own position, and, as a rule, they reasonably wish, and justly so, to hear nothing about such matters. But when the attempt of making capital out of trifling things has been resolved upon, the bad practice is adopted of questioning the Ambassadors and Envoys about every kind of gossip. "The Norddeutsche Allgemeine Zeitung a few days ago published a statement made by me in May, 1869, which cannot have escaped your notice. To my regret the aim of this publication would not permit the suppression of passages in which your Reverence's name was mentioned. I therefore feel bound to ask your Reverence's pardon for having in May, 1869, incidentally referred to you in a manner not sufficiently expressive of the profound respect which I entertain for your Reverence. You will the more readily grant me indulgence for the manner in which I then expressed myself should you reflect that in May, 1869, I had not the honour of being known by you. The lately published report of May 14, 1869, is interpreted to show that there is some discrepancy between the views contained there at that time, and the résumé which I made in a memorial published by the Vienna Presse. I take this opportunity of stating that I did not authorize that publication. I have a copy of the memorial which differs in some parts from the published documents. It would be merely a playing with words to say that the published part was apocryphal. The alterations were evidently made by the publisher to avoid giving offence to certain persons. But the discrepancy between my views in May, 1869, and June, 1870, is unimportant. In June, 1870, I still laid less stress on the dogma than on the manner in which it was to be promulgated. Had the German bishops in the first instance declared infallibility to be a theory-the acceptance of which would of course be a matter of practical indifference, -the Government would probably not have interfered in this question. But the conduct of the Austro-German bishops in 1869, and during the Council, showed me the bearings of the Papal enterprize. I was convinced that infallibility was to be not merely a costly and empty vessel, destined only to adorn the Vatican, but also that it was a Pandora's box, from which eventually very dangerous ingredients might be scattered over the Christian world. The reproach that between May, 1869, and June, 1870, experience corrected my views, is not unwelcome to me. If I learnt anything in that time I learnt it from the German bishops, who have had the kindness to enlighten me on the consequences of the dogma. Occasion has also been taken to enter upon the utterly fruitless controversy as to whether things would have taken a different turn had an Ambassador been sent to the Council. Who can pretend to decide that question now? I for my part maintain that, if measures had been taken as I intended, the authors of the campaign would have recalled the memory of the hero who went out to conquer the world and returned home because it rained-infecta recolle trombe nel sacco.' I chiefly regret that the deliberations prompted by Prince Hohenlohe did not give rise to more searching discussion. If the rank weeds which grew up during the Council could have been crushed in the bud we should not have found ourselves in the incon ceivable confusion of jeopardising everything which for ages seems to have been considered as the common property of Christendom. I beg your Reverence to allow me this opportunity of expressing the profound respect with which I have the honour to be APPENDIX No. V. Schlesische Zeitung, No. 197. Breslau, Wednesday, "Count Arnim and Prince Bismarck versus the Council. "The Vienna Presse recently published some of Count Arnim's documents relating to the Council, which have justly excited universal interest, as they bear surprising testimony to the sagacious views entertained by the Prussian representative at the Curia as to the consequences of the Vatican decrees. "This publication, whose origin is unknown to us, has caused the publication of a diplomatic correspondence between Count Arnim and his chief, which took place in the years 1869 and 1870, in the Norddeutsche Allgemeine Zeitung, evidently at the instigation of Prince Bismarck himself. The ensemble of this demonstration has caused so much sensation that it claims our attention on more points than one. "It may be acknowledged with the greatest respect for our eminent leading statesman that it is very difficult for men who in some matters represent their own opinions to have any official intercourse with him. Prince Bismarck himself has never made it a secret that even in the Ministerial Council he Q |