as a general thing, right-thinking
Chinese would not for anything in the world abandon the religion that
comes down to them from their ancestors, for the sake of embracing one
that is wholly foreign to them; the result is that the new converts
are unfortunately in large measure dishonest people who hide behind
the shelter of the Church to give themselves up to their evil
passions, such as bringing lawsuits with impunity, and molesting and
robbing their fellow-countrymen. The feelings of the people, which
were at first merely wrath and indignation, and do not date from
yesterday, have been changed into an implacable hatred, the fury of
which it is impossible any longer to restrain. The Chinese no more
desire to be converted to Christianity than the Europeans would wish
to embrace the maxims of Confucius.

My personal opinion is that commercial relations between China and the
foreign powers may be developed to any desired extent; but as for the
question of religion, it would be more prudent to allow each to
respect his own as he understands it; this would be calculated to
preserve the future from all conflict. I do not know whether the
foreign governments will at last recognize the whole importance of the
question and renounce it definitely.

In the belief that I have answered all your questions, I beg leave to
assure you that I shall always be charmed to be useful and agreeable
to you.

Yours with most sincere esteem
Yang-Yü, Chinese Minister

And a little later a second letter came from the same source:

Imperial Chinese Embassy
St. Petersburg, September 10 (23), 1900

My dear Baron:

Sincere thanks for your kind letter, as well as for the newspaper
clippings, which have greatly interested me.

I hasten to send you and the Baroness my best wishes for a good
journey and a happy sojourn in Paris. I likewise hope that you will
have a brilliant success in the noble assembly of the ninth Peace
Congress. Once again you are going to spread the light and to plead
for that peace cause which ought to be dear to every human heart.
Therefore I should be greatly delighted to learn that all your
endeavors toward this end have fully succeeded.

Yours with most sincere esteem
Yang-Yü, Chinese Minister

In the late summer we went to Paris to attend the Peace Congress that was to be held there, and to see the Exposition.

Johann von Bloch, who was living with his family at the Hotel Westminster, had invited us to stay at the same hotel as his guests. Now I made the acquaintance of our friend’s wife and daughters. Frau von Bloch looked like her eldest daughter’s sister, so similar and so young. This daughter is the wife of Herr von Koszielski, formerly so well liked at the Berlin court. He was known popularly as “Admiralski.” Bloch had good reason to be proud of his family. It would be difficult to imagine a bouquet of prettier, wittier, or more elegant women than the four that formed his _entourage_.

The Congress was opened by Minister Millerand. Frédéric Passy was honorary president; Professor Charles Richet presided.

Madame Séverine was a new apparition. I had often read, in the French papers, articles by this talented woman, and had admired the brilliancy of her style, and especially the greatness of her heart; for almost always, when she wrote her chronicles, there was some distress to reveal and to alleviate, some past wrong to right, ideas of freedom and gentleness to defend. Now I made her personal acquaintance and heard her speak. One who has never listened to Madame Séverine’s extempore speeches has no notion to what a height of passion and poetry eloquence can rise. Madame Séverine is also interesting outwardly. She was then forty-three years old, but her hair was already perfectly white—the result of the tragedies of life which she had passed through. She had dark, flashing eyes, vivacious play of expression, and a neat figure. Toward the close of her fascinating speech she greeted me as _notre sœur d’Autriche_, and when she finished,—both of us standing on the platform,—in my emotion I threw my arms around her, and that elicited a storm of jubilation in the hall.

We made a flying visit to the Exposition under the guidance of Charles Richet. All expositions are alike. The things that especially remained in my memory were the Eiffel Tower, the _trottoir roulant_, the tiny corner in the pavilion in which our Bern Bureau and its literature were displayed, and the gigantic hall in which army and navy had heaped up their latest appliances for destruction.

Richet invited us also to a small dinner given for a few friends. D’Estournelles sat next me. We talked about the general lack of information on the part of the public regarding the Hague Conference, and he told me that he had delivered explanatory lectures on this subject in various cities in France.

“Oh, if you could only come to Vienna and give such a lecture!”

