Page:EB1911 - Volume 04.djvu/816

 under Sykes. Pope withdrew under cover of night to Centreville. Here he received fresh reinforcements, but Jackson was already marching round his new right, and after the action of Chantilly (1st of September) the whole Federal army fell back to Washington. The Union forces present on the field on the 29th and 30th numbered about 63,000, the strength of Lee’s army being on the same dates about 54,000. Besides their killed and wounded the Federals lost very heavily in prisoners.

BULLY (of uncertain origin, but possibly connected with a Teutonic word seen in many compounds, as the Low Ger. bullerjaan, meaning “noisy”; the word has also, with less probability, been derived from the Dutch boel, and Ger. Buhle, a lover), originally a fine, swaggering fellow, as in “Bully Bottom” in A Midsummer Night’s Dream, later an overbearing ruffian, especially a coward who abuses his strength by ill-treating the weak; more technically a souteneur, a man who lives on the earnings of a prostitute. The term in its early use of “fine” or “splendid” survives in American slang.

BÜLOW, BERNHARD ERNST VON (1815–1879), Danish and German statesman, was the son of Adolf von Bülow, a Danish official, and was born at Cismar in Holstein on the 2nd of August 1815. He studied law at the universities of Berlin, Göttingen and Kiel, and began his political career in the service of Denmark, in the chancery of Schleswig-Holstein-Lauenburg at Copenhagen, and afterwards in the foreign office. In 1842 he became councillor of legation, and in 1847 Danish chargé d’affaires in the Hanse towns, where his intercourse with the merchant princes led to his marriage in 1848 with a wealthy heiress, Louise Victorine Rücker. When the insurrection broke out in the Elbe duchies (1848) he left the Danish service, and offered his services to the provisional government of Kiel, an offer that was not accepted. In 1849, accordingly, he re-entered the service of Denmark, was appointed a royal chamberlain and in 1850 sent to represent the duchies of Schleswig and Holstein at the restored federal diet of Frankfort. Here he came into intimate touch with Bismarck, who admired his statesmanlike handling of the growing complications of the Schleswig-Holstein Question. With the radical “Eider-Dane” party he was utterly out of sympathy; and when, in 1862, this party gained the upper hand, he was recalled from Frankfort. He now entered the service of the grand-duke of Mecklenburg-Strelitz, and remained at the head of the grand-ducal government until 1867, when he became plenipotentiary for the two Mecklenburg duchies in the council of the German Confederation (Bundesrat), where he distinguished himself by his successful defence of the medieval constitution of the duchies against Liberal attacks. In 1873 Bismarck, who was in thorough sympathy with his views, persuaded him to enter the service of Prussia as secretary of state for foreign affairs, and from this time till his death he was the chancellor’s most faithful henchman. In 1875 he was appointed Prussian plenipotentiary in the Bundesrat; in 1877 he became Bismarck’s lieutenant in the secretaryship for foreign affairs of the Empire; and in 1878 he was, with Bismarck and Hohenlohe, Prussian plenipotentiary at the congress of Berlin. He died at Frankfort on the 20th of October 1879, his end being hastened by his exertions in connexion with the political crisis of that year. Of his six sons the eldest, Bernhard Heinrich Karl (see below), became chancellor of the Empire.

BÜLOW, BERNHARD HEINRICH KARL MARTIN, (1849–), German statesman, was born on the 3rd of May 1849, at Klein-Flottbeck, in Holstein. The Bülow family is one very widely extended in north Germany, and many members have attained distinction in the civil and military service of Prussia, Denmark and Mecklenburg. Prince Bülow’s great-uncle, Heinrich von Bülow, who was distinguished for his admiration of England and English institutions, was Prussian ambassador in England from 1827 to 1840, and married a daughter of Wilhelm von Humboldt (see the letters of Gabrielle von Bülow). His father, Bernhard Ernst von Bülow, is separately noticed above.

Prince Bülow must not be confused with his contemporary Otto v. Bülow (1827–1901), an official in the Prussian foreign office, who in 1882 was appointed German envoy at Bern, from 1892 to 1898 was Prussian envoy to the Vatican, and died at Rome on the 22nd of November 1901.

Bernhard von Bülow, after serving in the Franco-Prussian War, entered the Prussian civil service, and was then transferred to the diplomatic service. In 1876 he was appointed attaché to the German embassy in Paris, and after returning for a while to the foreign office at Berlin, became second secretary to the embassy in Paris in 1880. From 1884 he was first secretary to the embassy at St Petersburg, and acted as chargé d’affaires; in 1888 he was appointed envoy at Bucharest, and in 1893 to the post of German ambassador at Rome. In 1897, on the retirement of Baron Marshall von Bieberstein, he was appointed secretary of state for foreign affairs (the same office which his father had held) under Prince Hohenlohe, with a seat in the Prussian ministry. The appointment caused much surprise at the time, as Bülow was little known outside diplomatic circles. The explanations suggested were that he had made himself very popular at Rome and that his appointment was therefore calculated to strengthen the loosening bonds of the Triple Alliance, and also that his early close association with Bismarck would ensure the maintenance of the Bismarckian tradition. As foreign secretary Herr von Bülow was chiefly responsible for carrying out the policy of colonial expansion with which the emperor had identified himself, and in 1899, on bringing to a successful conclusion the negotiations by which the Caroline Islands were acquired by Germany, he was raised to the rank of count. On the resignation of Hohenlohe in 1900 he was chosen to succeed him as chancellor of the empire and president of the Prussian ministry.

The Berliner Neueste Nachrichten, commenting on this appointment, very aptly characterized the relations of the new chancellor to the emperor, in contrast to the position occupied by Bismarck. “The Germany of William II.,” it said, “does not admit a Titan in the position of the highest official of the Empire. A cautious and versatile diplomatist like Bernhard von Bülow appears to be best adapted to the personal and political necessities of the present situation.” Count Bülow, indeed, though, like Bismarck, a “realist,” utilitarian and opportunist in his policy, made no effort to emulate the masterful independence of the great chancellor. He was accused, indeed, of being little more than the complacent executor of the emperor’s will, and defended himself in the Reichstag against the charge. The substance of the relations between the emperor and himself, he declared, rested on mutual good-will, and added: “I must lay it down most emphatically that the prerogative of the emperor’s personal initiative must not be curtailed, and will not be curtailed, by any chancellor As regards the chancellor, however, I say that no imperial chancellor worthy of the name would take up any position which in his conscience he did not regard as justifiable.” It is clear that the position of a chancellor holding these views in relation to a ruler so masterful and so impulsive as the emperor William II. could be no easy one; and Bülow’s long continuance in office is the best proof of his genius. His first conspicuous act as chancellor was a masterly defence in the Reichstag of German action in China, a defence which was, indeed, rendered easier by the fact that Prince Hohenlohe had—to use his own words—“dug a canal” for the flood of imperial ambition of which warning had been given in the famous “mailed fist” speech. Such incidents as this, however, though they served to exhibit consummate tact and diplomatic skill, give little index to the fundamental character of his work as chancellor. Of this it may be said, in general, that it carried on the best traditions of the Prussian service in whole-hearted devotion to the interests of the state. The accusation that he was an “agrarian” he thought it necessary to rebut in a speech delivered on the 18th of February 1906 to the German Handelstag. He was an agrarian, he declared, in so far as he came of a land-owning family, and was interested in the prosperity of agriculture; but as chancellor, whose function it is to watch over the welfare