In spite of this close friendship between Ballin and the Kaiser, it would be quite wrong to assume that Ballin exercised anything resembling a permanent influence on His Majesty. Their meetings took place only very occasionally, and were often separated by intervals extending over several months, and it happened only in rare cases that Ballin availed himself of the privilege of writing to the Kaiser in person. It is true that the latter was always pleased to listen to Ballin’s explanations of his views, and it is possible that every now and than he did allow himself to be guided by them; but it is quite certain that he never allowed these views to exercise any actual influence on the country’s politics. The events narrated in the chapter of this book dealing with politics show that in a concrete case, at any rate, Ballin’s recommendations and the weight of his arguments were not sufficient to cope successfully with the influence of others who were the permanent advisers of the sovereign, and who had at all times access to His Majesty.

If thus the effect of Ballin’s friendship with the Kaiser has frequently been greatly overrated in regard to politics, the same holds good—and, indeed, to a still greater extent—in regard to the advantages which the Hamburg-Amerika Linie is supposed to have derived from it. One of Ballin’s associates on the Board of the company was quite right when he said: “Ballin’s friendship with the Kaiser has done more harm than good to the Hamburg-Amerika Linie.” Indirectly, of course, it raised the prestige of the company both at home and abroad. But there is no doubt that it had also an adverse effect upon it: at any rate, outside of Germany. It gave rise to all sorts of rumours, e.g. that the company obtained great advantages from the Government; that the latter subsidized it to a considerable extent; that the Kaiser was one of the principal shareholders, etc. It is also quite certain that these beliefs were largely instrumental in making the Hamburg-Amerika Linie, as Ballin put it, one of the war aims of Great Britain, and it is even alleged that, at the close of the war, the British Government approached some of the country’s leading shipping firms with the suggestion that they should buy up the Hamburg-Amerika Linie or the North German Lloyd. This was at the time when it became desirable to secure the necessary organization for the intended commercial conquest of the Continent. It is quite possible—and, I am inclined to think, quite probable—that this suggestion was put forward because such a step would be in harmony with that frame of mind from which originated such stipulations of the Versailles treaty as deal with shipping masters, and with the assumption that German shipping—which was supposed to depend for its continuance mainly on the existence of the German monarchial system—would practically come to an end with the disappearance of the latter. It would, indeed, be difficult to name any historical document which pays less regard to the vital necessities of a nation and which actually ignores them more completely than does the treaty signed at Versailles.

The allegation that Ballin should ever have attempted to make use of his friendship with the Kaiser for his own or for his company’s benefit is, moreover, diametrically opposed to the established fact that he knew the precise limits of his influence, and that he never endeavoured to overreach himself. His “policy of compromise” was the practical outcome of this trait of his character.

The opinion which my close observation of Ballin’s work during the last ten years of his life enabled me to form was, as far as its political side is concerned, confirmed to me in every detail by no less a person than Prince Bülow, who, without doubt, is the most competent judge of German affairs in the first decade of the twentieth century. When I asked the Prince whether Ballin could be accused of ever having abused the friendship between himself and the Kaiser for any ulterior ends whatever, he replied with a decided negative. Ballin, he said, had never dreamt of doing such a thing. He had always exercised the greatest tact in his relations with the Kaiser, and had never made use of them to gain any private advantage. Besides, his views had nearly always coincided with those held by the responsible leaders of the country’s political destinies. Once only a conflict of opinion had arisen between Ballin and himself on a political question, and this was at the time when the customs tariffs were under discussion. Ballin held that these were detrimental to the country’s best interests, and it is a well-known fact that, at that time, there was a widespread feeling as to the impossibility of concluding any commercial treaties so long as those tariffs were in operation.

During the most critical period of the existence of the monarchy—i.e. during the war—Ballin’s influence on the Kaiser was but slight. Only on a very few occasions was he able to meet the Kaiser, and he never had an opportunity of talking to him privately, as in former times. It was the constant aim of the Kaiser’s entourage to maintain their controlling influence over the Kaiser unimpaired. Even when they last met—in September, 1918—and when Ballin, at the instance of the Supreme Army Command, was asked to explain to the Kaiser the situation as it actually was, he was not permitted to see the Kaiser without the presence of a witness, so that his influence could not assert itself. The fact that the Kaiser was debarred from knowing the truth was the cause of his and of his country’s ruin. “The Kaiser is only allowed to know the bright side of things,” Ballin used to say, “and therefore he does not see matters as they really stand.”

