Chapter VII: Part SEVEN: Continued (5)

October 18. Rear Admiral Tirpitz has elaborated a naval budget of 150,000,000 marks. The _Post_ writes: “Tirpitz has made use of a long leave of absence, under orders from the supreme authority, to formulate from the strategic-technical standpoint a plan for organizing our fleet so that from the military standpoint it shall correspond to the demands of the present time.” When shall we ever plan from the ethical-humane standpoint how circumstances may be shaped so that from the standpoint of the philosopher they may correspond to the demands of a better future?

November 9. Yesterday our beloved Rudolf Hoyos departed this life at his Castle Leuterburg in Silesia. Ever more and more numerous the graves!

November 10. Telegram from Washington: “The English ambassador Pauncefote lays before Secretary of State Olney the proposals for the Anglo-American treaty pertaining to the settlement of all future controversies through arbitration.”

This news may announce the dawn of a new epoch of civilization. Yet our “serious” politicians do not touch upon it in their leading articles.

The following letters were exchanged between the Austrian Peace Society and the Department of Foreign Affairs at London on this occasion:

Austrian Peace Society
Vienna, November 17, 1896

My Lord Marquis:

The Committee of the Austrian Peace Society venture to express to your
Lordship their deep gratification in the treaty passed at Washington,
November 9th. This is the greatest triumph which the cause of
civilization has hitherto attained, and posterity will never forget
the part which, in this happy achievement, is due to your Lordship’s
wisdom and energy.

We have the honor to be, respectfully
Baroness Bertha Suttner (president)
Prince Alfred Wrede (vice president)

To the most Honorable
the Marquis of Salisbury
London, Foreign Office

London, Foreign Office
November 21, 1896

Madam:

I am directed by the Marquis of Salisbury to acknowledge the receipt
of your letter of the 17th inst., expressing the gratification of the
Austrian Peace Association in regard to the negotiation between Great
Britain and the United States on the question of arbitration, and I am
to express his Lordship’s thanks for your communication.

I am, Madam, your most obedient humble servant
F. H. Villiers

The Baroness of Suttner, Vienna

November 20. The papers are full of the Bismarck disclosure.[16] The explanations given right and left in the Reichstag by Prince Hohenlohe and Herr von Marschall set a limit to further extension. Yes, much was certainly disclosed in this affair, and particularly the rascally face not of this or that politician but of that folk-cheating intrigante called “high politics.”

November 25. Good news. Italy and Menelik have concluded peace. Only a few days ago the Trieste _Picolo_ learned from a diplomat of high rank that the chances for a treaty of peace with Menelik were small; he was unwilling to submit to the condition that he should not put himself under the protection of any European power. “Let the Roman government circles take into account the probabilities that the prisoners must be left to their fate(!) and hostilities resumed.” But the diplomat of high rank was fortunately mistaken. The treaty of peace is signed. In a letter which Menelik on this occasion addressed to the King of Italy he said that it was a pleasure for him, on the twentieth of November, the Queen’s birthday, to be able to restore their sons to the Italian mothers; and thus he showed a tenderer feeling for the prisoners than the above-mentioned Roman government circles.

According to the tenor of the treaty Italy renounces the (falsely interpreted) treaty of Utshili, and the two belligerents resume their former boundaries. Consequently the _status quo ante_—why, therefore, the great sorrow, the gigantic expenditures, the heaps of corpses mutilated and putrefying in the torrid sun? Why? why?

LI
ALFRED NOBEL’S DEATH AND WILL

News of his death · His last letter to me · The will · Letter from
Moritz Adler · The will is contested · Letter from the executor ·
Emanuel Nobel’s noble act · Fortunate solution · Distribution of the
peace prize up to date

December 12. Alfred Nobel is dead.

I recorded this loss in my diary with this single line. The news—I found it in the newspapers—was a bitter blow to me. The tie of a twenty years’ friendship was snapped. The last letter which I received from Nobel was from Paris, dated the twenty-first of November, and ran as follows:

Paris, November 21, 1896

Dear Baroness and Friend:

“Feeling well”—no, unhappily for me, I am not, and I am even
consulting doctors, which is contrary not only to my custom, but also
to my principles. I, who have no heart, figuratively speaking, have
one organically, and I am conscious of it.

But that will suffice for me and my petty miseries. I am enchanted to
see that the peace movement is gaining ground. That is due to the
civilizing of the masses, and especially to the prejudice hunters and
darkness hunters, among whom you hold an exalted rank. Those are your
titles of nobility.

Heartily yours,
A. Nobel

The ailing heart on which he touches playfully brought him to his death. On the tenth of December—he was then at his villa in San Remo—he was suddenly snatched away by angina pectoris. No one was with him when he died; he was found in his workroom—dead!

Some time after the report of Alfred Nobel’s death the newspapers announced that he had left his millions for benevolent purposes, a part to go towards promoting the peace movement. But the details were lacking. I received, however, from the Austrian ambassador in Stockholm a copy of the will; and the executor of it, Engineer Sohlmann, entered into correspondence with me. So I became accurately informed as to the provisions of this remarkable last will and testament:

After payment of legacies to relatives, amounting to about a million
crowns, the residue of the property—thirty-five millions—was set aside
for the formation of a fund, from the interest of which five yearly
prizes should be assigned to such as had contributed some notable
service to the benefit of mankind. These were specifically:

1. For the most important discovery and invention in the realm of
physics;

2. For the most important discovery and invention in the realm of
chemistry;

3. For the most important discoveries in the domain of physiology or
medicine;

4. For the most distinguished productions of an idealistic tendency in
the realm of literature;

5. To that man or woman who shall have worked most effectively for the
fraternization of mankind, the diminution of armies, and the promotion
of Peace Congresses.

