eggorgement dun pelvic" ; but the seriousness of the situa-
tion has not blunted his perception of the ludicrous elements of the tragi-comedy. His great admiration for Prince Alexander does not prevent him from stigmatising his telegram to the Czar as the most serious and fatal political error of his whole reign ; on the other hand, it does not lead him into each violent and indiscriminate abuse of Bulgarian statesmen as disfigures the pages of Dr. Koch. Von Huhn's estimate of the Bulgarian national character is singularly temperate and sensible (see p. 26, on their love of peace, and consequent disinclination to embark on wanton warfare ; and p. 176, on the readiness with which they have adapted themselves to Parliamentary discipline); to their singular restraint he does the fullest justice, while his masterly sketch of the military position as developed in Bulgaria since the Servian War furnishes the reader with a key to that otherwise inexplicable problem, the participation of the Army in treasonable designs against the very Prince who had led them to victory. Success and rapid promotion had stimulated the ambition of the young officers to a high pitch, and led to end- less jealousies and intrigues in the upper ranks. As the writer shrewdly remarks, "an Army whose development has been for the most part brought about in the lap of revolution, can never be thoroughly reliable ; and this general proposition acquires double force when applied to such a young Army as the Bulgarian." The very fact of the strict discipline which prevailed in the subordinate ranks told against the Prince, for, in the absence of firmly established national or dynastic traditions, the men in some regiments obeyed their officers instead of declaring for their Sovereign. In support of his contention that the abduction was the outcome of a long and carefully prepared conspiracy, Von Huhn brings forward a good deal of interesting evidence, which is marshalled with damning force against the Russians, as early as the Bonrgas affair. To the Prince's enemies he is ready to ascribe consummate ability in their manoeuvres: "indeed, both amateurs and specialists in the art of plots will readily acknowledge the Bulgarian conspirators and the persons who stood behind them to be masters in their profession." For so well was the revolu- tion carried out, that while the Prince was kept entirely in the -dark as to the true feelings of the bulk of the people, the people, on their side, were entirely misled as to the behaviour of the Prince. There is a ring of manly indignation in the stirring pages which tell the tale of the Prince's kidnapping ; and it is melancholy to think that, but for his resolute refusal to take any notice of warnings, he might have escaped the sufferings and indignities of that infamous plot. There is something piteous, too, in the ignorance and bewilder- ment of the peasants, who, in the absence of their Prince, felt obliged to believe in the false statement of abdication, backed up—for one lie is the father of many—by endless forged docu- ments. In the absence of precise information, the general opinion in the provinces of Bulgaria, as You Huhn says, was that "Bulgaria must have been threatened with some sudden and unforeseen disaster ; that the country, so to speak, had found itself standing on the brink of an abyss ; and that at this juncture the Prince had enacted the part of Cartius with the concurrence of all the statesmen of Bulgaria, who had seen no other means of escape from the terrible danger."
At this point the narrative is interrupted by a series of vivid portraits of the chief conspirators, with most of whom the author was personally acquainted ; and in estimating the motives by which they were severally actuated, be shows great insight into character. The sketch of Zankoff is mercilessly severe. After describing his religions oscillations, Von Huhn remarks
"When, later, the hour of 'emancipation' struck for Bulgaria, Zankoff was already an old man, to whom his grey hairs imparted a certain air of respectability. He twice became Minister, and thus obtained an opportunity of demonstrating in the brightest colours his absolute incapacity. In politics as in religion, he wore all colours, and has appeared as both the friend and the foe of Russia. His own friends could no longer deny that their chief was afflicted to a pitiful degree with inarasmus sentilis, and except as a 'flag.' could be of no further use. Secretaries were, in fact, told off to him whose duty it was to think and to act for Zankoff. He still, in spite of all his grey hairs, preserved enough of his earlier character to seine with joy on every oppor- tunity afforded him of committing an infamy. Whether the old man had actually been initiated into the plot before its execution appears questionable. No sooner, though, bad the military con- spiracy succeeded in placing the Prince in confinement, than Zankoff delayed no longer to enter it, and, if rather in form than deed, to place himself at the head of the rebels, and thus to cover the closing years of his life with shame and ignominy?,
The story of the growth of the counter-revolution, Captain Veltscheff's daring move at Philippopolis, and the gradnalrising of the provinces, is told in thrilling fashion. Von Huhn does well to note the remarkable restraint of the loyalists in their attitude towards the adherents of the Russians ; while the abortive attempt on the Prince, on his return journey by rail, suggests the pertinent comment :—
" It was reserved for the men who do not call themselves Nihilists, but 'friends of the Emperor of Russia,' and are so named also by the official representatives of Russia, to transplant the mode of attack of the Russian Nihilists to Bulgaria, and to attempt to bring about the derailment of the Prince's train at Tirnova-Semenli."