This is all the more regrettable because, as Ballin thought, the Kaiser was not wanting in either the capacity or the independence of mind which would have enabled him to pursue a policy better than the one in which he actually acquiesced. More than once, Ballin said, the Kaiser’s judgment on a political issue was absolutely sound, but he did not wish to act contrary to the recommendations of his responsible advisers. When, for instance, it was decided that the gunboat Panther should be dispatched to Agadir, a decision which was arrived at during Kiel Week of 1911, the Kaiser exclaimed, with much show of feeling, that a step of such far-reaching importance could not be taken on the spur of the moment and without consulting the nation, and he only gave his consent with great reluctance. Moreover, Ballin stated, he was by no means in sympathy with Tirpitz, and the latter was not a man after his own heart, but he was content to let him have his way, because he believed that the naval policy of Tirpitz was right, so that he was not entitled to jeopardize the interests of his country by dismissing him. The Kaiser was not moved by an ambitious desire to build up a powerful navy destined to risk all in a decisive struggle against Great Britain, and the numerous passages in his public speeches which foreign observers interpreted as implying such a desire, must be regarded as the explosive outbursts of a strong character which was sometimes directed into wrong channels by a certain sense of its own superiority, and which, in seeking to express itself, would occasionally outrun discretion. His inconsistency which made him an easy prey to the influence of his entourage, caused him to be looked upon by foreign critics as vacillating and unstable, and this impression—as was discovered when too late—discredited his country immensely in the eyes of Great Britain, who, after all, had to be reckoned with as the decisive factor in all questions relative to world policy. Such a character could be guided in the right direction only if the right influence could be brought permanently to bear on it. But who was to exercise such influence on the Kaiser? Certainly his entourage did not include anyone qualified to do so, because it was not representative of all sections of the nation; neither was any of the successive Chancellors able to undertake such a task, since none of them succeeded in solving the questions of internal policy in a manner approved by a reliable and solid majority in the Reichstag. The Kaiserin also was not free from prejudice as to the war and the causes of its outbreak. Ballin relates how, on one of the few occasions when he was privileged to see the Kaiser during the war, Her Majesty, with clenched fists, exclaimed: “Peace with England? Never!” The Imperial family considered themselves betrayed by England and the English court. Why this should be so is perhaps still more difficult to say now than Ballin could understand in those days. Arguments, however, were useless in such a case, and could produce nothing but harm. The Kaiser did not bear Ballin any malice because of the frankness with which he explained his views that day; on the contrary, members of the Kaiser’s entourage have confirmed that, after Ballin had left that evening, he even tried to make the Kaiserin see his (Ballin’s) point of view. Putting himself into Ballin’s position, he said, he could perfectly understand how he felt about it all; but he himself could not help thinking that his English relatives had played him false, so that he was forced to continue the struggle with England tooth and nail.

When Ballin, during the summer of 1918, gave me a character sketch of the Kaiser, of which the account I have endeavoured to present in the preceding paragraphs is an outline, he added: “But what is the good of it? He is, after all, the managing director, and if things turn out wrong he is held responsible exactly as if he were the director of a joint-stock company.”

This comparison of the German Empire and its ruler with a joint-stock company and its board of directors used to form a frequent subject of argument in our inner circle, and even before the war these discussions regularly led to the conclusion that, what with the policy carried on by the Government and that carried on by the parties in the Reichstag, the Hamburg-Amerika Linie would have gone bankrupt long ago if its affairs had been conducted on such lines as those of the German Empire. It was a never-ending cause of surprise to us to learn how completely the European situation was misjudged in the highest quarters, when, for instance, the following incident, which was reported to Ballin during the war, became known to us. One day, when the conversation at lunch in the Imperial headquarters turned to the subject of England, the Kaiser remarked: “I only wish someone had told me beforehand that England would take up arms against us,” to which one of those present replied in a quiet whisper: “Metternich.” It would have been just as proper, Ballin added, to have mentioned my own name, because I also warned the Kaiser over and over again. On another page in this book reference is made to the well-known fact that the reason why Count Metternich, the German ambassador at the Court of St. James, had to relinquish his post was that he, in one of his reports, predicted that Germany would be involved in war with Great Britain no later than 1915 unless she reduced the pace of her naval armaments. This was one of those numerous predictions to which, like so many others, especially during the war, no one wanted to listen. Even in the late summer of 1918, when Ballin saw the Kaiser for the last time, such warnings met with a deaf ear. This meeting, to which Ballin consented with reluctance, was the outcome of a friendship which, politically speaking, was devoid of practical results. A detailed account follows.

CHAPTER X
The War

About the middle of the month of July, 1914, Ballin, when staying at Kissingen for the benefit of his health, received a letter from the Foreign Secretary, Herr v. Jagow, which made him put an immediate end to his holiday and proceed to Berlin. The letter was dated July 15th, and its principal contents were as follows: