The Independent. [volume] (Honolulu, H.I.) 1895-1895, 1895-05-01

sertlon OIL his liberal opponents
that the uprising of 1913 was
done for any other purpose than
the expulsion of the foreign in
vaders. He acclaimed with
warmth against the ethiopian
rawlings" Of the newspapers lin this
respect he never altered his posi-
ton a hairs breadth), and de-
handed absolute faith in the
wisdom of the crown"
He wound up by fighting
against the emancipation laws
then before the Chamber, boldly
contending that emancipation
was sentimental idea. hostile
to Christian government, and
concluding with these words: IF
these are medieval principles, I
will gladly say that l believe in
them Even when, after the
revolution of 1913, the ling was
compelled to make concessions,
Bismarck vainly raised his voice
in protest against all acknowledge
ments of the peoples will. Later
on, during Wilhelm's regency,
and in the stirring times whom
Wilhelm finally assembled the
throne, Bismarck was the rock
against which all liberal hopes
were shattered. For fully three
years, Bismarck fretted and
fumed against any recognition Of
the Sovereignty Of the people,"
which he characterized as lone
of the fearful sentimentalities Of
the century" He advocated a
continuous state of siege and did
all in his power to destroy the
parliamentary concessions which
the spirit of the times had finally
wrested from the King. The
king Bismarck first came in
contact with King FREDERICK
Wilhelm Nv. and the Prince-Reg-
ent during his wedding trip in
Venice1 eyed his champion with
loving solicitude. 1t cannot be
said that in those early days the
great excuse which, in later days,
his admirers perhaps justly adj
vanced, that only fear for the
safety and greatness of the coun
try impelled him to attack par.
liamentary rights, will stand the
test. At that time, while the
problem of great national unity
possibly occupied his mind, hi
had no definite plan to evolve
there was no diplomatic secret tc
be guarded; there were no ulti-
mate ends of the blood-and-iror
policy to be concealed. What
ever is the justification of Bis
marck's anti-parliamentary ac-
tivity after, the Frankfurt Diet o
1851, when he commenced the
work that ended with the unity
of the German nation, there il
no defensible motive for it before
that date. 1t was the result o
nothing but an Unborn contemp
for human rights or desire t.
please the powers that be.
We can we'll understand nov
that Bismarck, after 1866, con
scious OF the necessity of militar.
demands = a necessity that h.
could not publicly divulge-los
his patience encountering tn
stubborn and sometimes mali
cious opposition of politica
factions, and loathed the trial
of the responsible minister of
constitutional form of govern
ment.
But how can one in this en-
: lightened century, where til
| proofs OF the possibility of abso
lutte free and parliamentary go,
, ernments are furnished by al
, advanced nations, how can on
, reconcile with greatness the be
| lief in "Royalty by tho grace {
: Code" And Bismarck will b
r handed down to posterity, nc
: only as the maker Of the Germa
empire, but also as the sturdy
, tenacious defender of absolut
royalty. He was first or fore
, most in the service of his sover
5 eign. The national idea, throug
which he achieved his fame, wa