appeared again; they had formed a new party of
"Progressives," and had won over a hundred seats at the expense of the
Conservatives and the moderate Liberals; they were pledged not to carry
out the military reforms and to insist on the two years' service. They
intended to make the difference of opinion on this point the occasion of
a decisive struggle to secure and extend the control of the House over
the administration, and for this purpose to bring into prominence
constitutional questions which both Crown and Parliament had hitherto
avoided. From the day the session opened it was clear that there was now
no chance of the money being voted for the army. Before the decisive
debate came on, the majority had taken the offensive and passed what was
a direct vote of want of confidence in the Ministry. On this the
Ministry handed in their resignations to the King; their place was taken
by members of the Conservative party and Parliament again dissolved
after sitting only six weeks. It was the end of the _new era_.

It was doubtful whether the new Ministers would have the skill and
resolution to meet the crisis; they still were without a leader; Prince
von Hohenlohe, a member of the Protestant branch of the family to which
the present Chancellor of the Empire belongs, was appointed provisional
President. The opinions of the country was clear enough; the elections
resulted in the complete defeat not only of the Conservatives but of the
moderate Liberals; not a single one of the Ministers was returned. There
was, therefore, no doubt that the King would either have to give in on
the question of the army or to govern against the will of the majority
of the Chamber. The struggle was no longer confined to the question of
the army; it was a formal conflict for power between the House and the
Crown. The attempt to introduce a Parliamentary government which had
been thwarted ten years before was now revived. Who could say what the
end would be? All precedent seemed to shew that in a struggle between
Crown and Parliament sooner or later the King must be beaten, unless,
indeed, he was prepared to adopt the means which Napoleon used. The King
would not give in; he believed that the army reform was necessary to the
safety of his country; on the other hand, he was a man of too loyal a
character to have recourse to violence and a breach of the Constitution.
If, however, the Constitution proved to be of such a kind that it made
it impossible