“You need only to invite me,” he replied; “I will render you any service that you may require of me.”

I made him shake hands on it.

At Paris during that time I formed a new bond of friendship which has proved very valuable to me. An English lady, the daughter of a sea captain, earning her living in Paris by giving English lessons, had asked to be presented to me in the Congress hall. I exchanged a few pleasant words with her and then turned to others. The following day she wrote me a letter. This was filled with such enthusiasm, with such devotion to my cause and my person, that I was captivated and asked the writer to come to see me. Miss Alice Williams—for that was her name—came immediately and brought me a bunch of roses. But more than flowers, she brought me a soul—a soul overflowing with the ideals that are precious to me. As the daughter of an English “sea-bear,” and rather chauvinistically educated and inclined, she had been, so she told me, converted by reading _Die Waffen nieder_, and from that time forth had been a devoted adherent. In the course of years she has proved that such was the case. I am deeply indebted to her for her friendship, her wise suggestions, her energy, and her activity.

After our return to Harmannsdorf I devoted myself once more to literary occupations. I wrote the novel _Marthas Kinder_, the sequel to _Die Waffen nieder_. My Own also again resumed his labors and wrote on his novel _Im Zeichen des Trusts_. But in spite of this we did not neglect our work for the Unions and our journalistic writing. I took especial pains to make the newspaper public acquainted with the Hague business, which now threatened to be entirely forgotten in the excitement of Chinese and South African events.

But, in the meantime, the various conventions were ratified and the judges of the permanent tribunal were nominated. In accordance with the agreement, each country was to nominate four judges from among its most influential and distinguished men. The number of names thus selected furnishes a list from which, in case of a controversy which is referred to the Hague tribunal, the contending parties may each select two judges, not belonging to their own land; and these in their turn will choose a fifth to serve as president of the court.

The newspapers brought us the names of the nominees. Among those from Austria were Count Schönborn, and Lammasch; from Hungary, Count Apponyi; from France, Bourgeois and D’Estournelles. Of the Russian judges I found only the name of Professor von Martens. So I wrote to him both to congratulate him and also to ask him who were the three others named by the Russian government. I received the following letter in reply:

St. Petersburg, November 1 (14), 1900

My dear Baroness:

I hasten to offer you my sincere thanks for your congratulations on my
nomination as a member of the Permanent Court of Arbitration at The
Hague. The honor which you have been good enough to speak of so warmly
is indeed the greatest that I have ever received, and I am proud of
it; it is a genuine pleasure to receive your felicitations. Your
eminent merits in the defense of the interests of peace and
arbitration have given you, madam, an exceptional place among the
partisans of this great idea. I thank you again from the bottom of my
heart.

You ask me, madam, who are my Russian colleagues in the Permanent
Court. I am happy to be able to tell you that they are the leading
jurists and statesmen of Russia. Here are their names:

1. His Excellency, the Secretary of State, Pobyedonostsef, Procurator
of the Holy Synod. M. Pobyedonostsef’s religious ideas and his great
influence in the most exalted governmental spheres are known
throughout Europe; but he is at the same time a great lawyer, an
accomplished scientist, and a sincere friend of international
arbitration.

2. His Excellency, the Secretary of State, De Frisch, who holds in the
Council of the Russian Empire the office of president of the “Section
of Laws.” He is a Russian statesman of very great influence in all
legislative questions, and is one of the highest dignitaries of the
empire. He has been president of the Grand Commission to elaborate the
new criminal code of Russia.

3. His Excellency, the Secretary of State, Muravieff, present Minister
of Justice for the Russian Empire. He is a statesman endowed with the
greatest talents, and a very eminent lawyer. The late Count Muravieff
was his cousin.

Finally, the last—is your humble servant. His Majesty the Emperor, by
his nomination, in the month of May, of these Russian members of the
Permanent Court of Arbitration, has certainly tried to prove once more
what deep sympathy he feels for this creation of the Peace Conference,
and his utmost desire to give this court the greatest possible _éclat_
and the most serious importance. Such certainly is the opinion that at
present obtains in high governmental spheres.