The Stockholm Academy is intrusted with the assignment of the first
four prizes, the Norwegian Storthing with that of the fifth.

After the publication of the provisions of the will I received the following letter from the faithful collaborator on my _Review_, Moritz Adler, the author of the valuable essays _Zur Philosophie des Krieges_ (“The Philosophy of War”).

Vienna, January 4, 1897

My dear Madam:

Allow me to congratulate you with all my heart on the New Year’s
delight which the splendid Nobel foundation must have given you, of
course modified by the drop of wormwood which the death of such a
spirit and heart mixed with the nectar. _Multis ille bonis flebilis
occidit_ can be truthfully said of this great man now passed away. He
left behind no sanitary train for future gladiatorial baiting of the
nations, for it was far from his idea to wish to put to sleep the
consciences of the mighty and to make them believe that he thought it
possible for the disgrace to be repeated. He has not founded a
hospital, either, for the other sick, who are not innocently condemned
by society to wounds and death. But millions in days to come will
rejoice in brighter life and health, and perhaps not one in a thousand
will ever suspect that he owes it to Nobel alone that he is not a
cripple or a candidate for an infirmary. Could we have believed it
possible that Mammon, Mammon sprung from dynamite, should be so
ennobled? I am happy to have lived until this day; it has been the
richest joy of my life.

I kiss your hand with the profoundest respect.
Moritz Adler

Indeed, yes; this foundation was a deep gratification to me; again something new had come into the world: not the donors of alms, nor the lawgivers, least of all the conquerors, have been held up as the benefactors of mankind, but the discoverers and explorers, and the poets inspired by high ideals, and, in the same category, the workers in the service of international peace. Already the news of this last will and testament has aroused general attention; and every year, at the time when the prizes are awarded, this sensation will be repeated. It has been openly declared to the world, not by an overexcited dreamer, but by an inventor of genius (an inventor of war material into the bargain), that the brotherhood of nations, the diminution of armies, the promotion of Peace Congresses, belong to the things that signify most for the well-being of mankind.

Thus a guiding star is fixed in the sky, and the clouds that have hitherto obscured it are breaking away more and more; the name of this star is Human Happiness. But as long as men legally threaten one another’s lives, as long as they are at feud instead of being helpful one to another, there will be no universal happiness. Yet it must and will come. The increasing spirit of research puts into man’s hand a nature-controlling power which can make of him a god or a devil.

“Here you have a material,” said the living Nobel to his own generation, “with which you can annihilate everything and yourself as well....” But the dead Nobel compels us to look at yonder star and says to future generations, “Grow nobler, and you will attain happiness.”

It was five years before the distribution of the prizes began. It took this length of time because a lawsuit which was brought by certain members of the Nobel family against the validity of the will had to be decided, and then the estate had to be liquidated. If the then head of the family, Emanuel Nobel, had joined the rest in the protest, the will would have been broken, to his own great advantage; but Emanuel Nobel refused his consent to this step. He declared that his uncle’s will was sacred to him, and he took the ground that it must be faithfully carried out in all respects, even in regard to the fifth clause, which was especially endangered.

A letter dated April 13, 1898, from the executor of the will, brought me interesting particulars regarding the whole matter. Mr. Ragnar Sohlmann wrote:

... As you will have learned from the papers, certain members of the
Nobel family have been attempting to break Herr Nobel’s will in the
Swedish courts, and especially on the ground that no residuary legatee
is constituted. The Nobel fund as created by the will itself lacks the
necessary elements—so they claim—for performing its functions,—that is
to say, administrators.

To this we shall reply that all necessary elements have been provided
by the will, namely, the capital, the scope of action, and the
institutions designated to perform the action,—the Swedish Academy and
the Norwegian Storthing. The mere organization—so we shall
urge—belongs evidently to the task conferred upon the executors and
the Academy.

Originally the complainants conceived the plan of bringing the suit
before a French court by endeavoring to prove that Herr Nobel’s legal
residence was not in Sweden but in Paris. They regarded the French
laws as more favorable to their claims than the Swedish, and this
undoubtedly would have been the case. We have so far succeeded in
preventing the execution of this plan, and only a few days ago the
highest court of Sweden rendered the decision that Bofors was Herr
Alfred Nobel’s legal residence.

The fact that Herr Emanuel Nobel, of St. Petersburg, and the whole
Russian branch of the family decline to take part in the suit forms a
very important factor in the coming trial. This circumstance assures
the fulfillment of the will in so far as it concerns the corresponding
portion of the property. In consequence, the will may be regarded as
established regarding eight twentieths of the whole estate. That
diminishes also the chances for a judicial declaration of the
invalidity of the remaining twelve twentieths.

