There are grounds for believing that the motive for raising the whole subject was less the danger of the Socialist organisation (which, however, was strongly emphasised by me in the press under instructions from the Chief, and afterwards on my own account in the pamphlet _Zur Geschichte der Internationale_, Leipzig, 1872) than the opportunity which would be thereby afforded of bringing all the Powers together for the consideration, in common, of _one_ question; and, in particular, of producing a _rapprochement_ between two of them. In other words, the main object of the manœuvre was to maintain the antagonism between Russia and France--the land of the Commune, by exaggerating the danger of the International, and to win over Austria. I now return to the chronological order of my diary, observing at the same time that some of the most important notes and instructions which I received from the Chief at that time cannot be reproduced, as the slips upon which they were written have been mislaid. _May 30th._--The _National Zeitung_, commenting in an exceptionally violent and discourteous tone upon an article in Brass’s paper, spoke of “the Mamelukes of the _Norddeutsche Allgemeine Zeitung_,” of a “coarseness and boorishness, that can only be explained by the habits of literary menials,” and of the “tone of the Imperial Chancellor to which the anti-Parliamentary press, watching his every gesture, and exhibiting the zeal of a retriever, barks in eager response.” The Chief wished to have a reply written to this article, somewhat to the following effect. It was not necessary to enter into the attacks made upon the newspaper. The specimens quoted from the organ of MM. Bamberger and Lasker would suffice to show that persons who gave vent to their own irritation in that style were hardly entitled to complain of the manner in which others expressed themselves. But when the article charges the Imperial Chancellor with adopting an unseemly attitude towards the Reichstag, whereas his attitude has been eminently prudent and patriotic, when it accuses him of “domineering over men,” and of “demanding blind submission,” it may well be asked what part of the verbatim reports has given rise to these invectives. (From this point on dictation.) “We, who have not left these reports unread, as the author of this philippic would appear to have done, fail to find anything in the expressions of the Imperial Chancellor, but a declaration, for which he gave his reasons, that the motion under discussion was unacceptable, and that if it were maintained he could not undertake the responsibility for the administration of Alsace-Lorraine, during the period of provisional government. If any one discovers, in what he said, anything which would appear to justify in any way the charges in question, we would ask him to remember that a tone of bitterness and violence was _first_ adopted by the Reichstag, and exactly by that party which takes credit for prudence