MARGINAL COMMENT
By HAROLD NICOLSON
IHAVE been reading this week an interesting and suggestive book recently published by the firm of F. A. Herbig in Berlin. It is called Ein_Leben fur den Liberalismus, and is written by Dr. Eugen Schiffer, who was for long a leading Liberal in the -Reichstag and who held Ministerial rank in the days of the Weimar Republic. Dr. Schiffer is now in his ninety- second year, and can look back with melancholy detachment upon the last half-century of German history. His book is not written in a tone of self-justification, nor does it seek to attribute Germany's misfortunes solely to the malevolence of other coun- tries. It is written rather in that tone of dignified seriousness that rendered books such as Theodor Wolff's Vorspiel or Brandenburg's and Haller's studies of the Billow period so illuminating to the student of German politics. There can be few periods of history so fascinating, instructive and self- contained as that which stretched between the resignation of Bismarck in 1890 and the death of Hitler in 1945. Dr. Schiffer had special opportunities to observe the tragic developments of that half-century and to assess the relative value of the statesmen who successively directed the destinies of the German Reich. In his youth he witnessed the ardent optimism of the first years of William II ; he traversed as a deputy the confused period when the restlessness of the Emperor seemed to affect Cabinet and Parliament alike ; he experienced the First World War and shared the humiliation of impotence to which the Reichstag was reduced by the High Command ; and he survived to see the coming of Hitler and the terrible degradations and sufferings of his beloved countrymen. He knew personally all the leading figures of the age—the- Emperor, Billow, Holstein, Rathenau, Scheidemann, Solf, Ludendorff, Tirpitz, Hindenburg, Ebert, Stresemann. To the younger generation such names suggest a row of uniformed waxworks standing in some historical group: to their contemporaries they were men who held enormous power, and whose successive moods dappled the destinies of Europe with light or shade. * * * * To the young student, anxious to• specialise upon a given period of history, I strongly recommend the Billow period. Although very fully doclimented, there are still many areas open for research. The Holstein papers, for instance, have, not yet been published in their entirety ; the German State archives have still much to reveal. The horrible fascination that the period exercises upon those who like to search the springs of human action is that, against a background of world tragedy, we are shown the movements of small men. We see the fate of the great German people being determined by the sulks and impulses of a tiny clique. The really terrifying levity of men like Billow fills us with all the appropriate emotions of pity and fear ; few epochs of history are so rich in cautionary tales. Behind it all is the blind strength, the instinctive loyalty, the patient courage of the German people, driven from disaster to disaster, yet always retaining a faith in their own destiny and an energy to clear the rubble and to build again. We are assured that nations obtain the government they deserve ; the German people, owing to some curse upon them, have never been accorded a government worthy of their own virtue and strength. The student is urged on continuously to explore the nature of that curse. Gradually he finds himself entangled in the study of the German temperament, and by the time he has finished he will have learnt much about modem politics, the nature of true or false democracy, the value of self-confidence, and the \disasters which statesmen bring upon their countries when they strive to be clever. * * * * Dr. Schiffer entered politics as a National Liberal, still some- what stunned by the sudden magic of the Bismarckian achieve- ment, still gazing upon the House of Hohenzollern with almost religious awe. In the year 1904, as Member for Magdeburg in the Prussian Landtag, he entered the Palace at Berlin to listen to the speech from the throne. For him the virtues of the Hohen- zollern family had been represented by the benign figure of the old Emperor and by the attractive simplicity of his son, the Emperor Frederick, whom he regarded as the embodiment of all German virtues. He was somewhat disconcerted by the splen- dour and abruptness of William II ; he left the palace with a feeling of disappointment in his heart ; it took him some time to realise that what had shocked him in the Emperor's behaviour was the histrionic element, the feeling that. gazing at the deputies assembled in front of him, His Imperial Majesty was acting a part that had been studiously rehearsed. Again and again in the years that followed did Dr. Schiffer study the Emperor with what might be called sympathetic dismay. When at 3 o'clock on the wet afternoon of November 1 1 th, 1918, the Emperor's train drew up at the little Dutch station of Maarn, when the fallen monarch drove off to Amerongen and exile, he might be said to have passed out of history and was thereafter forgotten by his people. But not by Dr. Schiffer. Looking back across the years, the ex- Minister again and again examined the problem of monarchy. Why had William II failed ? Was it the fault of his own character ? Of his Ministers ? Or merely the trick of fate ?
It is with studiously objective respect that Dr. Schiffer in his old age seeks to make up his own mind about the Emperor William. His analysis of the character of that unsuccessful monarch is acute and balanced. It is not that Dr. Schiffer says much that has not been said before ; it is rather that, from per- sonal experience and after careful consideration, he confirms what might otherwise seem to be the superficial or prejudiced deductions of other writers. He concludes that William II possessed almost every gift except the power of concentration. His versatility was astonishing, yet he always remained a gifted dilettante. His retentive memory enabled him to impress scientists, historians, art-critics, archaeologists, industrialists and theologians with the range of his knowledge and interests. He could discuss with naval architects the details of armament and with strategists the employment of reserves. The minutes with which he decorated the despatches submitted to hint have been published, and have done much harm to his repute ; yet in fact he was often more intelligent and moderate than his advisers, seeing the dread consequences of the policies they urged. Why, therefore, was he too weak to control the impulses of Billow or to support the wisdom of Bethmann-Hollweg against the military party ? Dr. Schiffer makes the interesting suggestion that his tremendous gesture of independence in dismissing Bismarck exhausted for ever his stock of will-power. Thereafter he sur- rounded himself with flatterers, comforted his failing self- confidence by lavish gestures of self-approval, and satisfied his desire for doinination by playing vulgar practical jokes on people who were unable to respond. How finally are we to explain the ineffectiveness of so talented a man ? "Er ist niemals," writes Dr. Schiffer, " vollig ausgereift"—he never fully matured. I feel this to be a true explanation and one that excuses much.
* * *
The same criticism would apply to the whole epoch. To us, who read this strange story after the events, the utter irrespon- sibility of these small men appears incredible. Dr. Schiffer himself, amid all the hysteria, the exaggerations, the cabals and the illusions of the period, remained serene owing to the fortitude of his liberal faith. What did party labels or political combina- tions matter as compared to the eternal verities of the liberal doctrine—the belief in human rights, the belief in the sacred- ness of the individual, the belief in private life, in the love of country as of peace, the belief in the rule of law ? It is encourag- ing to find this veteran champion of Liberalism, after a life spent among shallow politicians and deeply tragic events, still calmly confident in the validity of great ideas.