[Footnote 30:  Say “red tape.”]

[Footnote 31:  Polstiche Reden (Cotta’s edition), i. 9.]

[Footnote 32:  See Bismarck-Jahrbuch, iii. 86.]

[Footnote 33:  Cf.  Bismarck’s letter to Gerlach of October 7, 1855.]

[Footnote 34:  Cf.  Bismarck’s utterance in the Imperial Diet on January 8, 1885. Politische Reden, x. 373.]

[Footnote 35:  Gramont, La France et la Prusse avant la guerre.  Paris, 1872, p. 21.]

[Footnote 36:  The telegram handed in at Ems on July 13, 1870, at 3.50 p. m. and received in Berlin at 6.9, ran as deciphered: 

“His Majesty writes to me:  “Count Benedetti spoke to me on the promenade, in order to demand from me, finally in a very importunate manner, that I should authorize him to telegraph at once that I bound myself for all future time never again to give my consent if the Hohenzollerns should renew their candidature.  I refused at last somewhat sternly, as it is neither right nor possible to undertake engagements of this kind a tout jamais.  Naturally I told him that I had as yet received no news, and as he was earlier informed about Paris and Madrid than myself, he could clearly see that my government once more had no hand in the matter.”  His Majesty has since received a letter from the Prince.  His Majesty, having told Count Benedetti that he was awaiting news from the Prince, has decided, with reference to the above demand, upon the representation of Count Eulenburg and myself, not to receive Count Benedetti again, but only to let him be informed through an aide-de-camp:  That his Majesty had now received from the Prince confirmation of the news which Benedetti had already received from Paris, and had nothing further to say to the ambassador.  His Majesty leaves it to your Excellency whether Benedetti’s fresh demand and its rejection should not be at once communicated both to our ambassadors and to the press.”]

[Footnote 37:  Play on the word gesprengt.]

* * * * *

BISMARCK AS AN ORATOR

By EDMUND VON MACH, PH.D.

Bismarck was not an orator in the ordinary sense of the word, nor did he wish to be one.  On the contrary, he looked with mistrust on silver-tongued orators.  “You know,” he said in the Diet on February 3, 1866, “I am not an orator....  I cannot appeal to your emotions with a clever play of words intended to obscure the subject-matter.  My speech is simple and clear.”  And a few years later he said:  “Eloquence has spoiled many things in the world’s parliaments.  Too much time is wasted, because everybody who thinks he knows anything wishes to speak, even if he has nothing new to say.  More breath is wasted on the air than thought is bestowed on the questions under discussion.  Everything has been settled in party caucuses, and in the House the representatives talk for no other purpose than to show the people how clever they are, or to please the newspapers, which are expected to be lavish with their praise in return.  If things go on like this, the time will come when eloquence will be considered a common nuisance, and a man will be punished if he has spoken too long.”