The chief danger for the will lies in the actual animosity which at
the present time obtains between Sweden and Norway, and in the fear
here entertained—even among the members of the government—that the
whole thing might give rise to further irritation between the two
countries. The conservatives especially believe—or pretend to
believe—that the Norwegian Storthing might use the prize to “bribe”
other countries to oppose Sweden. And they have certainly been given
some ground for their fears by the appointment of Björnson, who is
regarded as Sweden’s worst enemy and is on the committee which is to
award the prizes. The truth of the matter is that the members of the
Nobel family who are trying to break the will are supported by the
conservatives here, even by some members of the government.[17]

So far my correspondent, who indicated that these communications were confidential, not designed for publication. Of course, as long as the matter was undecided I did not give out the above information; but now, since the lawsuit was long ago decided in favor of the validity of the will, and the accompanying circumstances have become an open secret, I may be permitted to regard the injunction of privacy as removed. But it is a matter of universal interest to see how picayune politics everywhere harbors suspicions and enmities, and how, in general, the “conservatives” are distrustful of the peace movement and kindred matters. Now the Swedish-Norwegian controversy has been settled; Björnson is no longer counted as an enemy of Sweden. He received from the hand of the King himself the Nobel prize for literature, and, in company with Emanuel Nobel, dined at the royal table, on which occasion Oscar II conversed in the most friendly spirit with the Norwegian bard.

The first distribution of the prizes took place on the tenth of October, 1901, the anniversary of Nobel’s death. At commemorative exercises in Stockholm the King himself delivered to the laureates the four prizes assigned by the Swedish Academy. The peace prize was awarded by the Nobel committee of the Storthing.

In the eight years that have passed since then the peace prize has been awarded as follows: 1901, Frédéric Passy and Henri Dunant;[18] 1902, Élie Ducommun and Albert Gobat; 1903, William Randal Cremer; 1904, Institut du droit international; 1905, Bertha von Suttner; 1906, President Theodore Roosevelt; 1907, Ernesto Teodoro Moneta and Louis Renault; 1908, K. P. Arnoldson and M. F. Bajer.

LII
FIRST HALF OF THE YEAR 1897

From my collections of letters · Signing of the Anglo-American
arbitration treaty · The ratification fails by three votes ·
Insurrection in Crete · The concert of the powers · Outbreak of the
Turko-Grecian War · Extracts from diary · The letter “to all good men”
from Fortress Montjuich · Letter from Prince Scipione Borghese · Our
literary labors · My audience with Emperor Franz Joseph I · Text of the
petition submitted

Here let a few specimens from my collections of letters be reproduced. Some weeks before the annual meeting of my Union, which took place early in January, 1897, I applied to various personages, asking for communications to be read; and I received numerous replies, among them the following:

Political Department of the Swiss Confederation, Bern
December 10, 1896

My dear Madam:

Your letter of the fifth instant was duly received, and I thank you
most sincerely for the congratulations therein conveyed from the
Austrian Society of the Friends of Peace to the Swiss government.

The Parliament indeed follows with genuine interest the philanthropic
endeavors to spare the civilized world the horrors of war, and it
joins with great sympathy in the demonstrations that aim to make
nations comprehend the priceless advantage of peace.

In expressing to you the best wishes for the complete success of your
general assembly, permit me, my dear Madam, once more to thank you
heartily and to assure you of my distinguished consideration.

The President of the Swiss Confederation
Lachenal

International Peace Bureau
Secretary’s Office
Bern, December 9, 1896

Honored Colleague:

Every isolated effort of the friends of peace resembles those tiny
globules of mist, the condensation of which will afterwards form the
rain for which the caravan is yearning. These particles are not
noticeable; no one heeds them, and when the cooling rain is falling
the atoms that so patiently worked to constitute it are no longer
remembered.

“Who cares for that,” say our faithful prophets, “if only it rains?”

For more than five years the Austrian Society of the Friends of Peace
has been resolutely pushing forward, and its efficacy has been gaining
in breadth without losing anything in depth. It will have a
significant share in the final success of our united effort, and it
desires, just as we all do, nothing else than that the law of
international peace may some day appear as much a matter of course and
as self-originated as the law of gravity and the light of the sun.

In those happy days the peace unions and peace bureaus will exist only
as mere traces in the recollection of a few archivists, who will have
made the discovery that there were, in that strange epoch of cannons,
anti-cannon endeavors also.

Accept for yourself, honored colleague, and for your worthy
fellow-workers, the assurance of my perfect consideration and high
attachment.

Ducommun
Honorary Secretary of the International Peace Bureau

Brussels, Chamber of Representatives
Office of the President, October 13, 1896

My dear Baroness:

I was absent from Brussels when your letter of the fourth arrived, and
I reached home too late to be able to send in season the lines desired
for the meeting.

It is now certain that Brussels will have the sequel of Budapest in
the course of the coming summer. I hope that on this occasion we shall
have the honor of seeing you again. This would greatly delight Madame
Beernaert as well as myself.

Accept, etc.
Beernaert

Nice, December 6

... King Humbert told me that he had heard with great pleasure the
fine results of the Peace Congress in Budapest. “I am for peace,” said
his Majesty; “Italy needs peace, and you see that now a more friendly
understanding with France is coming about.”

My best greetings to all of the old fellow-combatants
S. Türr

At that time somewhat strained relations existed between France and England. I had learned that Gladstone’s friend, our proved fellow-worker Philip Stanhope, was introducing an act which had for its object the improvement of the relations between the two countries. I wrote him asking for detailed information and received the following reply:

Algiers, December 11, 1896

Dear Frau von Suttner:

I am unfortunate in always being away from home when you do me the
honor of writing me, and so it happens that your letter of November 23
reached me only day before yesterday.