You would infinitely oblige me if you would send me three copies of
your article on the Permanent Court and its members. Do you suppose
you could possibly publish the article in the _Neue Freie Presse_,
which is read in Russia? Madame de Martens wishes to be remembered,
and I beg you to accept the assurance of my highest regard.

Martens

I received other letters from the newly appointed delegates, thanking me for my congratulations; but I will cite only the one from Count Schönborn:

Vienna, January 11, 1901

Dear Baroness:

Will you accept my heartiest and humblest thanks for the thoroughly
kind letter of the eighth which reached me yesterday, and which I
should have instantly answered had not an unusually long session of
the Court of Administration occupied my time. Please accept at the
same time my warmest thanks for your kindness in sending me the highly
interesting publication, as well as your congratulations.

I am so deeply impressed by the importance of the duty imposed upon
the Hague Court of Arbitration that I was at first dubious about
accepting the nomination, and not until after some explanations were
made which pacified my scruples did I dare accept the complimentary
mandate.

We, that is to say the Arbitration Tribunal, shall not have much to
attend to at first, probably, but I confidently hope that a good vital
germ has been planted, and that later, if the institution proves its
value in several apparently unimportant cases, the number of its
adherents and the number and importance of the contentions submitted
to it will increase.

With the expression of especial respect, I am

Yours sincerely
Friedrich Schönborn

I sent my congratulations, together with a copy of my Hague diary, to two German gentlemen nominated to the same dignity. One of them did not reply at all; the other sent me three marks!

The beginning of the year 1901 still brought no cessation of the Boer War. Such a mighty power opposed to such a small one, and yet the decision was so long delayed!

Many of Bloch’s predictions regarding modern warfare were justified,—for instance, the advantage held by those who were on the defensive, the long, indecisive continuation of battles, the enormously increased sacrifices of money and men, and many other things. Bloch was at that time in London, where he was delivering lectures at the Navy Club before an audience of admirals and generals. Moreover, he was busily engaged with the preliminary arrangements for the founding of his War and Peace Museum at Lucerne.

Mindful of the promise which I had obtained from D’Estournelles, I wrote urging him to come to Vienna and give a lecture on the Hague Conference. He consented without hesitation. Count Apponyi, as soon as he heard of his coming, invited him to take advantage of this opportunity to spend a few days with him at his castle of Eberhard, and also to deliver a lecture in Budapest. This invitation D’Estournelles likewise accepted.

We put ourselves out to secure the attendance of a select and influential audience for the lecture in Vienna. I addressed myself to the then French ambassador, Marquis de Reverseaux, who gave me every assistance in his power in behalf of his fellow-countryman, whom he so highly prized. He not only saw to it that the members of his embassy should be present at the lecture, but he also undertook to extend invitations to the whole diplomatic corps. We for our part sent invitations to the ministers, to the principal officials at court, and to the leading politicians. We made no attempt to arrange for a particularly democratic assemblage, for in the first place the common people would not understand French, and in the second place we were particularly desirous that the political, court, and aristocratic circles, which are accustomed to look so superciliously cold upon the peace cause and the Hague Conference, should for once have a chance to hear an explanation of it from the lips of a man who was himself a diplomat and a politician and an aristocrat, and who had taken a prominent part in the work of the Hague Conference. I had also taken pains to get the directors of the Theresianum and the Oriental Academy to send us a number of their students, for the teaching offered would be particularly useful to just such young men, destined for political and diplomatic careers.

The affair went off brilliantly. D’Estournelles spoke splendidly, and the very numerous public, composed of just the elements that we desired, listened with great attention and approbation. It was a _succès_.

That evening—the lecture having occupied the time from four till six—we gave a small _souper intime_ in honor of our foreign guest. Among those present were D’Estournelles’s two Austrian colleagues of the Hague Court, Count Schönborn and Lammasch; also Barons Ernst von Plener and Peter Pirquet of the Austrian Interparliamentary Group.

This year we did not attend the Peace Congress, which was held at Glasgow. The following letter I received from the American delegate to the Hague Conference, Dr. Holls, who, as it appeared, had undertaken to make a journey through Europe on a peace mission. I had extended him an invitation to visit me in Vienna.

