TREITSCHICE.*

-WHEN Carlyle, in a moment, of: singularly happy word-coining inspira- tion, described the Turk as "unspeakable," probably no one could !have defined precisely what he meant, but all were agreed that the epithet was highly appropriate. It may be applied with equal reason

ito Treitschke. In the eyes of most Englishmen he is regarded as "` unspeakable " in more senses-than one. In the first place, he was the ;chief apostle of a propaganda designed to ensure the recognition of ;principles wholly at variance with the political and moral codes hitherto ;generally accepted by the rest of the civilized world. In the second place, it may reasonably be doubted whether the professorial Belials of Germany, of whom Treitschke was a leading representative, whilst speaking in the name of a spurious culture, have not done far more to arrest the progress of true civilization than those Oriental Molochs, 'such as Abdul-Hamid, who are frankly and avowedly barbarous. Tho latter merely strangled or threw into the Bosphorus a few of their :own subjects. The former have succeeded in stifling the moral sense of one of the foremost nations - of the world.

Until the war broke out, few Englishmen had ever heard Treitschke's :name. Even now, as Mr. Balfour points-out in his brilliant introduction to the hook under -review, few have read his writings. It is probable that even amongst-the very limited number who were familiar with his works before the war,-many-regarded his teaching as merely representing the fantastic vagaries. of a pseudo-philosophic lecturer, and did not

,realize, until the thunder of the cannon on the Belgian frontier awoke an astounded and scandalized Europe from its ill-timed lethargy, that Lit -was seriously intended for rigorous application in the tamp and in the council-chamber. Every thinking Englishman should avail him- self of the opportunity now afforded to him of acquainting himself at first hand with .what Treitschke really taught and thought. To produce a good English version of his political writings required _both a very thorough knowledge of German and great facility in the manipulation of literary English. It is clear that both of these qualities are-collect- ively possessed in a high degree by 'Mrs. Dugdale and Mr. Torben do Bine. Their translation is altogether admirable.

In spite of the obvious defects in Treitsohke's moral and intellectual

equipment, the carelessness which led him into making statements of fact which are grossly inaccurate, and the glaring sophisms and fallacies with which his philosophy is tainted, it.must be recognized that he was, in Mr. Balfour's words, " a vigorous personality," He also appears to have had the power of arresting the attention, and even of attracting the sympathies, of most of those with whom he was ;brought in contact. Mr. Harbutt Dawson, who attended his lectures, whilst condemning his philosophy and resenting his maniacal. Anglo- phobia, clearly entertained no ill-feeling towards the individual. If, he said, in What is Wrong with Germany, "I were required to throw stones at Heinrich von Treitschke, Ishould wish-my stones to be pebbles, and when T had thrown them I should want to run away." A perusal of Treitschke's- writings enables this frame of mind to be understood, for, strange as it may appear to any one whose intellect is not dominated ley Trussianisin and whose moral sense is not deadened by the glamour of Hohenzollern superiority, Treitschke evidently believed in his own philosophy. His earnestness and sincerity are attractive. He speaks with withering scorn of the French Revolutionists who imagined that France was to be " a 'Messiah among nations," but he is none tho less expounding what he considers to be an obvious truth When he practi- cally attributes a Messianic mission to Prussia under Hohenzollern guidance.

The spirit in which Treitschke taught is abundantly indicated by

two passages which occur in his lectures. In the first place, he said : " He only is a great writer who so writes that all his countrymen respond : ' Thus it must be. Thus we all feel '—who is, in fact, a microcosm of his nation." The midNictorian period produced a dis- tinguished Englishman who was -an adept in the application 'of the principle adkocated by Treitschke. His name was 'Delane. He was the editor of the Times. He was not a great writer, but he was certainly a microcosm, if not of the whole of his nation, of its middle classes.

' The qualities required in order to ensure success as a newspaper editor are not, however, altogether similar to those which we expect to find in a philosophic historian. In the second place, Treitschke made the following admission : " In all my life I have never once thought of my moral obligations towards society, but I think constantly of my own countrymen." From such a vehemently patriotic starting-point as this, it can be no matter for surprise that Treitschke built up a whole system of political philosophy on a foundation which was not only generally false but also wholly illogical. Assuredly Mr. Balfour is

• Politics : By Heinrich von Treitechke. Translated from the German by Blanche Dngdale and Torben de Bills. With an Introduction by the Rt. Hon. Arthur J. Balfour, F.R.S., LL.D., D.C.L. 2 vols. London : Constable and Co. 120. net]

justified in saying " Them is nothing profound in Treitsehke." Ha fell into the same error. as Professor Stewart has indicated in the me:. of Nietzsche. His psychology of motive was altogether faulty. lie confounded the moral impulses which, as a matter of fact, men oft• n obey with those that they ought to obey.