It is correct that I am among those who are at the present time
working for a combination to improve the relations between France and
England. You, who follow with such keen attention the development of
public opinion, are in a position to appreciate the dangerous tendency
in those relations which has recently developed, especially in a
portion of the press. These influences are difficult to resist, and
the work required will demand much time and energy. The
combination[19] of which you have heard is as yet only sketched in
very indefinite outlines; but on the reassembling of Parliament on the
twentieth of January we hope to make some progress, and I will send
you accurate details.

As regards the Venezuelan affair, the treaty in settlement of it has
been definitely concluded between England and the United States; and
we are just in receipt of the news that it has been accepted by the
government of Venezuela. So this question is in a fair way to be
settled by arbitration; and as regards that far greater question,
namely, the conclusion of a general and permanent treaty between the
two powers, President Cleveland in his message to Congress of December
7 announces that the negotiations touching it are on the point of
coming to a favorable and definite conclusion.

So as soon as I reach London for the opening of Parliament, I hope to
be in a position to send you a fuller résumé of this question,—which
we may expect will then be definitely decided,—together with all the
details that you may desire.

Accept, etc.
Philip Stanhope

The contents of these letters have a historical interest, as they show how leading men in influential positions were all the time working to bring the postulates of the peace movement to validity. On the other hand, these varied and occasional fragments from my extensive store of letters have also a biographical interest, for they mirror the course of development of that cause which ever more and more was becoming my vocation, my very life, my “one important thing”! And I was enabled to find therein such profound contentment for the reason that I knew I was in harmony with so many and such a rapidly increasing number of noble contemporaries, and especially in complete unanimity of soul with an endlessly beloved and loving life companion. Every inward experience and every outward event aroused in us both the same feelings. And therewithal was that full consciousness of peace, that absolute sense of security against all that might happen, which we feel when we know that there is a heart in whose fidelity we may have absolute confidence, a breast in which we may find a refuge from all the bitterness of fate—in a word, the boundless happiness of unconditional unity of love.

On the eleventh of January, 1897, the permanent arbitration treaty, which had been so long in preparation, between England and the United States was signed by Ambassador Sir Julian Pauncefote and Secretary of State Olney. President Cleveland designated the event as the beginning of a new era of civilization. The golden pen with which the treaty was signed was deposited in the National Museum. Queen Victoria said in her address from the throne that she hoped the example would be imitated in other countries. In the daily press and among the general public the news attracted no attention whatever.

It is true this first attempt did not come to fruition. The treaty had to be ratified before it could be made effective. In order that a law may be passed or an agreement become valid a two-thirds majority in the American Senate is required. When the arbitration treaty with England came up for ratification, three votes were lacking of this two-thirds majority, and thus it was defeated.

This in no respect altered the main significance of the fact that it was signed by the representatives of both governments; the forces that brought about the drawing up and signing of the treaty would in time also overcome the opposition of the Senate.

An insurrection breaks out on the island of Crete. Kanea is burning. The villages in the vicinity are on fire. Skirmishes between Turks and Greeks are taking place. Who began it? No matter; the island of Crete declares that it will shake off the Turkish yoke and join Greece. Street demonstrations in Athens; tremendous excitement. The Chamber in its session of February 25 votes to send war ships to Crete.

Something new makes its appearance,—the “Concert of the Powers.” The powers unite to restore order and quiet in Crete and guarantee Cretan autonomy.

In the entries in my diary during April, 1897, I find an echo of the way in which these proceedings were conducted. Let me introduce a few passages here:

That was an Easter gift!—the outbreak of hostilities between Greece and Turkey. So then the “Concert of the Powers” was unable or _unwilling_ to hinder the misfortune? Probably both. In the circles of diplomacy and the regents neither power nor will are as yet sufficiently developed in the direction of the spirit of peace; they still remain under the curse of the thousand-year-old Genius of War.

That the war was so long controlled, that it is now to be localized, that the “European Concert” will prevent the general conflagration,—this is a victory of the New. That the war broke out at all, that the powers look on and hesitate to interfere,—this is a victory of the Old.

It is clearly shown how necessary and advantageous at the present time an effective European code of laws, a European tribunal, _one_ European army, would be. The embryo of these things has shown itself, to be sure, but the development into a strong, healthy, living thing is yet to be.

Yes, tendencies toward a federation of the civilized countries are included in the “Concert.” If this has gone forward with little harmony and unsteady step, the fault lies in this fact: it is the might of the mighty, not the rights of the weak, that they want to support. Much stress is laid on the consideration that is due the will represented by the great powers, not on the consideration that should be given the cause of the weak. Compassion, righteousness, and liberty,—that is the triad that must lie at the basis of a genuine peace concert!

A picture from the campaign: Wild flight of the Greeks. For miles and miles around the darkness of the night was illuminated by the flashes of the shots which the fugitives in wild confusion fired at one another. Horses, becoming unmanageable under the blows of the whip, dashed off and overturned the wagons with all their contents. Helpless men and wailing women everywhere, over whom the fugitives, impelled by despair, like wild hordes, recklessly trampling everything and everybody under foot, dashed away through the night....

In the meantime, while the war is raging on one side, in perfect silence the conflicts obviated by arbitration are increasing in number. The controversy between the United States and England as to the Guiana boundary, and a similar controversy between France and Brazil, have been submitted to arbitration, the former on the fifth, the latter on the tenth, of April.

