B 0 0 S.

COUNT VON MOLTKE ON POLAND.* Tuts monograph, though far too concise, and in-a certain way even thin, has an interest of its own. It was written by the great German strategist fifty years ago, and it is curious to see how like his mind at thirty was to his mind now. He had evidently been greatly attracted by that unusual phenomenon, the extinction of a great European State, with a territory larger than France, a population exceeding eleven and a half millions, and a martial upper class, without striking one serious blow for itself, and he sought to discover the cause. He found it in the institutions of Poland, which rendered it impossible that the State should possess any vitality ; and he describes those in stitutions and their results with an acuteness and a calm which have the strangest effect. From first to last of his essay there is no eloquence, no attempt to excite passion, no departure from the quiet language in which Field-Marshal von Moltke would now send in a report to his Sovereign.

Captain von Moltke thought like a mathematician. The data are such and such, and therefore the consequences are so and so. That is all, and that is enough, for a more persuasive

monograph was never written. We have all heard, in a more or less vague way, that the liberuns veto killed Poland ; but Captain

von Moltke explains exactly how it came to do it. There never was, as he maintains, a monarchy called Poland. A nomadic Sclavonic tribe, for some reason now unknown, faced the Tartar conquerors, and settled on the great Sarmatian plain, protecting the aborigines—probably Sarmates and of their own race—from the invaders' violence. To do this, every nomad with a horse became a warrior, exacted from those he protected obedience, and when the battle was won considered himself a petty king in his own domain, and equal to any man outside it. In German terminology, every Polish noble became " Freiherr," responsible in part to the whole body of nobles, but to no individual whatsoever. The fifteenth century, therefore, fogad Sarmatia—a land larger than France, and not without means of yielding wealth—owned by 300,000 nobles, who each on his own estate governed serfs numbering in the aggregate some nine millions. Unlike all other castes, however, these nobles did not cohere. So intense was their sense of individualism, that they could not bring themselves to think any form of submission, even to the majority of themselves, right or honourable ; and honestly believed that a law, to deserve obedience, must be unanimously "sassed :

" The Polish noble acknowledged his obligation to his country, be submitted to the law, but the law was to express the unanimous will of the nation. If he had acknowledged the power of the majority, ho would have thought that he was yielding to tyranny ; the principle of equality was carried so far that the will of tie individual outweighed the will of the multitude, so that the dissent of one man in the field of election could annul the assent of 10,000 nobles, and the individual thus had the power of interfering with the machinery of the State and bringing it to a standstill."

Any one noble, by simply saying "I do not concur," made legislation impossible ; for his veto was as operative as that of a King. It was true he could be killed on the spot, and in early years he sometimes was killed ; but when the nobles ceased to attend in person, and sent representatives, public feeling was against killing a deputy for exercising a clear right, and if he was killed nothing could legally be done. He had used his veto. Usually a right so inconvenient would be evaded or reduced to a legal fiction ; but this did not happen in Poland. The right had woven itself into the feelings of the nobles till they all accepted it as their jus cardinals; and it even acquired new force, for, latterly, not only could a noble forbid a law, but he could suspend a Diet, and the representative Council, therefore—which alone possessed legal governing power in practice—became non-existent. In one instance Diets met for thirty-one years in succession, and separated, having effected nothing. The kings had no power, for they had no army ; and though they could make great officers, they could not dismiss them when once made. Moreover, if they gave an order, the nobles whom it affected. had the right of " confederating " to resist it, and did confederate, and even when defeated could not be punished for rebellion, or, indeed, at all, except by the Diet, which could never move. It came, therefore, to this,—that each noble, however small his estate, was an irresponsible sovereign, who could and did live

exactly as he pleased. Of course, in practice equality soon ceased. The little nobles found themselves unsafe and poor, and took service with the great nobles ; but this did not mend matters. The Republic became full of considerable kinglets, each of whom was irresponsible, each beyond the law, each able, through any retainer who happened to be noble, to forbid the action of the Diet :—

" There were Polish nobles who possessed estates exceeding in extent many a kingdom of those days. Thus, contrary to the spirit of the constitution, the Radziwills, centuries ago, founded an entail in the family, which made its chief the most powerful private individual in Europe. He had a retinue of several hundred nobles, possessed many fortresses, and maintained G,000 household troops. The Oginsky, Czartorysky, Tarte, Potocki, Zainojski, Lubutnirsky, and others were scarcely less rich and powerful. When we consider that the execution of judicial sentences had to be carried out by force of arms, we can understand that it was not easy to obtain justice from such citizens."

