At the outset of the reign of William II, referring to his father, I spoke of the "dead hand" and its power over the living. Now, what has the young King of Prussia done since his accession to the Throne? He, the flatterer of Bismarck, this disciple of Pastor Stoeker, this out-and-out soldier, this hard and haughty personage, who was wont to blame his august parents for their bourgeois amiability and their frequent excursions? He carries out everything that his father planned, but he does it under impulse from without and he does it badly, without forethought, without the sincerity or the natural quality which is revealed in a man by a course of skilful action legitimate in its methods. He smashed Von Bismarck in brutal fashion. His father, on the other hand, was wont to say: "I will not touch the Chancellor's statue, but I will remove the stones, one by one, from his pedestal, so that some fine day it will collapse of itself." It is a curious thing that these reforms and ideas, not having been applied by the monarch whose character would have harmonised perfectly with their conception and execution, now possess no reversionary value. They lose it completely by being subjected to a false paternity. It is true that occasionally William II envoys some real satisfaction, such as that which he has derived from the coming of the King of Belgium. So impatient was His Majesty to return his visit, that he could not wait for the good season and therefore he came in the bad. At Ostend, Leopold II had caused sand to be strewn at William's coming (the beach being conveniently handy). The King of Prussia only spread mud. Why was the King of Belgium in such a hurry? After the visit of General Pontus to Berlin and his three days in retirement with the German headquarters staff, people at Brussels are still asking what more King Leopold could possibly have to settle in person with Messrs. Moltke and Waldersee at these same headquarters? The _Courier de Bruxelles_ informs us that certain proposals for an alliance were made to Leopold II during his stay at Potsdam. What! Could Prussia possibly have dared to think of laying an impious hand upon Belgian neutrality! But if not, why should they have been at such pains formerly to prove to me that the thing was inconceivable? Prussia wants a Belgian alliance and the King refuses. Splendid! But let him tell us so himself! I confess that such a document would interest me far more than all that I have published on the subject! May not the explanation of King Leopold's journey be, that William II would like a mobilisation in Belgium just as he wants one in Italy? M. Bleichroder will supply the cash. He has already got his bargain money, viz. Pastor Stoecker in disgrace, and the repudiation of anti-Semitism by its ex-partisan, William II. November 27, 1890. [16]