A war cloud, however, is rising between Great Britain and the Transvaal. Will public opinion be influenced strongly enough by our friends in England to avert the danger?

Egidy writes me that he has applied to the Spanish ambassador in Berlin with regard to the cry for help from Barcelona.[20]

About that time I received the following letter from Prince Scipione Borghese, the same who ten years later was to make the great automobile trip from Pekin to Paris:

London, April 28, 1897

My dear Baroness:

Accept my heartiest thanks for your most encouraging letter, which was
sent to me here from Rome.

The trifling service that I have done for the ideal of peace is only a
shadow compared to what in greatness and brilliancy other and better
men have done for the progress of mankind. In my opinion this
perpetual struggling forward toward a better and more righteous life
must be the end and aim of all our actions.

I am happy to be able to come into direct alliance with you, and I
hope very much to make your personal acquaintance soon.

In the meantime, my dear Baroness, I remain respectfully,

Your most devoted
Scipione Borghese

Our literary labors do not rest. My husband is putting the last touches to _Sie wollen nicht_, and I am beginning the novel _Marthas Kinder_ (“Martha’s Children”), the second part of _Die Waffen nieder_, having just finished the translation of an English book, “Marmaduke, Emperor of Europe.” _Die Waffen nieder_ is appearing in a French translation in the _Indépendance belge_.

This same translation two years later was issued in book form by Zola’s publisher, Tasquelles (Charpentier). From the French public came now many newspaper notices and private letters which showed me that the theme treated in that book was waking a loud echo among contemporaries in other countries.

In May, 1897, I received from London, from the ecclesiastical Arbitration Alliance, a letter asking if I would be willing to present to the Emperor of Austria a copy of an address which a hundred and seventy dignitaries of the Church were sending to all rulers. I assented, and thereupon received the document, a beautifully engrossed copy of the text in a tasteful roll, with the autograph signatures of the petitioners. A special copy was provided for every potentate. At the head of the hundred and seventy names, which comprised only high ecclesiastical dignitaries, were the Archbishop of Dublin, the bishops of Ripon, Durham, and Killaloe, Queen Victoria’s chaplain, and others.

I applied at the office of the cabinet for an audience, and it was granted for the third of June at ten o’clock in the morning. I was obliged to state the object of my desire in my request for an audience.

On the day set, at the appointed hour, I presented myself in the imperial palace, accompanied by the vice president of my Union. There was a perfect swarm of uniforms in the anteroom to the audience chamber. Generals and staff officers were awaiting their turn to be summoned. We were not kept waiting long. When the door opened to permit the personage who had just been with the Emperor to pass out, we were immediately summoned. This preference was not at all due to the fact that the presiding officers of the Peace Society were bringing an “arbitration petition,” but simply because my escort was a prince (at court everything goes by rank and title).

I had my artistic-looking roll in my hands and a well-prepared speech on my tongue,—which at the crucial moment completely failed me,—and we passed through the door, which was held open by an adjutant and closed behind us. The Emperor was standing by his writing table and he took a few steps to meet us. After a low, courtly bow, which I am under the impression was a success, I gave utterance to my desire. My escort added a few explanatory words, and I handed the Emperor the document; he received it with a kindly smile. When I told him that the address was concerning an international arbitration tribunal he replied: “That would indeed be very fine ...; it is difficult however....” Then a few questions to us both, the assurance that the document would be carefully read and considered, an inclination of the head, with a gracious “I thank you,” and we were dismissed.

Here is the text of the petition which we presented, and which is now buried in the archives:

To his Majesty Franz Joseph I
Emperor of Austria, Apostolic King of Hungary
King of Bohemia, etc.

Blessing and Grace and Peace!

In common with other organizations of the Christian Church we are
taking the liberty of appearing, in all humility, before your Majesty,
as the monarch of a great and mighty people, for the purpose of
calling your Majesty’s attention to the method of peaceful solution of
such difficulties as may arise between the nations of the earth.

The spectacle which Christian peoples present as they face each other
with portentous armaments, ready at the slightest challenge to go to
war and settle their differences by the shedding of blood, is, to say
the least, a stain on the glorious name of Christ.

We cannot, without the deepest pain, look upon the horrors of war,
with all the evils which it brings in its train, such as unscrupulous
sacrifice of human life, which should be regarded as sacred; bitter
poverty in so many homes; destruction of valuable property;
interruptions in the education of the young and in the development of
the religious life; and general brutalization of the people.

Even when war is avoided, the presence of a powerful army withdraws
vast numbers of men from family life as well as from the productive
occupations of peace; moreover, in order to support this state of
things, heavy burdens must be laid upon the people. It is also true
that the settlement of international differences by force of arms does
not rest on the principles of right and justice, but on the barbarous
principle of the triumph of the stronger.

What encourages us to recommend this matter to your Majesty’s
benevolent consideration is the fact that already so much has been
accomplished; as, for example, in the settlement of the _Alabama_
question by the Geneva Court of Arbitration, or in the deliberations
of the American Conference at Washington, not to mention other
important cases. Happy for the world will be the time when all
international controversies shall find their peaceful solution!

This is what we are earnestly striving for. Regarding the ways and
means for attaining this end we refrain from all special suggestions,
confidently intrusting to your Majesty’s superior intuition and wisdom
all details in the domain of political life.

We offer our prayers that the richest blessings of the Prince of Peace
may rest upon your Majesty’s realm and people, and especially on your
Majesty.

