No. 274.
Mr. White
to Mr. Evarts.
Berlin, May 3, 1880. (Received May 19.)
Sir: The discussions of the last fortnight in the Diet (Reichstag) have been exceedingly interesting to all who watch the constitutional development of this empire; and I may take the liberty of calling your attention to them as a whole in a later dispatch. But my first duty is to inform you as to the debates upon German colonial policy, especially in regard to the plans for maintaining German commercial interests in Samoa.
The discussion arose upon a proposal coming directly from the Bundesrath (Federal Council), but understood to emanate from the chancellor himself, having as its aim the revival of the commercial business formerly carried on by Godeffroy & Co., of Hamburg.
The bill proposed to guarantee a certain amount of interest upon the bonds to be issued by a new company, which was to rescue the business of the Godeffroys from the creditors, maintain and extend it. So little doubt was there of its passing, that months ago advertisements and favorable notices appeared in sundry newspapers, calling attention to the newly formed association, asking for subscriptions, and speaking of the government guarantee as a matter of course.
The proposal being presented to the Diet, an unexpected opposition was developed, confined to no one party, but led by Dr. Bamberger, one of the strongest of the National-Liberals. The measure was advocated on the ground of its necessity for the interests of German trade in the Pacific, and to thwart the plans of England and America, looking to their own commercial superiority in that part of the world. Great stress was also laid on the commercial advantages to those who should take part in the scheme. At a later stage of the debate, pains were taken to suggest the idea that it was a part of a great political policy of the chancellor, which it was not thought best at present fully to reveal.
On the other side it was urged, with very great apparent force, that the scheme had no adequate commercial basis; that it would injure German commerce, by establishing a monopolizing government company in competition with the German houses now engaged in the trade; and that there is no international question involved, America and England showing themselves entirely indifferent to the whole matter. During the earlier stages of the discussion there seemed to be some uncertainty as to the attitude of the government. Pains seemed to be taken, by the men supposed to know, to show that the government did not take any especial and direct interest in it; but as the measure was seen to be in danger, and as the struggle became more earnest, it was asserted, apparently with the consent of the highest political authority, that the bill must be regarded as emanating from the government and as presenting a feature in its political plans.
The chancellor himself did not appear, as indeed he has not appeared at any time during the present session of the Diet; but the measure was intrusted to one of the ministerial subordinates, who was strongly aided by a few leading members of various parties.
A statement was also presented to the Diet by Professor Rouleaux, whose letters from the Philadelphia exhibition gave him such a reputation [Page 428] in Germany two or three years ago, and who having just returned from the exhibition at Sydney, was able to adduce arguments from his experience in Australia. Mr. George von Bunsen, who has been considered on general grounds a strong opponent of the chancellor, argued in favor of this measure for political reasons. Mr. Mosle, who is a recognized authority in commercial matters, and who claimed, as regards the points involved, special knowledge derived from a long residence in the tropics, also gave the bill his support. The debate became very earnest, but the result was that although the government showed, before closing, the greatest desire to pass the bill, its opponents secured its rejection by a decided majority.
Great as was the interest of what was said during the debate, it was still more interesting to observe what, apparently by common consent, was not said. While all who voted against the measure seemed to do so on the ground of financial objections, it became apparent very early that the controlling motive of the opposition was an objection to doing anything which should serve as a beginning, or even as an excuse for the beginning, of a colonial policy and an increase in the German navy.
There was very slight reference to this in the discussion; but there were many signs that it was the point on which the matter turned; and * * * this has become more and more evident. There is a very general feeling that the burdens now imposed upon Germany for the army are as great as she can bear; and that to add to these the money necessary for foreign adventures, and the support of a large fleet, would be crushing. To this conviction is due, I am assured, the rejection of the measure; and it is in view of the significance of this fact that I present the matter thus fully.
I have, &c.,