Claridge’s Hotel, Brook Street, W.
July 26, 1901

My dear Madam:

Your friendly letter reached me here after many wanderings. I regret
very sincerely not having seen you in Vienna, but my time there was
exceedingly brief and almost wholly occupied with business.

As you have seen from the published interview, my journey to Russia
was very satisfactory. But I do not believe that it would be advisable
to publish anything further about it at present.

The miscomprehension of our work disturbs me very little; it must make
its way by reason of its services. I should have been glad to discuss
with you, more extensively than is possible by letter, the present
phases of the question; but this year it is impossible. The thing to
do now is to wait patiently. The plant is growing, and there is no
object in disturbing its growth by too frequent investigation of how
far it has already progressed. For that reason I regret even the
holding of a Peace Congress this year.

General resolutions of condemnation are of very little value. The most
we can do now is to make excrescences of militarism—for example, silly
dueling—ridiculous.

With hearty respect, I remain
Yours sincerely
Dr. W. Holls

On the twelfth of June we celebrated our silver wedding; not by a great festival at home, with congratulations, deputations, and toasts, but, as usual, by an excursion into solitude. Sacred day! The retrospect upon five-and-twenty years of undisturbed comradeship! We had left Harmannsdorf two days before—no one knew where we had gone—like a pair of fugitive lovers. The festal day we spent in a romantic forest region, hiding ourselves in the deepest depths of the woods and calling up reminiscence after reminiscence! A rich life lay behind us. And what might come in the future? How much farther should we wander together on the path that leads from the silver to the golden wedding? How fortunate that fate gives no answer to such questions!

I had written again to the sage of Yasnaya Polyana, and in reply received the following very characteristic lines:

August 28, 1901

Dear Baroness:

I thank you for your good letter. It was very pleasant for me to know
that you retain a kindly memory of me.

At the risk of being tiresome to you by repeating what I have many
times said in my writings, and what I believe I have written to you, I
cannot refrain from saying once again that the longer I live and the
more I consider the question of war the more I am convinced that the
sole solution of the question is for the citizens to refuse to be
soldiers. As long as every man at the age of twenty or twenty-one
abjures his religion—not only Christianity but the commandments of
Moses (“Thou shalt not kill”)—and promises to kill all those whom his
superior orders him to kill, even his brothers and parents, so long
war will not cease; and it will grow more and more cruel, as it is
already becoming in our day.

For the disappearance of war there is no need of conferences or peace
societies; one thing only is needed, namely, the reëstablishment of
the dignity of man. If the smallest part of the energy spent nowadays
for articles and fine speeches in the conferences and peace societies
were employed in the schools and among the people for destroying false
religion and propagating the true, wars would soon become impossible.

Your excellent book has had a great effect in spreading abroad a
realization of the horrors of war. It would be well now to show people
that they themselves are the ones that bring about all the evils of
war by obeying men rather than God. I take the liberty of suggesting
that you devote yourself to this task, which is the only means of
attaining the end you have in view.

Begging you to excuse me for the liberty which I have taken, I remain

Yours with highest regard
Leo Tolstoi

This year, for the first time, the Nobel prizes were distributed. The date selected was the tenth of December, the anniversary of the testator’s death. The peace prize was divided and assigned in equal shares to Frédéric Passy and Henri Dunant. Highly as I regarded and still regard Dunant, persuaded as I was and am of his friendly attitude toward peace, nevertheless his services and his fame rested on a quite different field from that which Nobel had in mind. The granting of the prize to Dunant was once more a concession to that spirit which managed to force its way even into the Hague Conference, and which supports the dogma that the endeavors against war should be discreetly limited to its alleviation.

That Frédéric Passy, the oldest, the most deserving, and the most highly regarded of all pacifists, received the prize was a great satisfaction to all of us—only the whole amount should have gone to him.

I received the following letter from Dunant:

Heiden, December 10, 1901

My dear Madam:

I am impelled to offer you my homage on this day, as I have just been
informed by an official telegram from Christiania that the Nobel peace
prize has been granted to me in conjunction with my honored colleague
of many years’ standing, Frédéric Passy.