I learned how the petition was presented to the other rulers. Frédéric Passy presented it to the President of the French republic. In Switzerland the President received it from Élie Ducommun; the President of the Confederation declared that the contents of the address corresponded perfectly with his ideas and those of the Parliament. Dr. Trueblood, of Boston, undertook the service for America, Marcoartu for Spain, and the address was presented to the Queen of England by Lord Salisbury. The Tsar also received it, but I do not know through whom.

The petitioners themselves could scarcely have expected that the action would have an immediate effect. Words of this kind scattered abroad are seeds of grain, or, by a better figure of speech, hammer blows. New ideas are like nails; old conditions and institutions are like thick walls. So it is not enough to hold up the sharp nail and give it one blow; the nail must be hit hundreds and hundreds of times, and on the head too, that it may be firmly fixed at last.

LIII
SECOND HALF OF THE YEAR 1897

Letter from Count Eugen Zichy · The Eighth Peace Congress at Hamburg ·
Letter from Prince Emil Schönaich-Carolath · Egidy’s début · Regarding
the assassination of Canova · Public meeting in the Sagebiel · Egidy’s
speech · New adherents · Henri Dunant · Appeal to the Oriental peoples ·
Extracts from diary · Bad news from all sides · Attitude of the press ·
The Russian Emperor in Darmstadt · Letter from Marie Büchner · The
Dreyfus affair · Dispatch of the European squadron to the Yellow Sea

The enthusiasm for the peace cause which had flamed up at the Millennial Festival in Hungary had not proved to be merely a fire in the stubble, as so many pessimists had predicted it would be. I kept getting news of the progress and growth of the group in that country. The following letter bears witness to the opinions of one of the most brilliant members of the Congress, Count Eugen Zichy:

Vienna, December 4, 1897

My dear Baroness,
Most honored President:

To-morrow our delegations break up, and it has not been my good
fortune, during our several weeks’ _séjour_ here in Vienna, to see
you. Twice I have made the attempt—alas! in vain. You were out of
town—still in the country! So I will at least send you in writing my
hearty respects and greeting. You must have read with delight
Berzeviczy’s utterances in our delegation, and have rejoiced,
likewise, at the reply made thereto by our skillful and masterly
(_takt- und sattelfest_) Minister of Foreign Affairs. Great ideas are
realized only slowly, but a healthy seed always brings healthy fruit,
even if, as often happens, it takes a long time; so it is with the
idea for which you, dear Baroness, and all of us are fighting. _Gutta
cavat lapidem!_ Over and over, and ever unweariedly, we must renew the
battle, and at length it will, it must, win the day; for our aim is
humanitarian,—the welfare of mankind.

And an idea that has this for its only object is not to become
effectual? Impossible! That is the answer that hovers on my tongue,
and “impossible” will at length be the shout of all reasonable human
beings! And we shall be victorious! And the victory will then really
be—universal peace! And even if the present does not recognize it,
posterity will remember with gratitude those who turned the first sod.

I understand that in a few days—I believe about the middle of
December—you are to hold your annual meeting in Vienna. Permit me,
dear Baroness, to send my sincerest respects, and to beg of you to
communicate to our peace friends my warmest greetings and good wishes.
May your work be blessed!

I hope, dear Baroness, that you may for a long time to come have the
most abundant health and strength to share in bringing your work to
completion. And for my own self I desire that you continue to grant me
your favor and good will, which I so highly prize.

May the Angel of Peace be with you and your work!

Your most faithful fellow-worker and admirer
Eugen Zichy

This year the meetings of the peace workers were not held, as hitherto, in the same place, but in different towns. The Congress met from the twelfth to the sixteenth of August at Hamburg, and the interparliamentarians had their sessions a few days earlier in Brussels.

We took part in the Hamburg gathering. Again we met all our old friends,—Passy, Türr, Bajer, Émile Arnaud, Dr. Richter, Moneta, Hodgson Pratt, Ducommun, and others. We had anticipated that the chairmanship of the Hamburg Congress would be taken by the writer of exquisite verses, Prince Schönaich-Carolath, but he declined to take it, though he was suggested for the office. What his reasons were may be seen from the following letter:

Haseldorf, July 19, 1897

Highly honored, gracious Baroness:

Allow me to thank you cordially for your friendly lines. The
expectation that in all human probability I should be permitted to
greet you in Hamburg has caused me much happiness, even though I look
toward the Congress with a kind of solemn enthusiasm. Your kindly
supposition that I have been intrusted with the chairmanship is in so
far correct that the Hamburg local group at first, as I heard, thought
of conferring that honor upon me. Later, I believe, a more official
personage was found, and this saved me from declining with thanks; for
I have not the gift of speech and the acquaintance with parliamentary
usages requisite for the performance of the duties of such a position.

My wife and I regret that we cannot have the honor of seeing you and
your honored husband at our house; my wife’s health unfortunately
makes it impossible for her to entertain company in Hamburg as she had
hoped. If ever Copenhagen should be selected for a peace gathering, we
shall venture to ask you again, either before or after the Congress,
to honor us with a visit in our more hospitable Danish home.

Begging you to remember me most warmly to the Baron, and with regards
to yourself, gracious and kindly Baroness,

I sign myself yours devotedly
E. Schönaich-Carolath

A new fellow-champion came upon the arena,—Moritz von Egidy. It was a source of pride and satisfaction to me that I had won him over to take part in the Congress and to assist our cause by the fascinating power of his eloquence in the public meeting which had been arranged by the Congress.