In this connection it is permissible to quote the even more striking remarks which occur on p.199, in reference to Kanlbars's note to M. Nacevics on September 27th, 1886, demanding the release of the conspirators. Russia, he says, had never yet openly avowed the fact that she was the author of the revolt against the Prince. But now "with one blow Kanlbars had rent this veil, and Russian Imperialism luzd unequivocally declared for the rebels. He had recognised that to a band of conspirators could be granted the rights of a belligerent party, and he had thus placed in their hands a weapon by which the right of rebellion might be exalted to a State maxim. What, however, is the right of rebel officers in Bulgaria, is lawful for Nihilists in Russia." In yet another passage, the dangerous precedent involved in Russia's
action is neatly indicated thus The only thing that the understanding of an ordinary mortal will never be able to grasp is, why an act which in Russia constitutes a capital crime should in Bulgaria be a praiseworthy deed meriting support ! A great deal is said, and, unhappily, with truth, about subver- sive tendencies.' It is difficult to imagine anything more 'sub- versive' than the example set in high quarters." The attitude of the various European Powers after the abduction is very clearly put, in one of the best chapters of the book. He describes the conflict of national sentiment with official policy in Germany; the rapprochement of the Balkan States ; the indiscreet exulta- tion of the Czechs ; and finally, England's refusal to recognise that her interests were directly affected by the events in Balgaria,—a refusal which You Huhn ascribes either to a terrible deficiency in political understanding, or to a readiness to abdicate the position of a Great Power. It is evident that he shares Professor Vamb5ry's views of our relations towards Russia, every fresh aggrandisement of whose power he holds we should oppose, if we have any appreciation of our interests. In regard to the treatment of the conspirators, on which the abdication of the Prince directly hinged, it has been asked, and with a considerable plausibility, why, if the Regents, who had not half the Prince's popularity, were able to administer martial law later on without any interference on the part of the Powers, did not the Prince do likewise, and shoot or hang those who betrayed him P There is an answer to this which Von Huhn does not give, and which has nothing to do with the official remonstrancee of foreign Powers. No blood had been shed by the conspirators—as in the mutinies under the Regency—and it is characteristic of the Bulgarians that they have a strong disinclination, which we believe found vent on this occasion in the protest of several loyal supporters of the Prince, to proceed to retributory measures involving loss of life. We have only space before quitting Von Huhn's brilliant pages, to call our reader's attention to the perfectly accurate account, which they will find on p. 175, of the settlement by the Sobranje in September, 1886, of the financial affairs of Prince Alexander—about which scandalously false and malicious misstatements have gained credence in some quarters of the English Press—and to promise them abundant entertainment in the witty chapters which deal with the perambulations of Kaulbars, and the election intrigues of Nekliudoff.
Dr. Koch's rather unfortunate work need not detain us long. It has had the effect—wholly unintended by the author—of prejudicing the interests of the Prime in Bulgaria by the un- sympathetic tone which it represents as uniformly prevailing in the Court. Dr. Koch, a high-flying Tory of the academic stamp, had a Boswellian genius for recording those remarks which fell from the Prince, especially in the earlier years of his reign, in moments of depression, when the ingratitude of his subjects hurt him sorely, or before he had come to see that the truest road to their hearts lay in identifying himself with their national aspirations. "No Sovereign," says Dr. Koch, in the preface, "was ever surrounded by a more despicable set of so-called supporters than Prince Alexander." This is neither trite, nor generous, nor consistent with what Dr. Koch himself says of such men as Zachary Stojanoff, Stoiloff, and several others.
Previous page