This prize, gracious lady, is your work; for through your
instrumentality Herr Nobel became devoted to the peace movement, and
at your suggestion he became its promoter.

For more than fifty years I have been a pronounced adherent of the
cause of international peace, and a fighter under the white banner.
The work of international brotherhood has been my aim ever since my
earliest youth. I say this and repeat it to-day more emphatically than
ever in my character as founder of the universal institution of the
Red Cross and as promoter of the Geneva Convention of August 22, 1864.

When, in the year 1861, I wrote my _Souvenir de Solferino_, my
principal aim—be assured of this—was general pacification; I desired
as far as I could to awaken horror of war in the readers of my book.

This has been recognized, and I will merely adduce one example. The
famous Professor Marc Girardin, of the French Academy, said in an
article devoted to my book, “I could wish that this book should be
widely read, especially by those who love and glorify war.”

And Victor Hugo wrote me: “You furnish mankind with weapons, and you
help peace by making war hateful.... I applaud your noble desire.”

I might say much on this theme, and bring forward a quantity of
citations in like spirit from authorities of all kinds and all
countries; but I must refrain, and beg you, Baroness, to accept the
assurance of my most sincere gratitude and my deepest respect.

Henri Dunant

The yearly meeting of my Union for 1901 took the form of a sort of jubilee; ten years had passed since its establishment.

From among the many letters of greeting that reached me on this occasion I will include a few in these reminiscences, for the reason that they depict the status of the movement at that time, and also furnish a résumé of its philosophy.

Paris, December 27, 1901

Gracious Lady and dear Associate:

The friend has usually written you; to-day the president of the French
Society for Arbitration among the Nations and—since he cannot hide the
title—the first recipient of the Nobel prize sends these lines to you,
though of course the friend is not eliminated. If I am correctly
informed, you are holding the tenth general assembly of the society of
which you are the head. And this is an event which we cannot permit to
pass without notice. It means something for a Union to have lived ten
years, especially for the reason that at its inception many, even
among the well disposed, might reasonably have doubts of its
continuance. You certainly had to meet the prejudice, if not the
opposition, of some; the skepticism and the scruples of others; not to
mention the ridicule of those who could not understand that a woman
might take part in the political questions which, according to their
ideas, are reserved exclusively for masculine intelligence and
activity.

But, supported certainly by true and genuine sympathies, you have put
up a good fight, and you have attained your end.

Courage, then, and patience! And may it be permitted me in my
character as dean, and as a veteran of the peace militia, to send to
you, and through you to transmit to your society, the thanks, the
congratulations, and the benediction of all those who combine regard
for human life, love for justice, and faith in the future with horror
of force and bloodshed.

Frédéric Passy

Budapest, December 21, 1901

Noble and honored Baroness:

The agreeable fact that the Austrian Society of the Friends of Peace,
called into existence by your Excellency, and still conducted through
the indefatigable energy of your Excellency, can now look back over a
ten years’ activity, constrains me to congratulate your Excellency
most warmly on this circumstance.

Though there may be many who will be unable to appreciate the
endeavors of the society, I can, as far as I am concerned, assure your
Excellency that I can estimate at their true value all great and noble
ideas, as well as those who labor for the accomplishment of such
ideas, and so I follow these endeavors with the warmest interest.

With the highest esteem, I am yours respectfully

Szell, Prime Minister of the Kingdom of Hungary

[Telegram.] On the decennial anniversary of your Union I send you my
congratulations, and beg to be enrolled as a life member of the
Austrian Peace Society, at the same time calling attention to the
ideas expressed in my letter of the tenth of December.

Henri Dunant

Vienna, December 30, 1901

... The friends of peace in various countries have done good service,
for it is certain that they have materially contributed to the
formation of the Court of Arbitration, and it cannot be doubted that
their moral support is necessary to the embryonic undertaking.

I am taking the liberty, my dear Baroness, of most respectfully
offering you, who have played so prominent a part in the whole
movement, my best wishes for your honored person, as well as for the
success of the great work.