At the first session,—all present being under the influence of the painful news, just received from Spain, of the assassination of Prime Minister Cánovas by an Italian anarchist,—Teodoro Moneta, in conjunction with R. Raqueni, editor of _Il Epoca_, in the name of the Italian group offered the following resolution:

The undersigned, citizens of the country from which, unhappily, came
the fanatic who has murdered the Prime Minister of Spain, urge that
the Congress, before it begins its labors, transmit to the widow of
Cánovas del Castillo the expression of its profound sympathy. Devoted
to doctrine which involves the harmonization of politics and morals,
we insist that under no conditions must the principle of the
inviolability of human life be transgressed, for on this principle our
whole existence and the lofty aims that the Peace League has in view
are based.

The public meeting, which took place on the first evening, brought together in the hall of the Sagebiel establishment an audience of five thousand of all ranks. Otto Ernst made the opening address. Then Richard Feldhaus recited a poem by Schmidt-Cabanis. And then Egidy. This was the first time I had ever heard him speak. Clear, assured, deliberate, vibrant, powerful. The real voice of command. “Be good!” is an injunction which is usually whispered mildly or spoken in an unctuous, preachifying tone; Egidy thundered it out like a command. The gist of his address was:

We must grow into the unmilitary age which we are fighting to bring
about. A new mode of thought must take possession of our inmost being.
War predicates the hostile opposition of man to man. We must oppose
this hostility and put in its place the feeling of solidarity
(_Zusammengehörigkeit_). In this soil is to grow the natural equality
of all people and all peoples. This equality of birth leads to the
right of every one in the nation, and of every nation taken
collectively, to determine its own career under the limitations made
by the duties that each one has in turn toward the whole. In a certain
sense we have already entered upon the warless age; but we do not
realize its blessings because we have not the courage to meet the
transformation.

Egidy spoke also of other conflicts besides those of war:

The conflict between employers and employees, between consumers and
producers, must cease. To every person in the community must be
assured a dignified existence. Then every conflict will cease. In the
unions we already have the beginnings of it.... Credal relationships
must become different. The faith of the individual must be respected,
but the discrepant evaluation and persecution of individual forms of
belief must cease.

The French artillery captain, Gaston Moch, who was present at the Congress, was so delighted by the former Prussian lieutenant colonel that he subsequently published a book, _L’Ère sans violence_, in which he introduced Egidy’s doctrine and way of looking at things, together with several translations from his articles and speeches.

At the second session I announced that a new adherent had joined us,—Jean Henri Dunant, the founder of the Geneva Convention of the Red Cross. I stated that he would use his influence in the Red Cross societies so as to work through them for our cause, especially in the Oriental nations, amongst whom the Red Cross numbered many adherents and to whom a special appeal was to be directed in all the Oriental languages. I presented the text of this appeal. Dunant had sent it to me with a request that I should give it my signature and win the sanction of the Congress.

General Türr announced that he was prepared to procure its translation into Turkish and to have it disseminated.

Here are a few extracts from my diary:

August 14. Banquet given by the city at the Horticultural Show. My neighbors are Egidy and a senator. Three hundred persons present. Egidy as a table companion does not show his apostle or popular-preacher side; he is a jolly, amusing companion, versed in the usages of the best society.

August 16. Yesterday, after a session which was adjourned early, about five o’clock in the afternoon, we took a trip down the harbor and made an excursion to Blankenese. What a rush of traffic in the colossal harbor! What a host of ships docking and discharging! Our party had supper on the Süllberg; My Own was toastmaster. Novikof, Trueblood, and Ducommun made addresses. A general feeling of enthusiasm. It was after eleven o’clock when we got down to the float. The road was illuminated with Bengal lights. As the steamboat put off, the Süllberg Restaurant was so brightly lighted up that it looked as if it were bathed in fire. Music on the ship; as we sailed along, rockets flew up into the air against the cloudless, moonlit sky. These are the old instruments for celebrating,—toasts, music, fireworks,—which are indeed also employed in the celebrations of battle anniversaries; but how differently they act when they are accompaniments to the feelings of fraternity, of prospective redemption,—redemption from the curse of slaughter and hatred....

I will also copy the advice which Dr. Wagner, a Hamburg author and journalist, gave us. “It seems to me of dubious value,” he said, “for the Congresses to indulge in long and tedious debates over resolutions for the future, and merely to vote on them, perhaps with trifling majorities. Debates bring to the main issue more confused rubbish than serious, valuable thoughts. It would seem to me a far more useful activity for the cause if the members were presented with a series of vigorous reports and speeches, which, when accepted by the Congress after discussion, should be printed and disseminated as pamphlets in tens, nay hundreds, of thousands of copies, and also brought before the governments and parliaments.”

At the final session Lisbon was suggested as the next place for holding the Congress. The Interparliamentary Union, which had met at Brussels, decided upon Lisbon as the place for their 1898 meeting. But it was to result differently.