The pages of these two volumes abound with gross misstatements of fact, some of which havebeen exposed by Mr. Balfour, -sweeping generalizations .based on false premisses and advanced without any serious attempt to prove their correetnesseand distortions of the vies s set forth 'by past historians and philosophers. Thus, it is stated that " nearly one-third .of the North -American population is of German origin." There can be no manner of doubt that this figure -is a gross exaggeration. A well-known passage from Tacitus is first misquoted, and then given a significance totally opposed to that which its original author intended. Although, of course, Treitsehke generally highly disapproved of Rousseau's views, the sorry attempt made by the Swiss thinker to cover hie transition from the earlier to the later stages of his philosophy by distinguishing between the " volonte generale " and the " volonte -de toles " is enlisted into the Treitschkean service inasmuch as, when misapplied, it may serve as a justification for the opinions of a majority being trampled underfoot by.a minority. Even if Treitschke were now alive, it may be doubted whether the heroic examples of Belgium and Serbia would cause him to modify his judgment on small States. These latter, he said, " hatch a puling spirit." They -generate a " form of -materialism which has a deleterious effect on their citizens." Moreover, they are " totally lacking in that capacity for justice which characterizes their great neighbours." Incidentally, it may be remarked that this particular characteristic of some -of the great neighbours both of Belgium and Serbia appears recently to have undergone an eclipse. The outlook for the bulk of the population under the Treitschkean scheme of philosophy is distinctly gloomy. They must toil in order that supermen may thrive. " To put it simply, the masses must for ever remain the saes. There would be no culture without kitchen-maids. Obviously, education would never thrive if there was nobody to do the rough work. Millions must-plough and •forge and :dig in order that a few thousands may write and paint and study." The programme is admirably adapted to -foster not merely extreme Socialism, but even Anarchism. Subject races are to fare no better than the German proletariat. The inhabitants of Livonia and Courland stubbornly refuse to be Germanized. What can be done with them ? Clearly, " the only course open is to keep the subject races in as uncivilized a condition as possible, and thus prevent them from becoming a danger to the handful of their conquerors." " A nation," Fichte said, "cannot dispense with arrogance." Most people would think that the Prussians are in no way guilty of attempting to dispense with this moral attribute. The .German is, indeed, " a hero born, and believes that he can hack and hew his way through life." But he is not arrogant enough. He is too generous. He is not a Chauvinist. " Nowhere is there so little Chauvinism to be found as in Germany." German statesmen have always been far too considerate to the " miserable little States who have had the good luck to become Prussian." A capital error was made when the opportunity for annexing the Swiss canton of Neuchatel was allowed to slip by. Then, was it not an act -of culpable weakness to give the individual inhabitants of Alsace and Lorraine the faculty of opting whether they would -become Germans or remain French- men.? Conceive what would have happened under this system if a German province had been conquered by France. -A German might then have been given the option of becoming a Frenchman ! The mere idea of such a thing happening is "-terrible." Further, German Roman Catholic children in Posen are allowed to receive private instruction in Polled]. This is "a shocking piece of folly." None the less, circum- stances alter cases. The attempt made -by the -Russian Government "te de.Germanize a -German country . . . can only be described as barbarous."

The manner in which Treitschke dealt with the question of the freedom of the Press is characteristically German. He laid down the very sound maxim that " every man may speak the truth, and the State must not prevent him." But how was this exemplary principle to be made to harmonize with the article whicliferms the very corner-stone of the Treitschkean creed--namely, that in which the State declares : " It .does not matter what you think, so long as you obey." There is manifestly some risk that in practice perfect freedom to speak the truth may encourage and even produce disobedience. The dilemma is awkward, but it can readily be solved by remembering that " truth is a subjective conception, and a right to declare it openly is accompanied by the no less binding duty to refrain from doing harm by the spoken word " ; in other words, the only truth which may be proclaimed is that which is recognized as orthodox by the State.

Treitschke passed in review the different forms of government which exist or have existed in the past—theocracies, oligarchies, constitu- tional monarchies, republics, and federations. Their merits and demerits are judged by the extent to which they conform to or depart from the standard Hohenzollern pattern. But all are bad. One bright star shines alone in the political firmament. It is the Prussian system administered by the exemplary Hohenzollerns. Treitschke is, of course, a warm adherent of the Carlylese philosophy which exalts the individual over the system. Moreover, he was quite right in holding that it is great -men -who have -largely contributed to the making of history, only he omitted to add Lord Acton's timely rider, that they have often done, so by the propagation of ideas which were " mostly wrong." It is essential 'that every German child should "hear about Martin Luther and our old Fritz," for the latter was unquestion- ably " the greatest King that ever ruled on earth." Did he not, on he very day upon which ho gave orders to invade Silesia, "compose an ode in praise of the peace of rural life " I Moreover, towards the close of his life, •" our old Fritz " was " transfigured by the idea of his political mission:" Would any Prussian " desire to barter his glorious Hoherizolienes for the English Georges " ? Certainly not. The latter, in contradistinction to the Stuarts, who were "hereditary villains," were "hereditary nullities."

Treitsehke's rabid Anglophobia led him into making statements about England and the British race:which are, for the most part, either wholly false or palpably ridiculous. But we need not despair of our country .in 'spite 'of the ominous fact that we have sunk so low as to have ".abolished all n.oun.declensions " in the use of our mother-tongue. These -and other similar criticisms are clearly duo to that " terrible, demoniacal and base passion, envy," which prejudiced critics have been inclined to consider a German speciality, but which the learned Professor thought•" plays an-immeasurably important part in the life of a Demo- cracy." The way that England has been allowed to conquer the world is, in German eyes, " appalling." This must be put right. It is to be hoped that in -the future some " men of genius," such as the rough but gallant Hussar Bliicher, who would have destroyed the .Jena Bridge at Paris had not the Duke of Wellington prevented him from doing so, and that worthy but singularly narrow-minded old drill-sergeant, the Emperor William L, will arise to wrest world-power from the hands of these Anglo-Saxon pirates, and to bestow it on the more gifted and liberally minded inhabitants of the Fatherland, who, me now learn with an amazement which very providentially admits of .being tempered by a healthy scepticism, " are in reality 'a far more democratic nation

than the English." Rieum teneatis, amici Caomen.