With especial respect, yours faithfully
Schönborn, First President of the Imperial Court of Administration

Paris, December 30, 1901

Dear Madam and Friend:

You are about celebrating the decennial anniversary of the society
which you called into life, and which, I hope, as a recompense
therefor, will save many human lives. Be undisturbed while those who
admire contentions and spectacles make sport of your endeavors; these
people are looking out for their own interests, for they feel that
they are threatened with ruin; in fighting against peace they are
fighting for their own existence. What would become of the so-called
patriotic, imperialistic, and nationalistic press in all countries if
wars between nations should cease, and if the daily instigations
should remain ineffectual? People would then cease buying and reading
these papers. And what would become of the great sensation mongers if
the continual threat of war should no longer be a burden on each
country, and if the peaceful idea of the Court of Arbitration should
make its way into the usages of mankind?

The principle of international arbitration has a great portion of the
press universal against it, exactly as the same principle in its
application to labor and employers of labor has the opposition of
certain politicians and agitators.

Nevertheless, this last system has lately made great strides forward,
and it seems like the only righteous and reasonable solution of labor
difficulties.

It will be so with the international courts of arbitration as soon as
the Hague Tribunal shall have begun to exert its activities. That is
the real reason why it has met with such obstinate opposition; for if
its doors are once opened, it will be difficult to close them again.

So let us, then, beat these doors down. Let us, in common with all
true men of all lands, through our united protests compel the
governments to renounce their inactivity and their unfriendliness. Let
us compel them to comprehend that their duty is in harmony with their
interests if they would avoid the social revolution.

After they have had the magnanimous unwisdom to call into existence
the Hague Arbitration Tribunal, with the approval of the whole world,
they cannot bury it alive now without bringing themselves into
condemnation and betraying the fact that they are afraid of justice
and are adherents of a system of violence against which public opinion
long ago revolted.

In a word, let us demand the opening of the Hague Court of
Arbitration! There is our salvation, there is to be found the means
for hastening the accomplishment of your hopes and mine.

Most heartily and respectfully yours
D’Estournelles de Constant

Vienna, December 26, 1901

My dear Baroness:

On the occasion of the decennial celebration of the Society of
Austrian Friends of Peace I am sending to the Union, and above all to
you,—its spiritual head, its soul,—my best congratulations. You can
look back with pride and satisfaction over this long period of
unceasing activity, which, supported by intrepid faith in your noble
cause, rejoices in such splendid success and through the results of
the Hague Conference must convert the most obstinate doubter to a
belief in its necessity and usefulness.

Accept, Baroness, the assurance of my especial consideration.

Chlumecky, Former Minister

Graz, December 31, 1901

The thought of universal peace can no longer be put out of the world;
this is the first result of the League of the Friends of Peace!

We have the same courage—so sorely needed—for peace as the soldier has
for war! Salutations, friends, for the New Year!

Peter Rosegger

Aulestad, December 18, 1901

The future of the peace cause always comes to me in the guise of a
sunrise. For us Northlanders the sunrise can mean so much more than
for the people to the south of us; we expect it only once in a while,
and greet it as a miracle. The darkness was so oppressively long, the
silence so mysterious, the first glow over the rocky peaks so
deceptive! It lasts and lasts and ever grows—but still no sun! Even
when the sky is already streaming full of hope—yet still no sun! And
it is cold—really colder than before, for fancy has become impatient.

Then suddenly, like a flash of lightning, even while we are gazing,
comes the so-long-expected Majesty! So powerful, so compellingly
powerful that the eyes cannot endure it. We turn and look at the
landscape, which, without our noticing it, has been so long ensouled;
at the air which, without our perceiving it, has been so long flooded
with light. Everything, everything, even down into the depths, and
high up on the summits, is bathed in the sun, clear, complete, filled
with warmth, throbbing with music....

So I think it is happening to us. In our yearning we do not take note
of what is being accomplished—how near already the great sun of
universal peace is. Something is coming, and it seems like a miracle.
But it is no miracle; in our impatience we do not see how everything
was all in readiness for it.