The Republic, nevertheless, though unable to advance, or even to keep order, possessed one element of strength. The nobles were all soldiers, and good soldiers, so far as undisciplined men could be good soldiers, and their great numbers long preserved -Poland from outside attack, which, indeed, was occasionally punished by wars of invasion. When, however, in the eighteenth century, the neighbouring States had formed regular armies, it was found that a new and ruinous element had been introduced into Polish life. The Kings being powerless, and the Diets im movable, each noble governed his peasants as he would, and the

consequent oppression was so terrible, that to resist the enemy there were no people :— " The utter misery of the Polish peasant is proved by statutes like that passed by the Diet of 1708, articles 18 and 19. The absolute dominion of the nobles over land and people is to be maintained, but the right over life and death of the peasant is no longer to he vested in his lord.' In 1791 it was found necessary to enact : If henceforth an agreement is drawn up between lord and serf, in proper form, it shall form a valid contract.' From Polish historians we learn with regard to the conditiou of the peasant that he lives without justice or judge, without law or king, often without religion ; that lie is forced to work on Sundays and feast-days ; in many places, for every hide of land his cattle must be at the disposal of his lord for five days.' It was this arbitrary enforcement of labour which made it so difficult to restore the balance, The peasant is looked on as a nonentity. He cannot sue without his lord's consent. He cannot obtain justice from his lord. Laws were once made in his favour, but they were forgotten long ago. There is no appeal against this oppression, the lord has long been master over life and death of his peasants." Poland is the only c!aintry a here the cornmon people are deprived of the rights of humanity.'" The consequence was, that even in extremity the nobles dared not arm the peasantry, whose very first use of their arms would

have been to massacre their lords. Except the nobles and the peasantry, there was no one, for the whole of the middle class

were Jews, who numbered 200,000 families, paid no taxes, would and did perform no services, and were so ill-treated that they were profoundly indifferent whether the country were conquered or not. They grew rich and numerous, so that when

Von Moltke wrote every eighth person in Poland was a Jew ; but they remained apart from the people in feeling and in action. Poland, therefore, as a State among States, had in the end of the eighteenth century no lower-classes who would fight,

and no middle-classes who felt like citizens—only a caste of nobles, of whom three-fourths were the retainers of a few rich men. No one not a noble was really alive. In 1791, when matters seemed desperate, the Czartoryski family, who, as descendants of the Grand Dukes of Lithuania, and therefore collaterals of the Jagellon dynasty, were considered the first Poles, and were also nearly the richest men in the Republic,

succeeded in forcing through the Diet a rule under which matters of the first importance could be settled by a majority, as a preliminary to the regular action of the Diet, and had they had time, would probably have mounted the throne and saved the State ; but it was too late. The civilised dynasts around poured in civilised armies, and practically there was no possibility of resistance. Poland fell, and so rotten had

the social 83 stem become that even in Prussian hands the peasantry could not be kept from starvation ; and it was not until the Government, by high-handed measures, gave the labourers the virtual ownership of the soil, that even in Prussian Poland prosperity recommenced. Captain von Moltke is too hurried in his account of these changes, and, indeed, they are too old, for his summary to be of any value; but Ws is his broad general jedgment :— " IIatil now the great landowner had tilled his immense fields by forced labour; the labourer had no interest in the success of his work, and the produce passed through the hands of subordinates. It was, therefore, imrossible that the land should have the same value in his eyes as in those of the small landowner, wbo ploughed, sowed, and reaped for himself, and left nothing unused. He alone can offer the highest price for the land, even the fourfold amount of that which it yields to the great landowner. Evidently the value of the land is increased by decreasing the extent of property and increasing the number of owners, especially in a country like Poland, where the produce of the fields can be so greatly increased, where endless woods, which bring in nothing, cover excellent wheat-ground, and where only workmen are wanted to make the soil available. Agri. culture—and in this it differs from industry—can attain a height of perfection which cannot be much improved upon, and in many Prussian provinces this height has been reached. In Poland a great deal still remains to be done by industry and diligence. The surest means of attaining this, was by distribution of property. The peasant is now certain that he is working for himself and his family, that every improvement, even if he does not live to see its result, will benefit his children, among whom he may divide his property at will. It is no longer a question of obtaining the greatest possible value from the land in a short time, without caring whether its fertility is thereby injured, bat it is in the interest of the owner to keep it in the best possible condition. Though day-labour costs more than forced labour, the former is incomparably the better system of the two ; agriculture gaits more hands, and owing to their voluntary exertions, every workman does more work than formerly."

Throughout it should be observed he never condemns the nobles, to whose personal virtues he attributes the early success of the State. He simply narrates, exactly as if he were describing certain defects of discipline which had made a particular regiment powerless in tle field.