Americus times-recorder. [volume] (Americus, Ga.) 1891-current, 1914-10-19
That a poor little wretch of a

! Corsclan should become the ruler Of
the world-which at one time seemed
possible and even eminent-and that
he did capture the revolution il
France, suppress chaos and restore
order, and then lead French armies
to fields far surprising in glory thosG
of Condo and Turenne-that he did
reign ten years as emperor, the while
menacing Christendom-compl a
career surprising that of Alexander
and Caesar in exploits and distancing
them in romantic interest.
Naturally the world would hang up
on the incidents. Inevitably philosophy
and criticism would discuss the morals
and divide upon the facts. The space
writer's of history no less than tn :
space writer's of the daily newspapers
must live.
Yet, after all, Napoleon was merely
a lucky gambler possessing the genius
for the explorations of war that Mr..
John Oakhurst had for the manipula-
ton of cards. He was no more a gen
tleman than Bret Harte's hero. He
was equally an adventurer. He was as
much an adventurer; let US say, if we
would hit nearer home, as Cagliostro.
His luck carried him through ST. Cloud
and the Tuillries to Austerlitz, Water
loo and st. Helena Joseph Balsamo's
lick, shorter lived, carried him through
st. German and Versailles to st. An
gelo Both, whilst their luck held out,
had very great success. And both are
measurably, though in different ways,
immortalized. But in point of merit,
there was not much difference between
them. Each is to be admired-for his
splendid audacity and self confidence
to be pitied that he loved and erred,
and hated, and was the sport of chance
and his imperfections just like other
men.
But the -Wilhelm-"Mein self
un Gott"-that is difference. He was
born a gentleman and bred Christian.
He was educated in modern schools, he
sat in the rocker and he held the "age"
on Europe and the situation. If he
had really wanted peace it was within
his competency to comand it.
Alas for mortal infrmity, and alas
for human vanity and ambition. He
became the victim of a system. He was
an autocrat. He could not understand
the Institutional democracy of Englani
For years, says Mr.. Low, Germany
not her people or individuals, but her
officials and governing classes-has
shown its dislike of England and Of
fensively ratified the sabre in the sound
of English ears. There was the Kali
ser's telegram to Kruger, for instance;
the obscene insults to the late queen
during the Boer war; the Kaiser's
sneers and slurs at King Edward, the
crisis precipitated over Agadir and the
revenge he took in making France dis
miss Delcasse."
The Kaiser was thus inveigled per-
haps by his prejudices but also by his
environment and his predictions into
total and fatal misconception of the
situation. Doubtless he took the state
Of Ireland into his account. But on
general lines he misunderstood Eng
land and misjudged the English. Mr..
Low puts it unanswerable as follows:
There is no military party in Eng
land. England, with the sole exception
Of the United States, is not subordia-
ate to the military. No Englishman
wanted to go to war with Germany. No
Englishman could see that there was
anything to be gained by war with Ger
many. Time after time Germany gaze
us provocation and we kept our tenn
per- Those of us who believe that war
is usually a crime, the most insensate
act nations can commit, believe that
the German emperor was too sensible
of his obligations to his people and
posterity, too wise not to recognize the
desperate risk he took in plunging Eu-