My greeting to the assembly!
Björnstjerne Björnson

LXIII
THE LAST YEAR

Premonitions · Bloch’s death · The Transvaal · Stanhope on the situation
· My husband’s sudden illness · Three letters · Congress in Monaco · The
Oceanographic Museum · Prince Albert I · The corrective · Pierre
Quillard on the Armenian horrors · The crag castle · Venetian night ·
The Duke of Urach · From Prince Albert’s after-dinner speech · A
dedication to the German Emperor · Return home · An act of
D’Estournelles’s · The first controversy before the Hague Tribunal ·
Opening of the Bloch Museum at Lucerne · Anti-dueling League · A letter
from Prince Alfonso de Borbon · Offer for a lecture tour in the United
States · Hodgson Pratt on America · Visits of Emanuel Nobel and Princess
Tamara of Georgia at Harmannsdorf · Sojourn in Ellischau · A surprise ·
Adjournment of the Interparliamentary Conference at Vienna · The end ·
From the will · Provisional conclusion · What is yet to follow

The last year of him who was my all.

On New Year’s Day, 1902, all sorts of trifling annoyances happened to us.

“You will see,” said My Own, more in jest than in earnest, for he was not superstitious, “this is going to be a bad year.”

During the first week indeed came bad news, a dispatch from Warsaw,—“Johann von Bloch dead of heart disease.” Once more a mighty fellow-combatant gone from us!

The war in the Transvaal still kept on. It was now in its third year. At first the English believed that it was merely a little military promenade; and now these unending sacrifices and losses. I wrote to Philip Stanhope asking him if he could give me some information regarding the situation, and perhaps raise his voice against the continuance of the strife. He wrote back:

3 Carlton Gardens, S.W.
January 25, 1902

Dear Baroness de Suttner:

I am overwhelmed with confusion. I have been since the beginning of
December in Italy, and have only recently returned for a short time to
find your note of December 14 awaiting me.

I should have been pleased to contribute a few words to the
publication of the Austrian Society upon the occasion of its 10th
anniversary, though all such words of peace, coming from my country,
would be in sad contrast with realities.

However, all great causes have dark moments to traverse, and there
will again be a reaction against the militarism and the jingoism of
the present age.

I hope to see you in Vienna in the autumn, and to find you in good
health.

Please remember me to Baron de Suttner, and believe me

Sincerely yours
Philip Stanhope

This year the Peace Congress was to be held as early as April, and it was to meet at Monaco by invitation of Prince Albert. The neighborhood of Monte Carlo was a circumstance which caused some hesitation among many of our friends,—I did not share it,—and only after a considerable correspondence among the members of the Bern Bureau (in whose hands the organization of the Congress lies) was a majority won for the choice of Monaco. My husband and I were greatly pleased at the prospect of this trip and the visit in this paradisiac corner of the world.

My happy frame of mind was increased by the fact that my book _Marthas Kinder_ was on the eve of appearing. The proceeds from it (my publisher, Pierson, had bought the novel with all rights, including those of translation, for an honorarium of 15,000 marks) enabled me to stave off for at least a little while longer the breaking up of our beloved Harmannsdorf, and during this time so much might happen to rescue the estate; so we looked forward with joyous hearts to the coming journey.

Only a few days before the date set for our departure, My Own was attacked by a very sudden indisposition. As he was going to get up one morning, his legs gave way. He was obliged to go back to bed, and he felt pain in his right knee. We hoped it would not amount to anything. Our trunks were already packed, the sleeping-car tickets were already bought, and our rooms in Monaco engaged. Also the lecture which I was going to deliver at a public meeting on the events of the Hague Conference was prepared and announced.

“If by day after to-morrow I am not all right again, you must go,” insisted my husband; “it is your duty.”