How did things look in the rest of the world while the debates regarding arbitration and peace were going on in Brussels and Hamburg? Of the “peace negotiations” between Turkey and Greece no end is in sight. Spain also is still a prey to discords. Fresh troops are constantly being sent off to America, and the reports from there announce terrible and increasing losses through sickness. Protests are raised in the country, among them that of Silvela, that concessions ought to be made to the Cubans, that a _convenio_ with them should be entered into. But the government remains inexorable: First surrender, then talk of reform may be in order. This attitude wins much applause in the European press. “Liberal policy,” so run the leading articles, “is admissible in times of peace; in times of war it is equivalent to abdication. Besides, the moment would be ill chosen to make the United States any gift or concessions. All Europe is stirred by her aggressive and extravagant policy, and all Europe has an interest in seeing Spain stand firm. The government is, therefore, right in paying no heed to timorous and interested proposals. The undeviating policy which the Prime Minister has chosen, and to which he clings, is alone worthy of a statesman.”

So stubbornness, despotism, uninterrupted sacrifice of the country’s sons and the country’s money,—that is the only worthy attitude! And such views are borne out in millions of sheets from the editors’ tables. Lucky for these gentlemen that there are no great public scales in which their responsibility might be weighed!

The Minister Plenipotentiary of the United States, General Woodford, came to Spain in order to offer the services of his government for intervention, so that an end might be made of the Cuban war. The press and public opinion (it is well known how that is created!) assume a very hostile attitude to the American ambassador, who cannot understand it. Why should Spain decline mediation which would put an end to a war ruinous to the country?—Yes, why? As if ruin of country and people were to be taken into account when national pride is involved!

The Emperor and Empress of Russia were to spend the month of October in Darmstadt. I find in my correspondence a letter from Frau Büchner, the daughter-in-law of the author of _Kraft und Stoff_, who was _persona grata_ with the late Princess Alice of Hesse, mother of the young Tsaritsa.

Darmstadt, February 13, 1897

Gracious and honored Lady:

Your very charming letter has made me more than happy, and I should
have willingly answered it immediately to tell you how ready I am to
fulfill your wish; but only to-day do I get to it. I have considered
the matter from every side; it can be managed only in case the Empress
should be here. It is expected here that she will take up her
residence this summer at Castle Seeheim, near Darmstadt. If that
should happen, my husband thinks that he might smuggle the book[21] in
through a chamberlain with whom he is personally acquainted. But I
myself have no confidence in this scheme, for the gentleman in
question seems to me not at all equal to the responsibility. I think
the book should be sent directly to the Empress here in Germany, where
watchfulness and exclusiveness are not so absolutely punctilious. Then
the name of a Baroness Suttner would assuredly help it to make its own
way.

That would not work in Russia, even through the mediation of the court
here,—that is to say, of any person connected with it. Our sovereigns
here are still young and take little interest in anything in
particular, and consequently play no great rôle.

Oh, if a Grand Duchess Alice were still alive who made it her special
purpose to support noble efforts, to look out for the general good,
and to establish truly benevolent institutions! That wise woman had
sympathy with the burgher class, and from it she selected her most
efficient forces; and a Luise Büchner was her right hand in her useful
undertakings. How easy such a matter would have been then! And yet
even at that time my father-in-law did not get on with her sister, the
Empress Frederick; she was very much interested in his works, and
caused this to be intimated to him, and so he sent her the book of the
two crowned Liberals, but she never again let him hear from her. And
she was a comparatively liberally educated English princess!

Even here little is known about the character and opinions of the
young Empress of Russia. From all that is heard it seems that the
dowager Empress there wields the scepter, and it is said she has not
become reconciled to the fact that her daughter-in-law is a German
princess.

So the young woman will have little to say in her country.
Nevertheless, I will let no opportunity pass of executing your
commission; perhaps it will be more successful than I can now count
upon. Perhaps, also, the Empress has inherited something of her
mother’s energy and capacity and will be able in time to win a
position and to maintain it. In that case I am firmly convinced that
her influence will be good, since nothing but good has ever been heard
regarding her character.

I have not lately told you that I know and prize your husband’s works
also—especially the fresh, thrilling tales in _Die Kinder des
Kaukasus_. Those wonderfully beautiful descriptions of nature have
constantly brought before my eyes your own idyllic life there. It must
be splendid to live in such a lovely land when you have the genuine,
inspired feeling for such beauty. In fact, I think often of your life,
your habits, your environment; just because you are both such talented
people you must get double the enjoyment out of everything. Only I had
always imagined that you lived in beautiful, gay Vienna; so I was
greatly astonished that you were in the country. I was obliged to
overturn your whole surroundings,—that is, as they existed in my
imagination,—and conjure up a quite different frame for the picture of
your life. In doing this I was helped by your _Einsam und arm_; that
must have been written at Castle Harmannsdorf.

I should so like to know whether you took for Karl Binsemann a model
out of real life. This interested me so very much because generally in
real life it is just the opposite: As a rule a man who is in
unfortunate circumstances is a reformer in his youth; it is then he
has the genuine sacred fire for righteousness. By the time he reaches
old age he becomes weary, indifferent, and selfish, by reason of cares
or the eternal monotony of his days. Then he says to himself, “What is
the use of puzzling one’s brains over insoluble enigmas, what is the
good of becoming indignant over injustice—it does not prevent it!”

Of course I am speaking of men of the same rank in life and the same
grade of culture as a Binsemann. If this figure were taken from life,
or at least suggested by a prototype, it would make the book much
dearer to me, because I have always believed that it is not in
accordance with life for any one to be thoughtless of such things in
his youth, and in old age to begin, for the first time, to think
rightly. The descriptions are so true to reality, and everything is so
vivid, that one cannot help feeling, just as in reading _Die Waffen
nieder_, that they must be taken directly from life.