And so it came about. The doctor ordered that the disabled leg should be kept wrapped up and perfectly quiet. This was a great grief to us both; we had counted so much on the journey together, and the separation filled me with tribulation. Up to the last moment he hoped still to be able to go, or at least to follow me a day later, but it was not possible. I had to go to Monaco without him, yet I was not alone; my friend Countess Hedwig Pötting accompanied me. The delight in the visit there was spoiled for me by the separation from him and my anxiety about him. Every day I had a telegram from him, and besides he wrote me three letters. These letters lie in my jewel casket; they are the last which he ever wrote me. They must have a place in these memoirs:

Easter Sunday, 1902

My beloved Löwos:

I am afraid this written greeting will be all that you will get from
me while you are in Monaco. How happy I should be if this very
afternoon I could convince myself that I was going to be able to
follow you. When I think that to-morrow you will probably be traveling
without me, it makes my heart so terribly heavy! It was not good of
Nemo[46] to separate us so cruelly. He might have let us enjoy this
little pleasure! But I will not make your heart heavier than it is
already. You must keep your head clear and be easy in mind, so as to
fulfill the duty which you have no right to shun.

My holiest wishes and my heart’s love accompany you on your way, my
dear old Löwos, though in these circumstances it is rather a thorny
way. But it ought not to be that; you must enter upon it with the
joyous feeling that you are rendering a fine service and are going to
render fine service yet again. So you must get all the pleasure you
can out of the lovely place and the friends who all cling to you with
such love and respect.

Enjoy your stay, my dearest, and then you will come back to me with
all the more delight and contentment.

This is all for this time; and now I take your dear head, my Löwos,
between my hands and kiss it a thousand times.

Your Own

March 31, 1902

My dear old heart’s Löwos:

Those were sad hours of loneliness and abandonment after your
departure! It enabled me to realize how deep you have grown into my
heart, my precious, precious pet. Now I am trying to accustom myself
to the unavoidable, but reactions will be sure to return, for I miss
you too deeply.

I have followed you in my thoughts on the stages of your journey. Now
you are probably through breakfast and waiting for the train at the
railway station.

If only days enough had gone by, so that I could say, “Day after
to-morrow it will be day after to-morrow, and so on.”

I shall not be so well looked after to-day as I am by you. Maria
Louise has just been in for a moment; she has taken cold, so is not
exactly rosy and merry.

As soon as I have finished writing these lines I must rest awhile.
Even writing takes hold of me. I will lie back and think about you. If
our nerves were only receptive for telepathy we should certainly be in
close contact these days! The doctor is taking his time about his
morning visit to-day; but I believe the leg is somewhat better.

Farewell, my dearest, I kiss you many thousand times.

Your Own

April 2, 1902

My precious Löwos:

Ten o’clock! There you are perhaps at this very minute standing on the
platform and giving your address, which is not very long. So, as far
as I can follow it, I am taking part in the Congress. The newspaper
reports will not give any very detailed account of it.

Yesterday Chimani[47] was here. He discovered some improvement, but
there is still inflammation; therefore strict orders not to get out of
bed.

I received your telegram yesterday evening about half past eight. I
was beginning to be a trifle uneasy when no word came. My reply, which
I intrusted to the messenger, you will not be likely to get until
to-day.

It is a beautiful summer’s day—and here I am in bed! Have such a
longing to get out.

Nothing interesting in the mail. Among other things a crazy letter to
you from a crazy photographer in Graz. Then came a letter of twenty
quarto pages from Linz and a little book which the author published
ten years ago through Schabelitz. Of course I do not send you this
stuff.

Thank the Hex [Countess Pötting] for her card and sisterly greeting.
Kisses on thy Löwos mouth from

Thy Own

How the poor man would have enjoyed those days at Monaco! The place was all a glory of spring splendor. We had seen the Riviera before, but not at a time of such luxurious profusion of flowers.

A hall in the new building destined for the Oceanographic Museum had been cleared for the proceedings of the Congress. All the speeches and debates had a constant accompaniment of distant hammering. In the immediate neighborhood the work was at a standstill during the hours of session, but not very far away the pounding and sawing and nailing went steadily on. This seemed to disturb some of the orators; yet one of them found in it a welcome occasion for bringing out in a beautiful picture how the work in the name of which we were there assembled was also an edifice, already designed but still unfinished,—an edifice which, like this, would also arise in usefulness and beauty to the honor of the builders and to the advantage of mankind.